Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

A bouquet for the minister at the table straight up. I know he has veterans at heart, and I know that he and I share support for the two veterans facilities in Wagga Wagga, in the heart of the Riverina: RSL LifeCare, the Riverina Veteran and Family Hub at 240 Baylis Street, Wagga Wagga—the main street; and the Pro Patria Centre, in the western suburb of Ashmont. The minister announced funding recently for Pro Patria, for the defence shed, in September this year. Earlier, in November 2023, he announced $1.2 million for Pro Patria and $520,000 for RSL LifeCare. Those investments were welcomed. He was in Wagga Wagga to announce the 2023 spending. It is funding which will save lives, and I say that because I know how important it is, as a former veterans affairs minister—and you don't get that job unless you are a good person, and the minister is a good person. I'm giving him some bouquets at the moment; don't worry, Minister, you'll get a few brickbats further on in my speech!

I also acknowledge the service of the member for Solomon, who is speaking after me—a solid citizen as well; he went through Duntroon. I acknowledge the member for Herbert and the member for Canning, former reserves and may still be serving in some capacity—the members for Hasluck and Spence, and no doubt there are others. I know the member for New England has also done some service, and there could be other members in the House of Representatives as well who have. I say to them, as we ought to say to everybody who has worn a uniform: thank you for your service—TYFYS. As the shadow minister, the member for Gippsland, quite correctly pointed out in his remarks, but for the service and sacrifice of those and many others before them we would not enjoy the benefits we do today. We live in the greatest country on earth. We have these democracies, these freedoms. I see a number of young people up in the gallery; they will enjoy a better life because of those people who have put on a military uniform and represented our nation.

I come from Wagga Wagga. That city is a garrison city. We have Blamey Barracks, named after Thomas Blamey; what a hero he was. But for him, we may well be speaking a different language and this nation would be vastly different to what it is today. His efforts in the Pacific in the Second World War are to be admired and respected. That is Blamey Barracks, Home of the Soldier, 1st Recruit Training Battalion Kapooka.

We've got the Royal Australian Air Force. There's a sign that says 'Air power begins here'—and it does, right in Wagga Wagga. If you spend any given time in the Air Force you may well end up at Forest Hill. With that base, we have a Navy base as well, even though we are a long way from the nearest drop of seawater. There are 80 personnel serving the Navy proudly at Wagga Wagga, at that Forest Hill facility, and we thank each and every one of them. Recently all three arms of defence came out to mark one of the many commemorative occasions that we do in our defence training city. It was so impressive to see them marching up the main street in khaki, blue and white, representing the three arms of the Defence Force.

This Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 1) Bill is due to come into effect on 1 July next year. It establishes a single legislative framework for veterans' entitlements, compensation and rehabilitation. The minister would know, as would anybody who has served in any capacity in the portfolio of military, defence and veterans' matters, that getting simplification for entitlements for veterans is so crucial and so vital. The legislation introduces minor technical amendments to support a smooth transition from the three existing acts to the new Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Act 2025, quite simply known as the VETS Act. The coalition backed the VETS Act when it passed the parliament early this year. We understood—because veterans are at the core of what we support as well—a simplification of veterans' compensation and rehabilitation, the system recommended by the royal commission.

In her remarks, the member for Sturt talked about the royal commission, which shone a light—an all too tragic light—onto what some of our veterans have endured since leaving military life, and it's not a new thing. Indeed, former Australian War Memorial director Dr Brendan Nelson—he was probably the best prime minister we never had. He used to speak about the fact that as many veterans, diggers and Anzacs passed away in the decade after the guns fell silent on the Western Front in World War I on 11 November 1918 as did in the war years from 1914 to 1918. Just think of that—for the 60,000 of Australia's best and bravest who came back from that conflict, the bloodiest war the world had ever known, there weren't the support systems and there weren't the wraparound services that we have today, more's the pity. They came back with trench fever, shell-shocked. They were conditions that no-one could possibly have understood. They were different men. Yes, there were women too. There were nurses who were on the frontline, and, no doubt, they too suffered. We gave mightily to World War I efforts. They called it the Great War—no war is great. We've learnt a lot from that conflict, and we've acted responsibly since, but we can never do enough for our veterans.

I know that former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull is being honoured this week. He put in place a veterans' employment program which is to be acknowledged and applauded. I know he would often say, during his days in the Lodge, that not all of our veterans are broken. And they are not. The member for Sturt touched on that in her contribution, wisely so. Many of our veterans come back, and they're used to the formality and rigidity of military life. It must be hard for them to adjust back into civilian life and back into family life, and yet many of them do and contribute mightily to our nation. All of them have put in, all of them have given, all of them have served, and all of them have sacrificed. Not all of them are broken, and we should acknowledge that. But, for those who are affected and for those who have done their time and done their service, proudly so, and are going back into civilian life who are affected—we must be there for them. As a parliament, we have to be.

I have to say that making sure that compensation and rehabilitation come under the one banner, under a single piece of legislation, is to be acknowledged and is to be applauded. It replaces the outdated patchwork of laws veterans currently face. Not every veteran's relationship or association with the Department of Veterans' Affairs is going to be a good one. Some choose not to even go through the DVA process at all. But I would encourage veterans to take advantage, to avail themselves of all the services available. The DVA has very good people. Our public servants in that area are very good, and they want to help. They truly do. But veterans' experiences may well be different to those of their comrades and former comrades.

This bill ensures a smooth and fair transition to this new system. It's written in such a way that veterans do not accidentally lose entitlements in the process. Thank goodness for that. It's not a new policy proposal; it's about fixing cross-references, it's about definitions, and it's about transitional clauses in the law—making sure they work properly when the new system takes place and begins. Importantly, the bill guarantees that veterans with existing claims under the Veterans' Entitlements Act or the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-Related Claims) Act keep every right and review option that they currently have. Nothing is being taken away.

Minister, this is where the brickbat comes in. I know the minister, as I said before, is a principled person, but he should not have listened to the Department of Defence, to the bureaucrats, when they came to him with the changes to Defence medallic recognition. I know that he knows I was going to say this. For people such as Richard Norden, a recent Victoria Cross for Australia recipient—he would not have been eligible under the system that was proposed and even passed this House of Representatives. He would not have received that long-overdue recognition, that highest of honour that the military could provide and that Australia could provide to someone who, at the Battle of Coral-Balmoral went into danger not once, not twice, but thrice—again and again and again placing his life at risk—to rescue a mate. Isn't that, after all, what service and sacrifice are all about? Mateship, honour—he didn't do it for a medal. He didn't do it for a piece of tin on his chest. He did it because it was the right thing to do and because that's what Australian soldiers do. That's what Australians who go through Kapooka do.

Under the changes that were passed by the House of Representatives—brought into the House of Representatives by the minister at the table—that was all going to be taken away for future heroes. That was wrong. That was dishonourable. Thankfully, the minister has, through pressure, through advocacy and through common sense—and, I will say, through decency because you are a decent man, Minister—has taken that piece of legislation, that folly, off the Notice Paper. Let it never see the light of day again, because our heroes deserve better. They deserve better from a parliament that understands the service and sacrifices they have made, not in their name but in their mate's name, in the duty of their service in the Army, Air Force or Navy, for the flag and for the patriotism of our nation so that others may live, because, as St John once said, 'Greater love hath no man shown than to serve and lay down one's life for one's friend.' I commend the bill.

See this speech in context