Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This amendment includes safeguards to stop the clock to account for reasonable delays, like for medical advice. If the commission does not determine the claim by the end of the consideration period, the commission is taken to have accepted the claim. Veterans who have to take their matters to the Veterans' Review Board can't be represented by a lawyer. This is hugely unfair for some of them, and it flips all the power to the DVA staff, which are expert lawyers—the known enemy, as we like to call them, who do have access to legal representation before the hearing. My amendment attempts to level the playing field so veterans can get legal representation themselves when they go before the Veterans' Review Board to plead their case. It's a no brainer, and I reckon it gives the veterans a fair go. It also removes section 353L, which allows the Veterans' Review Board to imprison a veteran for up to six months if they insult a person, interrupt proceedings, create a disturbance or cause contempt as part of their proceedings. We need to know as much as possible about the ongoing health and wellbeing of our veterans. That means research and data gathering.

The amendment responds to recommendations 114, 115 and 117 of the royal commission. It establishes an expert committee on veteran research made up of people with real skills and real experience. The amendment also requires the department to establish work plans to outline the immediate research priorities of the department in relation to health and wellbeing, long-term research goals and detailed actions to address gaps in the legislation.

My amendments are not perfect, but they will go a hell of a long way to fixing the injustice that we've put up with for far too long, that is within the system and that has resulted in so many of your mates taking their lives. I ask everyone in this place to vote for my amendments. Veterans put their lives on the line for this country. The least that we can do is make sure that they are looked after during and beyond their service.

I would also like to put on record the shocking and slow response the coalition displayed over nine years. They did everything they could to resist a royal commission. They were aided and abetted by the national RSL. They kept telling me and the veterans that there is 'nothing to see here'. The National President of the RSL even went after Julie-Ann Finney, accusing her of campaigning for a royal commission to assuage guilt for her failed relationship with her son. You, Mr Melick, subsequently apologised, but I have to ask why on earth this man is still the head of the national RSL. It is certainly not the request and it is not the want of every digger who has served and is serving.

I would like to acknowledge the work of Minister Keogh and his willingness to work with me over the summer and over the past two years. I want to take some time here to make sure that the veterans know this: I cannot praise Minister Keogh enough. He has worked over the Christmas period with me. He's given up time with his family. It has been very enduring of him to go through this with me for the past two years. He has carried tears behind closed doors. I want you to know that. He has, fair dinkum, put everything he possibly can into this, knowing we needed to get as much as we possibly could through before an election.

We have done everything that we possibly can over the last eight weeks to get that national commissioner up and to start ticking off those royal commission recommendations. We cannot possibly have any hours left, between the minister and I, to do anything else that is left. We have nothing left. I just wanted you to know that Minister Keogh—over the last 10 years I have been up there, the revolving door of ministers has been an absolute shocker for you people—has put his heart and his soul into this, and I will pay credit where credit is due. I know, at times, that we have sat behind closed doors and cried together, and we have tried to do everything possible in the last eight weeks. I cannot thank you enough, from the bottom of my heart, Minister Keogh. I want you to know that. I want every veteran out there to know that, because nobody during the period of time I've been up here has ever done what you have done or stood beside me.

I want to thank the Prime Minister for giving me the extra staff member over the last two years. I want to thank you, Luke Brown. I don't think this will get you sacked. I want every veteran out there to know that assistant commissioner Luke Brown has saved many lives in the last two years, because, when this government came in, they gave me full access to Luke Brown. I'm not sure if he works for DVA or Jacqui Lambie, but I cannot thank you enough, Luke. I cannot thank you enough. The pressure that you have taken off the people in my office has been absolutely remarkable. It has stopped being the revolving door for you veterans out there as well, and it's caused a hell of a lot less harm to my office and the people working there in the last two years. Luke, thank you. Just to let you know, I have another six people I will need to come and see in the next day. I'm sorry I didn't ring you Monday. I'll be in touch with you tomorrow, mate, but thank you.

Finally, I would like to thank all the organisations, the veterans, the mothers and the families who have fought for the royal commission. I know it has taken it out of you. I know it has taken it out of me. I want to thank especially Julie-Ann Finney and the other mums and the dads who have worked so tirelessly for many, many years, campaigning for veterans and the recommendations of the royal commission. Julie-Ann, I want you to know that your son would be so proud of you.

I know the royal commissioners. You were shaken, and I know that you have been moved by the testimony from so many. I know that has been extremely harmful to you, and I want to thank you for going through that and doing everything you could for us. Nothing can compensate for the pain and the loss of losing your child, and that is the burden of military service that many parents and many families will have to carry with them for the rest of their lives.

The passage of this bill won't fix everything, but the speed of the government response is now down to you. To you, Matt, once again, thank you. I know that we have tried to rush this through, and I'm pretty sure we've got it right—we've got to be damn close—but there is still a lot of work to be done. There are still over 120 recommendations to be put through as quickly as possible.

We have worked hard in my office over the last eight years to do as much as we possibly can to fix the DVA and Defence. Like I said, it has taken a toll on my staff, and I've lost some of them along the way. To my staff, thank you, once again, for your commitment to the veterans over the last eight years. I thank all of you.

I am up for re-election this year, and I am hoping that Tasmanians will give me another six years, but if they don't I want the veteran community to know that I will always stand beside you. I want you to stay vigilant. You will need to keep holding Defence, the Department of Veterans' Affairs and, most importantly, the government to account. You must do that.

I want you service organisations to listen to me—listen very carefully. There are a lot of you out there; there are thousands. I want you to stop fighting with each other, because it is not helpful. You are not standing together as one, so you have no strength. You have a national RSL that is useless; we know that, but if you service organisations continue to fight with each other and bicker with each other, you will continue to not save lives. Dealing with you makes my job up here very difficult, and you are not being fair to your mates.

If you are part of an organisation and you fall out with your mates, don't go and start another one. It has not been helpful. I know that many of you in these organisations are also physically and psychologically damaged. I know your patience only goes so far. I also know that for many, many years you have been fighting a government that has destroyed you. I know that, but the biggest enemy that I have right now and that we, the veterans out there, have right now is you, because you won't come together as one. For God's sake, even the Vietnam veterans worked it out. They only split into two groups, not thousands. That has been extremely harmful to us. I want you to go away and think about that.

I want to see you guys have one group, one union. That's where you should be—and that is what our national RSL should have been. It has failed us, but it has taken great delight over the years in watching us chew each other up for breakfast. Oh, they've loved it! I beg you to recognise that you will only become a force again if you come together as one. You must come together as one. You have to do that today. Then we will get what we want. But, until you do that, you will make the fight harder. I want you to go away and have a good think about that. Surely one of you is big enough to say, 'The rest of us are not doing our job, and we need to come together as one.' I don't even care what you call us, but bring us together because it gives us more power and it gives us more might. Then we can help our own. That is how it works.

Sometimes I know it feels like two steps forward and one step back. But, whenever I have felt defeated, the resilience and the strength of you, even in the chaos you are in—that service organisation community has got me through. I want to make sure that you know that. I want to thank all of you for helping me along the way. There are some who have, along the way, thrown names at me and others out there, and it has been very unhelpful. But I think I've said enough about service organisations out there.

All I'm asking you to do, in my last minute, is to go away and think about where you are, because what you are doing in thousands of groups out there, how you've all separated, is not helpful. It is not helpful to saving your mates.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One Nation supports measures to simplify veterans entitlements. At the moment, it seems to many veterans that they need to be a lawyer just to receive entitlements that should be easily accessible. In this government bill, the Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024, it's difficult to say whether the government's proposal will meet veterans' needs for clarity and ease until we see the legislation put into action, when the guidance filters its way through to the service agents. As the saying goes, the proof will be in the pudding.

We're willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt when it comes to converting three acts, 2,000 pages of legislation and more than 800 legislative instruments into one act. As other senators have mentioned, it's not rare for veterans to have claims under all three separate acts. This obviously needs desperate change. Throughout this process, we do not want to see any veterans worse off. One Nation notes with concern submissions that state some changes may have the intention of easier administration not achieving the veterans full entitlements. That's a deep concern. We'll be supporting the amendments codifying the Senate's intent that no veteran is left worse off after this bill's passage.

In relation to the government's amendment on sheet ED101, we've received concerns from the Families of Veterans Guild, as have many other senators, I'm sure. I'll read them out so that they're on the record from the impressively confident chief executive officer of the Families of Veterans Guild on this government amendment to its own bill. Why is the government having so many amendments?

The letter is as follows:

After being alerted to the amendment, I've read through the detail and have a number of concerns with it which are as follows:

There has been no public announcement or public communication from the Department of Defence or Veterans Affairs about it, and as a result there has been no consultation with the veteran community regarding its content. This amendment proposes a significant structural change to the Defence and Veteran system in Australia. It is arguably a Bill in its own right, and ought to be treated as such. Our view is that it ought to be introduced as an amendment to the Defence Act 1903 and debated accordingly. Instead, it is being added on to the VETS Bill in order to be rushed through the parliament—

Here we go again, Labor rushing. She continues with No. 2:

The intent of the VETS Bill is to harmonise the legislative frameworks that govern the provision of veteran entitlements and supports, it is not to make fundamental structural changes to the veteran system. That is a separate issue—

She says. She goes on to No. 3:

The object outlined in the amendment, "improve suicide prevention", is extremely broad, unclear, and lacks any insight into tangible work that will be done to achieve the objective. This objective requires significant work to be more specific, focusing on issues we know are challenges in the veteran community like reducing the incidents and rate of suicide among the Defence and Veteran population, and improving the effectiveness of suicide prevention initiatives within this community.

The amendment outlines that the commission only needs to provide two public reports on the status of the implementation of the Royal Commission's recommendations. This isn't good enough.

The reason the concept of the independent body outlined in the amendment received initial support from the veteran community was because for too long recommendations from previous inquiries have been shelved. 700+ recommendations which could have resulted in better health and wellbeing outcomes for veterans and their families were left to collect dust. The amendment ought to compel the commission to report annually to the Parliament, the veteran community, and the Australian public on the status of the Royal Commission's recommendations until such time as they are implemented and their effectiveness evaluated.

She goes on, under No. 5:

The amendment provides the Minister with the power to direct the Commissioner to conduct an inquiry. However, before the Commissioner reports to the Minister (at which point the report is to be tabled) the Minister may vary or withdraw the request. Does this mean the inquiry results are never made public? This point must be clarified.

In No. 6, she says:

The amendment outlines that the commission can inquire into the 'entire Defence ecosystem' but doesn't define what that is. With the amendment providing significant powers to the proposed commission, this must be defined understood and consulted. As it stands, the authority this commission would have could affect more than 5,000 non-profit organisations in Australia who provide support to veterans.

She says, under No. 7:

Veteran families once again are omitted from this amendment, other than a mention that they will be 'listened to'. The Royal Commission highlighted the important role of veteran families and the significantly implications (including related to mental health) that service and suicide have on them, yet they are excluded from the commission's remit. Will it require a Royal Commission into the ill health, wellbeing and high suicide rates amongst veteran families before they are taken seriously by their government?

It's a good question she's asking. Under 'our expectations', she says:

The Families of Veterans Guild supports the establishment of an independent body to oversee the defence and veteran system and the implementation of the Royal Commission's recommendations. However, it fundamentally disagrees with rushing an un-consulted amendment through parliament which could have significant consequences for the system, and the communities within it.

She goes on:

The Guild's expectations were set by the Minister in his media release on the appointment of the interim Commissioner—

where the minister said:

"Mr Manthorpe will head the organisation and work across government to deliver the establishment of a legislated oversight body by September 2025.

As part of the Albanese Government's response to the Royal Commission, we have committed $9.5 million of funding, as part of MYEFO, to support its implementation, including:

$5 million over two years to fund the appointment of the Interim Head of the Defence and Veterans' Service Commission, and to establish a cross-agency taskforce to provide advice to Government"—

that's the end of the minister's quote. She goes on:

We expected DVA and Defence to therefore consult with those who could and would be impacted by this amendment. That hasn't happened.

She said, 'We are especially shocked by this, considering the unwillingness of the minister and the Department of Veterans' Affairs to support and implement amendments to the vets bill aimed at removing archaic and offensive language, due to concerns it would hold up passage of the bill. Yet an amendment which does bring cost implications and hasn't been consulted on is deemed acceptable.' This is the last paragraph: 'We'd like to see this amendment withdrawn so that it can go through the proper process, including consultation, to ensure it is fit for purpose and reduces the risk of having unintended consequences on and within the defence and veteran community.' That quote is from the letter from the Families of Veterans Guild, and that's where it ends.

One Nation is greatly concerned that the government is operating this way and dropping significant changes on the Senate suddenly. We won't even get time to discuss the bills tonight. We will be voting against this amendment because of those concerns and the lack of consultation.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In rising to speak on this bill today, I wish to first and foremost express my continued gratitude to Australia's veterans community for their service to our country. The Albanese government accepted and took swift action on the first recommendation of the interim report of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide to simplify and harmonise the legislation governing compensation, rehabilitation and other supports for veterans and families so that they can not only access the support that they need and deserve but receive it in a timely manner.

Under the current legislative model, veterans entitlements are determined under one or more of three primary compensation acts: the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, known as the MRCA; the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, known as the VEA; and the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-Related Claims) Act 1988, known as the DRCA. Which act or acts apply to a veteran depends on when they served and which period or periods of services caused or contributed to the condition being claimed.

The Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024, known as the VETS bill, modifies the current tri-act legislative framework by providing for all claims for compensation and rehabilitation received from 1 July 2026 to be determined under an enhanced MRCA. In essence, the changes in this bill will make it easier for veterans and families to know what they are entitled to, make it simpler for advocates to assist veterans and their families with those claims, and make it quicker for DVA to process claims so veterans and families get the benefits that they need and deserve in a timely way.

The government will also propose three amendments following the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee inquiry into this bill, the release of the final report of the royal commission, advocacy from the veterans community and consultation with the opposition, the Jacqui Lambie Network and the Australian Greens. The first amendment provides for a Senate foreign affairs and defence committee to initiate a review of the enhanced MRCA, to be conducted 12 months after the act commences. The second allows for apportionment of payments to veterans with severe impairment in relation to their children under section 80 of the MRCA. And the third amendment implements the government's response to recommendation 122 of the royal commission's final report by establishing an independent body, headed by a commissioner, to provide advice and oversight on reducing deaths by suicide in the Defence and veterans community.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to offer additional information for senators following debate. The government notes the concerns expressed by the opposition regarding the statement-of-principles system, known as SOPS, and the role of the Repatriation Medical Authority. However, it should be underscored that the royal commission examined this matter and did not recommend a change to this feature of the military compensation system. I would also note that the VETS bill will actually add flexibility to the SOP arrangements by introducing two new liability tests that do not rely on the SOPS—namely, the presumptive liability arrangements and temporal connection to being on duty, both of which were noted by senators earlier in the debate. Furthermore, the current flexibility under section 340 of the MRCA will be retained, which permits the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission to determine its own SOPS outside the RMA process where warranted.

Regardless of these improvements, I would note in this context that, under the MRCA, using the SOP system, the acceptance rate for liability claims sits at 80 per cent or higher on an annual basis. This system ensures that sound medical and scientific evidence is applied consistently, fairly and equitably in the assessment of veterans' claims, with no need for further review of these beneficial arrangements.

With respect to comments made that the bill results in modest improvements for veterans and minor bureaucratic improvements only, I would note that the passage of the bill would result in an additional $222 million being provided to veterans and their families in the form of increased compensation and health care in the first two years of operation alone, with ongoing support beyond this period. In addition to these increased levels of compensation and treatment, it was acknowledged that this legislation will make the veterans system easier for veterans and their families to navigate, ensuring they receive the care and support they need more quickly.

As mentioned, this bill implements the very first recommendation of the royal commission's interim report. Clearly, the royal commission, in prioritising this recommendation, viewed it as resulting in more than just minor bureaucratic improvements and saw harmonising and simplifying veterans' legislation as intrinsically linked to the issues of suicide and veterans' wellbeing. The level of support expressed for this bill by ex-service organisations and the veteran community more broadly would indicate that they see these changes being of real and tangible benefit to them also.

Finally, as this bill was still before the parliament when the government delivered its formal response to the final report of the royal commission on 2 December 2024, and recognising the urgency that veterans attach to recommendation 122 to establish an ongoing, independent body to provide advice and oversight on reducing deaths by suicide in the defence and veteran community, we have taken this opportunity to legislate to implement this recommendation as a priority, and I will speak further on the government amendments shortly, should time permit. The Albanese Labor government is committed to continuously improving and adapting to the needs of current and former serving Australian Defence Force personnel and families.

I acknowledge Minister Keogh, who was here in the chamber earlier. I know that he has worked hard on this historic reform, but I know, too, how much he has valued those who've advocated for reform and, especially, those who participated in and bravely shared their experiences with the royal commission. The government also acknowledges the partnership we have been able to form with Senator Lambie, and we thank her for her advocacy, her constructive approach and her dedication to veterans and their families.

This is an historic reform. It will benefit veterans and their families for generations to come. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the second reading amendment on sheet 3321 moved by Senator Davey be agreed to.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(In division) Senator Blyth, you cannot move when a division is in place.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's my fault.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's even worse that you encouraged her, Senator Ruston.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm apologising.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the request of Senator Lambie, I move:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes that:

(i) clarification is needed to ensure that no veteran will be worse off from the passage of this bill,

(ii) the bill must fully protect the rights and entitlements of veterans while ensuring there will be no reduction in any form of compensation,

(iii) improvements are needed in the navigation of government processes to ensure veterans can access the support and services they need without unnecessary obstacles,

(iv) it is essential to expedite claim processing times to reduce delays that can adversely affect veterans' financial stability and overall wellbeing,

(v) veterans are treated less favourably to those receiving support under the National Disability Insurance Scheme; and

(b) calls on the Government to ensure that:

(i) no veteran will be worse off from the passage of this bill,

(ii) all 122 recommendations from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide are implemented as a matter of priority,

(iii) the Department of Veterans' Affairs Medicinal Cannabis Framework is fit for purpose and aligns with current medical research and best practice to support the health and wellbeing of veterans, including for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorders, traumatic brain injuries, chronic pain management, sleep disorders and other health conditions, with a focus on improving quality of life and facilitating return to work; and

(iv) all support and services provided by the Department of Veterans' Affairs align with the National Disability Insurance Scheme to ensure fair and equitable outcomes".

Question agreed to.

Original question, as amended, agreed to.

Bill read a second time.