Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you for your comments, Madam Deputy Speaker. I hear them, and I would point out once again that veterans are part of our community. Veterans are affected by the budget strategy. Veterans were affected by the rhetoric that was out in the debate before the election when the government, which was then in opposition, said that it was going to be for veterans and it would always have veterans in mind when it made decisions about the way in which taxpayers’ money was to be spent. I am simply pointing out that this did not happen. The bill before us, in fact, is one that does do three good things—small things; small adjustments, you can say, in the overall scheme of things—but the government has given with one hand and has taken away with the other.

If we go back and look at the background against which this bill has been introduced and the sorts of policies that the Howard government introduced to make veterans recognised in a way in which they had not been before, probably the most significant thing that the Howard government did was, in 1999, to make the gold card available to all Australian veterans over the age of 70 or with qualifying service in World War II. In 2002 this was extended to veterans over 70 with qualifying service from any conflict. In 2001 we extended the orange card, which provides access to subsidised pharmaceuticals, to British, Commonwealth and allied veterans over 70 with qualifying service from World War II.

The most important thing about the gold card is that it gave veterans the equivalent of private health insurance without having to, in fact, pay a premium. Partners of veterans who received the gold card, on the other hand, are not covered unless, when they become widows or widowers, they meet the necessary criterion and can be covered by the gold card. There are many, many carers who take out private health insurance so that they are covered for the sort of medical care that they require and regard as essential. And yet, from this budget’s changing of the criteria for those who must take out private health insurance, it is estimated that something like 800,000 people are likely to leave private health insurance, which means premiums are going to go up, which is going to affect carers of veterans in particular, and there are going to be probably 800,000 people thrust onto the public health system. So, whilst we are pleased that this legislation gives an extension of the automatic grant of pension entitlements, and whilst we are pleased to see that the income support supplement is going to be extended in the way it is paid, and whilst we are very pleased about the bereavement payments being extended, when you look at the impact of other government policy upon our veterans community—and we must look at it as a veterans community—we see that they are in fact being penalised.

A further piece of legislation came into the House today—it was introduced this morning by the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs—which is going to implement the carers payment. We certainly have agreed to facilitate that bill coming through so it can be paid expeditiously. But, after all the debate we had about the impact and the importance of the carers bonus payment, in this budget there is no provision for it in the forward estimates; it is a one-off grant. We paid it for four years. The government was prepared to scrap it; after pressure from us it was reinstated. But it is a one-off payment, only for this year. Again, when you couple that with the impact of the anticipated rises in private health insurance premiums—and many of them use this bonus payment to contribute to their private health insurance premiums—there is no guarantee for anything past this year.

So, in the overall assessment of the policy being pursued with regard to veterans benefits, we see this piece of legislation, which was introduced prior to the budget coming down, as needing to be viewed in the budget context to see what its real benefit is for the veterans community. I would simply say that, whilst we are supporting the Veterans’ Entitlements Legislation Amendment (2007 Election Commitments) Bill 2008 without hesitation, the rest of the budget strategy is not one where veterans are being considered at all—and, indeed, it is to their detriment, as we see when we start to read the fine print in the budget. So I simply say that we welcome these initiatives but, in the overall debate, and looking at the way in which veterans are being treated in the overall picture, the government is found wanting.

See this speech in context