Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on behalf of the coalition to comment on the Veterans’ Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011 and I acknowledge the Minister for Veterans' Affairs in the House this morning. There are three schedules to the bill. The opposition will not oppose the bill but will certainly move in the Senate for the bill, especially schedule 2, to be examined by a Senate committee to more fully understand the issue of the offsetting of compensation under multiple acts and to allow the various ex-service organisations, DSOs, to further provide any comment to the parliament on their view of the offsetting of compensation.

Before I move into the substantive detail of the bill, it is instructive, as we deal with veterans' entitlements, to let the House know that a mere hour ago the Senate decided to vote against the private member's bill in the name of Senator Ronaldson which would have provided fair, just and equitable indexation for defence pensions—DFRDB and DFRB—and would have brought them into line not only with the CPI but with the living cost index and with male total average weekly earnings, currently set at a bit above 27½ per cent. The private member's bill was put into the Senate in honour of the coalition's election promise that we would index pensions for those on DFRDB and DFRB to bring them into line with age pensions. It was our intent that we would rectify an injustice. Using the government's own words, today could be seen as 'fundamental injustice day' for the veterans of this nation—57,000 of them that have served in their nation's uniform for over 20 years.

In 2007, the Labor government went to the polls stating they would seek a fairer and more equitable indexation of defence pensions. That was their policy. That is what the soon-to-be Prime Minister Rudd, then the opposition leader, took to the Australian people. He stood there and promised that that was what he would provide the veterans. Whilst there was no opportunity for that government to come to this House and honour that promise, because they chose not to take that opportunity, we stood up with the courage of our convictions and told the veterans we would seek to legislate it and in the Senate we did that, but an hour ago the government joined by the Greens and Senator Xenophon chose to knock it down.

What I find particularly vexing is the hypocrisy and the effrontery of the Greens, who in the 2010 election went to the nation to say they would support equitable indexation of defence pensions. It was their election policy; they told the Australian people they would support it. People, I am sure, voted for them at face value. The Greens had the opportunity to do it, and they decided against it. Senator Bob Brown clearly looked for where the savings were. We estimated the cost over four years at about $98 million; the government said $175 million. Let us not quibble over the numbers, Minister. We presented to the Greens and to the Senate savings of up to $280 million by slowing the rise of public servants from about 12.7 to 8.4 per cent. Over the forward estimates, that would have saved almost $260 million. The Minister for Defence thought that was such a great idea that he took it himself and announced it as savings. The Greens wanted savings, they were given the savings and in the hour of the veterans' need the Greens, the Labor Party and Senator Xenophon were found wanting. At a time when they had the opportunity to stand up for the promises they had made to the Australian people, they were found wanting. At a time when vulnerable veterans needed the government and the Greens the most, they were found wanting.

Let it be known that the opposition will continue to honour the promise it made in the 2010 election. We will take it to the next election that we will index DFRDB and DFRB pensions by not only the CPI but MTAWE and the new living cost index, because we are a party that honours its promises. That is the difference between the 'there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead' Labor Party and the opposition that honours its promise. When we say at an election campaign that we will do something, guess what—we will do it. We will not pull a stunt like that of the member for Lindsay in a land locked electorate who just prior to the last election was seen on an Armidale class patrol boat with the Prime Minister as if to say, 'I am strong on borders.' Guess what, member for Lindsay: you do not have a bloody border with the ocean—you are landlocked. What were you doing in Darwin on a naval warship apart from trying to show the Australian people, in some farcical way, that your party is strong on borders?

How many—over 10,000 illegal people and over 225 illegal boats? Spare me 'strong on borders'! The coalition opposition will honour its promise. And the world and the nation knows that today, an hour ago, you decided not to honour your promise—and there is no running from it and there is no hiding from it, Minister. The veteran community know that you had the opportunity to honour your promise and you walked away from them. That is called fundamental injustice day, Minister.

Moving on to the bill, schedule 1 of this bill provides for a $500 fortnightly payment to former Australian prisoners of war. Schedule 2 clarifies the operation of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 with respect to the offsetting of compensation under multiple acts. Schedule 3 rationalises temporary incapacity allowances for veterans. As I have said, the coalition will not be voting against the bill in the House but we will seek to refer it to a Senate committee to further explore—particularly schedule 2—and to give veterans organisations the opportunity to fully understand and explore the concept of offsetting of compensation under acts.

In terms of schedule 1, from 20 September this year former Australian prisoners of war will each receive a $500 payment each fortnight from the Australian government. It will be made to former military personnel and civilians who were taken prisoners of war during World War II and the Korean War. The payment will not be taxable and it will not affect a former POW's present access to income support under the VEA and the Social Security Act, or compensation payments under the VEA. It is considered a 'non-taxable supplement'. I am led to believe there are 900 Australians known by the department to be ex-prisoners of war. All known ex-prisoners of war will automatically receive the payment, which they will receive from 6 October. The coalition certainly supports the minister on this move.

I will put on the record that, as the minister would acknowledge, the coalition has a strong record of providing assistance to Australia's ex-prisoners of war. In 2001, all former Japanese prisoners of war received a $25,000 tax-free, ex gratia payment from the Australian government. It was extended in 2003 to former Korean prisoners of war and, in 2007, to former German and Italian prisoners of war, who received similar payments. I am sure this move will be extremely welcomed by those Australian POWs who are eligible for the payment and by their families. I am certainly glad to be supporting the minister on this very worthwhile endeavour that he is moving to on schedule 1.

Schedule 2 of the bill seeks to clarify the operation of compensation provisions under the Veterans' Entitlements Act. Comp­ensation offsetting is indeed a longstanding principle under our repatriation system. The fundamental principle of the system is that compensation is paid for incapacity, not for a specific injury. The coalition believes that the changes proposed by this schedule should be investigated by a Senate committee to fully understand and to fully explore whether there are any unintended consequences or any issues that need to be teased out of some of these moves in schedule 2 to deal with the compensation offsetting. We will seek to refer the bill to enable the ex-service community to have an opportunity to have their input into the proposed changes. I think that is fair and reasonable.

Schedule 3 will rationalise the way incapacity payments are paid under the act. The changes in the bill will remove the temporary incapacity allowance. Instead of receiving this allowance payment, veterans will be entitled to seek access to the loss of earnings allowance, the LOE allowance. The LOE is paid where the veteran accrues an actual loss of earnings as a result of hospitalisation or treatment of accepted disabilities or illnesses. We are not opposed to the rationalisation. However, as I look at the Minister for Veterans' Affairs I certainly call on him to ensure that the changes are appropriately communicated to the veterans and ex-service community. Minister, if there were ever a time for the government to spend some money on advertising or on getting a message across, this would be it. Ditch the climate change nonsense in terms of that advertising and spend some money on this, Sir. Ensure that the changes are appropriately communicated so veterans understand fully exactly what is being proposed. When it comes to the veteran community, there is certainly nothing like ensuring people are well and truly informed, to take away any risks and to take away any anxiety they may indeed have when it comes to change. Much change is good. It is better when it is communicated well.

In terms of wider veterans issues, the minister and I have discussed this matter at length in consideration in detail on the budget, a mere day or two ago, but it is worth reiterating to the House some of the concerns that the coalition continues to have about how the government is working through the Veterans' Affairs portfolio. With credit to the minister, he is a very busy minister: he is the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, the Minister for Defence Science and Personnel, the Minister for Indigenous Health and the minister assisting with respect to the Anzac Day celebrations. I can only wonder what else the Prime Minister has given such a busy, busy minister. Our view though is that Veterans Affairs' is of such importance that there should be a minister dedicated to it. Defence science, technology and personnel—when we are at war—is such a busy ministry that there should be a minister attached to it. When it comes to Indigenous Health, such a significant issue in its own right, it should be either attached to another portfolio or indeed perhaps another parliamentary secretary. So what we have is a minister really doing the job of three ministers—

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Which he is capable of!

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No doubt, as some could say. Some could say that the minister sitting here in front of me has the capacity to do that—but, seriously, three jobs for a full-time minister on one set of shoulders? Something always has to give, Minister. It may not be your fault, Minister, as the problem lies with the Prime Minister, who has so loaded you down with work that perhaps you are unable to provide the full set of oversight that you know is necessary in the portfolio. I say that because we are deeply disappointed there is no money in the budget for the commemoration of the Anzac Day centenary. I know you are looking to announcements at the end of the year. However, there is no money in the budget so an announcement with no money makes it a little difficult for you to spend a cent, Minister, up until 30 June next year. Communities across Australia need certainty about the availability of funding.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Science and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order. I am loath to do this because I am entertained, but I would ask that the shadow minister come back to the bill that we are actually discussing, which would be useful.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Certainly being entertained is not one of the standing orders, so I will ask the shadow minister to come back to the topic of the bill.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will return to the bill, which looks at veterans entitlements, and it goes to the very nature of veteran entitlements that the minister has the capacity to ensure that the schedules within the bill are indeed capable of being met. It is therefore incumbent upon me as part of Her Majesty's loyal opposition to actually outline where this minister, who I have led to, is so overworked that he lacks the capacity in hours of time to be able to lend his full attention to the portfolio to ensure these schedules are met. And it is incumbent on me that I outline to the parliament the areas where this very busy minister is being shown to have let down in dealing with veterans entitlements because of the busyness.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will interrupt the shadow minister to say that I appreciate the link he is drawing but I do think it is a rather tenuous link and I would ask him to more directly address the topic of the bill.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will, Madam Deputy Speaker. If we can move on to the Australian War Memorial, which of course—

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry, I am going to stop the shadow minister. I appreciate the attempt to draw the longer bow but I am indicating to you it is not an acceptable longer bow and I would ask you to come back to the actual details of the bill before us. I ask you to come back to the contents of the bill.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I am feeling unduly constrained. However, in deference to the House, for which I have great respect, I will simply wrap up. Whilst we do not deny the bill its second reading and will be seeking to move into a Senate inquiry to more fully understand it, it is important for the minister to understand that we will continue to scrutinise areas of veterans entitlements that this bill seeks to move into with great detail. We will continue to scrutinise any cuts to other areas of veterans or indeed the War Memorial funding. We will seek to scrutinise the $8 million cut from grassroots veterans advocacy funding. We will continue to hold you to account for the full areas of your portfolio and how it is managed.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That was the most animated, boorish contribution I have heard in a long time. It was great to hear that the shadow minister acknowledged that he is not capable of being able to match the great work ethic and great capabilities of the minister at the table. So we appreciate his honesty for admitting he is not up to the job.

I rise to support the government's Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill because this bill is an important initiative to show our gratitude and respect to these worthy Australians, many of whom live in my electorate. The bill will give effect to a number of veterans affairs measures that will create a prisoner of war recognition supplement. It will clarify the original intention of the compensation offsetting policy in relation to disability pension and rationalise temporary incapacity allowance and loss of earning allowance. As part of the Gillard government's 2011-12 budget we announced that the POWR supplement of $500 will be made fortnightly to surviving former POWs. This supplement is in recognition of the severe hardship and deprivations that former POWs experienced when serving our nation. This bill will provide a tax-free supplement with exempt income for the purposes of veterans entitlements in the social security income test. It will be indexed annually in line with the consumer price index. This payment is in addition to the ex gratia payment of $25,000 already made to most of the former POWs or their widows or widowers and the existing benefits a person may already receive from the government. (Quorum formed)

Once again it shows the calibre of the opposition in just wanting to stop, block and say no. When it comes to talking about entitlements for veterans they just leave the country wanting. The shadow minister scurries from the chamber after that embarrassing effort of his.

None of us can fully comprehend the abhorrent conditions that the vast majority of POWs experienced. We are all well aware that POWs were subject to horrific conditions and many returned home with physical and psychological scars that stayed with them for the rest of their lives. More than 30,000 Australians became POWs between 1940-45 alone. The Germans and Italians captured Australians during the Mediterranean-Middle East campaigns as well as those in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans. Members of RAAF crews who had bailed out during operations over Germany, occupied-Europe or North Africa also became POWs. Of the 8,000 Australians taken prisoner by the Germans and Italians, 265 died during their captivity. During the Pacific War, the Japanese captured 22,000 Australians—soldiers, sailors, airmen, members of the Army Nursing Service as well as some civilians. They were imprisoned in camps throughout Japanese-occupied territories in Borneo, Korea, Ambon, Singapore, Timor, Java, Thailand, Burma, Vietnam and in Japan itself. At the end of the war, only 13,872 of the POWs were recovered. So, approximately, and very sadly, one-third of the prisoners had died. A generation of men and women who went to war to protect our freedoms, defend our country and liberate oppression across the globe, ended up fighting for their own survival and that of their mates in POW camps across the globe in conditions that we can only shudder to think about.

If I say the service number VX39234, it would have little meaning to the House, but this is the service number given to George Henry Mitchell—a man whom I am proud to call my grandfather. He was a gunner in the 2/3 Anti-Tank Regiment. He saw active service in Africa, Borneo and notably in the Tobruk siege—one of our most significant and hard-fought battles of the Second World War. Fortunately for my family, my grandfather never became a POW, but I recently read about and have taken interest in another member of the 2/3 Anti-Tank Regiment, Herbert Hawley, who unfortunately did become a POW.

Herbert Hawley enlisted in the Australian Imperial Force on 7 November 1939. He was posted to the 2/3rd Field Regiment in May 1940, after training at Ingleburn, near Sydney. He sailed with his regiment to England, where he was stationed at Salisbury. In December, he left England for the Middle East and then was moved to Greece, where his regiment came under heavy attack from the German Luftwaffe and Panzer divisions. His regiment was evacuated to Suda Bay, Crete. There they defended an airstrip against German paratroopers but, just 10 days later, they were forced to surrender, and Herbert Hawley became a POW. Herb arrived in Wolfsburg prison camp in August 1941 and spent the next four years as a POW in Germany. He was sent to various locations and joined working parties on roads, farms and repairing and laying railway lines. In May 1945, when the Germans surrendered, Herb was at Spittal, working on bomb damaged railway trucks and tracks. He was repatriated to England through Italy and arrived home in Australia three months later. Unlike many others, Herb was reunited with his family.

Twenty-nine Australians were taken as POWs in Korea, including two officers. The treatment of Australian POWs in Korea was generally better than that meted out by the Japanese to POWs during the Second World War. However, there were many Australian POWs who were kept in appalling conditions. At the time, Captain Phillip Greville (later Brigadier Greville) 1RAR, wrote:

Many prisoners became filthy, full of lice, festered with wounds full of maggots, unshaven and without haircuts for months on end and were faced with squads of trained interrogators, bullied, deprived of sleep and browbeaten. Of the 100-odd flyers subjected to this kind of treatment, 38 signed 'confessions', believing them to be so silly that no one would believe them.

That is a terrible story to read about the suffering our soldiers faced during this time of conflict. We all know the courage and bravery of those who survived internment at Japanese POW camps, particularly in places like Changi.

The name Changi is synonymous with the suffering of Australian prisoners held by the Japanese during the Second World War. This is ironic, since for most of the war in the Pacific, Changi was in reality one of the most benign of the Japanese POW camps. Its privations were relatively minor compared to those of others, particularly those on the Burma-Thailand railway. In May 1944, all the Allied prisoners in Changi, which included some 5,000 Australians, were concentrated in the immediate environs of Changi Gaol, which up until this time had been used to detain civilian internees. In this area, some 11,700 prisoners were crammed into less than a quarter of a square kilometre. This period established Changi's place in popular memory. Rations were cut, camp life was increasingly restricted and, in July, the authority of Allied senior officers over their troops was revoked. Changi was liberated by troops of the 5th Indian Infantry Division on 5 September 1945 and, within a week, troops were being repatriated after a torrid period of emasculation and humiliation at the hands of their captors.

Earlier this year, I noted that the Japanese foreign minister formally apologised to a group of Australian former prisoners of war for the pain and suffering they experienced during World War II. Rowley Richards, aged 94, said that the important thing to their members was the official apology and, years on, POWs received the apology they were looking for. The Foreign Minister told the five diggers that 'he was sorry from the bottom of his heart for their treatment'. 'As I understood it, it was deep and expressed great remorse for the suffering that was inflicted on us and it was a very moving experience,' said 89-year-old Norm Anderton, who was used as slave labour on the Thai-Burma railway.

That is why the bill is important. This measure is worth $27.2 million over four years, with payments beginning automatically in September 2011. In addition to the benefits available to other veterans, other benefits for POWs include an ex gratia payment of $25,000;    DVA payment of Residential Aged Care packages, which provide care similar to low-care residential facilities in the veteran's home; DVA payment of fees for Extended Aged Care at Home; and Extended Aged Care at Home Dementia packages; automatic Gold Card and funeral benefits; and automatic granting of a war widow/widowers pension to the partner upon the death of the former POW.

The bill will make amendments to compensation offsetting provisions in the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. Compensations offsetting is a statutory provision which ensures that a person is not compensated twice under separate schemes for the same incapacity. It also ensures equity between a claimant who is entitled to compensation for a level of incapacity under two schemes, compared to a claimant who is entitled to compensation for the same level of incapacity under only one scheme. The purpose of the proposed amendments to the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 is to both clarify and affirm this existing policy. As I said, Australian prisoners of war numbered more than 30,000. In the Boer War there were some 104 POWs in captivity. In World War II, 22,376 were captured in the Pacific and 8,591 in Europe. In the Korean War, some 30 Australian servicemen were interned by North Korean forces. Australian prisoners of war were subjected to conditions that none of us can even begin to imagine. They battled starvation, exhausting work and the brutality of their captors. All suffered and many died during captivity. The vast majority returned home and many still live with the scars and memories of their experiences. Abroad they sacrificed so much, yet they continue to contribute to our nation and its prosperity today.

To the prisoners of war in my electorate and across the country, this government will never forget your sacrifice, stories and courage. I am proud to be part of a government which is delivering on its budget promise to help support our veterans.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Since the Boer War in 1899, Australia has had a proud history of service, defending our freedom and what it means to be an Australian. Today we have more than 360,000 veterans and their families living in our society. It is imperative that we serve and look after them in return for how they have served and looked after our country and our heritage.

The Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011 gives special recognition to Australian prisoners of war. It will introduce an additional payment of $500 per fortnight, made payable from October of this year. Importantly, it will not affect their income for tax or social security purposes.

There are approximately 900 former prisoners of war alive in Australia today. My own father is one of them. He was a fighter pilot with the famous 3 Squadron, flew 60 sorties in a Kittyhawk, survived the battle of El Alamein and was then shot down in the last few weeks of the war in North Africa. He spent two months in a POW hospital in Italy and was then sent as a prisoner of war to the notorious Stalag Luft III, where he participated in the great escape. And contrary to the movie, there were no Americans, no baseball and no motorcycles; instead, there was just plain cold-blooded murder in defiance of the Geneva Convention. Unfortunately, the views of recent generations about prisoners of war, in particular those who were on the European front, have been softened by television shows like Hogan's Heroesmaking light of the harsh and brutal conditions which prevailed.

From pilots in Turkey and soldiers in Germany to nurses in Indonesia, it is estimated that 34,000 Australians have been held captive during war time. Their experience is unique and heart-rending. Prisoners of war were almost always sick and hungry, either sweltering hot or freezing cold, put to unimaginably harsh work or left to be consumed by mindless boredom. They were constantly under the control of their captors. For young Australians who had come from 'a land of sweeping plains' to be detained behind barbed wire, having left home to fight in a war, it was a devastating fate and beyond imagination. It challenged their self-worth and, heart-breakingly so, often left them feeling embarrassed, despite their capture not being their own fault. This is why this amendment is so important.

Time in captivity leaves both physical and psychological scars on prisoners of war, scars that are difficult to fathom for those of us who have not experienced captivity. Former prisoners of war endured their captivity and recovery from that captivity all in the service of their country. This experience deserves not only our recognition and admiration, but our understanding. I believe this amendment goes some way to achieving that.

Warfare today is different from that of the 20th century. At a time when tragedy continues to bring the current commitment of our service men and women into sharp focus, it is important that we also recognise our veterans and what they experienced. Prisoners of war    were captured during World War I, World War II and the Korean War. I would like to touch briefly on these three historical events to acknowledge the significance of this amendment.

In 1914, Australian service men and women did not really know what it was to be a prisoner of war. Those who had been briefly captured during the Boer War had for the most part escaped quickly and were not subject to the brutal conditions of those who were to follow them. Captured in the Middle East and Europe, these prisoners of war were the first to really learn the humiliation, ill-treatment and hardship of captivity. Four thousand Australians became prisoners of war during the Great War. They were not forgotten or left behind by their mates or their country and taught us all the true meaning of resilience and defiance.

I would also like to take this opportunity to mention two important figures within the prisoner of war experience of World War I. Elizabeth Chomley was an Australian woman living in London, who ran the Red Cross prisoner of war office supporting Australian prisoners of war in Europe. A recent War Memorial exhibition displayed hundreds of letters and cards of appreciation to Miss Chomley, who helped remind thousands of prisoners that they had not been forgotten. We can still learn from Miss Chomley today and remind ourselves that our deployed service men and women need our support—kind messages will never go astray.

The second figure I want to speak about today is Douglas Grant. Mr Grant was one of our first and, at that time, the only Aboriginal soldier, as during World War I Aboriginal people were not allowed to enlist in the army. I mention Mr Douglas as he is an example of determination and dedication. His love for his country saw him persevere until he had successfully enlisted in the Army and, upon serving his country, he endured the terrible conditions of captivity. He was appointed by his fellow prisoners to be in charge of relief parcels and was described as being given that role because of 'his honesty, his quick mind and because he was so aggressively Australian'. As a nation we are proud of figures like Mr Grant and, fast-forwarding to today, the amendment we are currently discussing acknowledges that pride.

In World War II, 8,000 Australians became prisoners of war in Europe alone. Most endured captivity for more than three continuous years. Over 22,000 servicemen and, for the first time, more than 40 female nurses were captured in the Pacific. It was those prisoners of war who worked on the notorious Burma-Thailand Railway—the haunting picture of emaciated young men, men who were once strong and robust soldiers. Of the prisoners of war captured in the Pacific, one in three died in captivity. Tragically, this included over 1,000 prisoners who were on unmarked war ships that were torpedoed by the Allies. Thirty Australians were captured during the Korean War and they endured much of the same brutal treatment as their forebears in the Pacific; however, they did so in the harsh conditions of a bitter Korean winter. Additionally, as this was a war fought over opposing ideologies, these prisoners of war were also subject to attacks on their minds, with attempts to brainwash these servicemen against the cause they served.

Simply mentioning these experiences does not do our prisoners of war, or their families, justice. Their time in captivity affected our prisoners-of-war veterans in different ways—from a positive experience of comradeship to the bitterness of questioning how it could have happened. Either way, the experience was harrowing and stays with those who suffered through captivity. This payment is a welcome recognition of that, and adds to the support payments made by the coalition to former Japanese prisoners of war, in 2001; former Korean prisoners of war, in 2003; and former German and Italian prisoners of war, in 2007. Our veterans have supported our country and we must support them.

With this in mind I must say that it was extremely disappointing to see $8 million in funding cut from grassroots veterans advocacy funding over the forward estimates. I fail to see how that is supporting our veterans. The ex-service community had no warning of this cut, and now must compete for a smaller pool of funding. This is in addition to both Labor and the Greens not supporting the coalition's commitment to military superannuation reform, specifically providing fair indexation to DFRDB and DFRB superannuants.

Whilst the payment to prisoners of war is a welcome addition to recognising our veterans, this government is simply not doing enough.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011, which we have before us today, is legislation that I am sure every member of this parliament would support. We all support our veterans and we all acknowledge the enormous contribution they have made to our country.

In Shortland electorate we have a very large and strong veterans community. Its strength is epitomised by the fact that they all provide support for each other. There was camaraderie when they fought together in the wars and that camaraderie still exists today. As our veterans get older we still need to recognise the issues that are important to them.

The bill that we have before us today will have effect in a number of ways. The Veterans' Affairs 2011 budget measures will create a prisoners of war recognition supplement, clarify the original intention of the compensation-offsetting policy in relation to disability pension and rationalise temporary incapacity allowance and loss of earning allowance. This legislation will impact on Australian prisoners of war from the Second World War and Korea, whose numbers are in excess of 30,000. Over 22,000 Australians became prisoners of war of the Japanese in South-East Asia and, during the Korean War, 30 servicemen were interned by North Korean forces.

As part of the 2011-12 budget, the government announced that a POWR supplement of $500 will be made fortnightly to surviving former Australian prisoners of war. (Quorum formed)

Before my contribution was interrupted I was expressing my respect for the veterans not only in Shortland electorate but throughout Australia. I was acknowledging the enormous contribution that they have made to our nation. For the benefit of the House I would particularly like to acknowledge the ex-service community and the subbranches within Shortland electorate. There is the Belmont subbranch and the Pelican subbranch, which is a very strong subbranch with a large number of members. Many of them are World War II and Korean War veterans. There is the Swansea subbranch, which is also a very strong subbranch, a community with strong camaraderie where the ex-servicemen work together, stay together and maintain that common bond.

The Doyalson-Wyee subbranch is an enormous subbranch. That is on the Central Coast. Those members are very supportive of each other. It was only two weekends ago that they had the 54th anniversary of their subbranch, which was a fantastic event where all the ex-service community gathered. They were joined by other ex-service communities. There is also Catherine Hill Bay, which is just a tiny little hamlet but still has its own subbranch that operates out of the surf-lifesaving and bowling club in the area. Then there is the Toukley subbranch, which is outside Shortland electorate, but many residents of the Shortland electorate are members of that subbranch. That is one of the truly strong subbranches on the Central Coast. I must not forget the Adamstown subbranch, which is just outside Shortland electorate, in the electorate of the member for Newcastle. Many of the members there live in Shortland electorate and it provides support to the veterans of our community in Shortland. I really want to put on the record very strongly my support for those veterans and for the work that they do.

In relation to prisoners of war, I remember an occasion when I visited Toukley subbranch. When Toukley was in Shortland electorate, I used to visit there once a month and meet with people. They would come and tell me if they had an issue. On this particular day, an ex-serviceman who had been a prisoner of war came to talk to me about a problem he had. At the conclusion of that conversation he spent some time telling me about his experience as a prisoner of war. There were some fun things that they did to while away the hours, but there were some pretty horrendous things that happened. He told me that he still wakes at night in a cold sweat because he can remember what it was like. He broke down and cried, and this was many, many years after he had been a prisoner of war in Germany.

When you hear stories such as this and the stories that have been told by other members in parliament today, you can understand why the government has decided to implement the POWR supplement. It will be tax-free, exempt income for the purposes of the veterans entitlements and social security income test and will be indexed annually in line with the CPI. That will benefit those veterans who are entitled to it. Aged-care fees will not be affected by the POWR supplement, and that is an important aspect of this legislation. The supplement will apply to all former Australian prisoners of war of Japan and Europe from the Second World War, including civilian prisoners of war, and former POWs from the Korean War.

I recently attended a book launch in the Hunter for a book about the role that nurses have played in conflicts. It dealt with nurses from the Hunter. Reading about the experiences of many of those nurses and other nurses working overseas, tending to soldiers right there at the battlefront and being interned as prisoners of war, makes you realise that our involvement in conflict has many layers. It is really important that legislation that we put before the parliament recognises the fact that not only our service men and women were prisoners of war; there were many civilians. I find that a very important aspect of this legislation.

Prisoners of war known to the Department of Veterans' Affairs will be paid from 20 September. The first payment will be made on 6 October. This will only be made to prisoners of war, not to war widows or widowers, because they already have access to the ex-gratia payment. In addition to benefits available to other veterans, there have been many benefits provided to prisoners of war. They were recognised by the Howard government and have been recognised by this government. These benefits include the ex gratia payment of $25,000, the DVA payment of residential aged-care fees in both low- and high-care facilities, the DVA payment of fees for community aged-care packages which provide care similar to low-care residential facilities in a veterans' home, and the Extended Aged Care at Home and Extended Aged Care at Home Dementia packages, the automatic gold card and funeral benefits and the automatic granting of war widow pensions to the partner upon the death of a prisoner of war. All of these are very important aspects of what the government provides to prisoners of war. We recognise the fact that prisoners of war made an even greater contribution than some other people who were involved in war. To be interned in a foreign country in the worst kind of conditions adds another dimension to their service.

This legislation also amends the compensation offsetting provisions in the Veterans' Entitlements Act. The purpose of these proposed amendments is to clarify and affirm existing practices. No veteran payment is affected by them. We often hear the suggestion that legislation is not clear, and wherever there is uncertainty the government should clear it up. I think these amendments are important because they do give clarity. The other aspect of the amendments is the rationalisation of the temporary incapacity allowance, which improves the targeting of the allowance for veterans and members who lose wages during a period of short incapacity. The legislation before us is worthy of support. I know that members on both sides of the House will join together and support the legislation.

Karen Andrews (McPherson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak today on the Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011. This bill seeks to implement three measures which affect veterans' entitlements: the provision of fortnightly payments of $500 to former prisoners of war, the clarification of arrangements for compensation offsetting with respect to the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and, finally, the modernisation and rationalisation of the arrangements for the payment of loss-of-earnings allowances to eligible veterans.

Firstly, I will speak about payments to prisoners of war. The relevant schedule to the bill is entitled 'Prisoner of war recognition supplement'. I believe the word 'recognition' is particularly relevant to the veteran community and is significant to all Australians. I take this opportunity today to recognise the sacrifices made by veterans and to thank them for the sacrifices that they have made. There are approximately 900 former POWs in Australia, including 20 who reside on the Gold Coast. In 1975, repatriation regulations to provide health benefits for POWs were established. While serving our country these veterans were confined in camps, buildings, prisons or other restricted areas as a prisoner of the enemy. POWs have a unique place in our history and within the veterans' community.

The coalition has a strong record on providing assistance for Australia's ex-prisoners of war. I note, for example, the $25,000 tax-free, ex gratia payment from the Howard government which was made available in 2001 to all former POWs of the Japanese. The coalition extended these payments to other former POWs, with former Korean War POWs and former POWs of the Germans and Italians receiving similar payments in 2003 and 2007 respectively.

The coalition supports the continuing acknowledgement and appreciation of our former POWs. Under this bill, ex-POWs will receive a $500 payment each fortnight from the Australian government from 20 September 2011. Specifically, this payment will be made to former military personnel and civilians who were taken as POWs during World War II and the Korean War. The payment will be considered to be a non-taxable supplement. The proposed payment will not affect former POWs' present access to income support under either the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 or the Social Security Act, or to compensation payments under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. As I indicated before, there are approximately 900 eligible former POWs, and they will automatically receive the payment, with the first payments to take effect from 6 October 2011.

Schedule 2 of the bill relates to compensation offsetting. This schedule seeks to clarify the operation of compensation provisions under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. Currently, under Australia's repatriation system, compensation is paid for incapacity, not for a specific injury. These amendments have come about in response to the ruling of the full Federal Court in the case of the Commonwealth of Australia v Smith in 2009. In essence, the court found that the facts of Mr Smith's case meant that the Repatriation Commission's determination to offset his compensation under each scheme, in line with the principle of compensation offsetting, was inappropriate. Therefore, the full Federal Court determined that Mr Smith's separate incapacities should be separately compensated because they were different injuries with different incapacities.

In response to this issue, schedule 2 substitutes the words 'the incapacity from that injury or disease or the death', contained in the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, with the more precise phrase 'the same incapacity of the veteran from that or any other injury or disease or in respect of that death'. The amendments proposed by schedule 2 should be investigated by a Senate committee. I believe that referring the bill for investigation by a Senate committee will allow the ex-service community, the community affected, an opportunity to provide their input and to have a say into these proposed changes. It is hoped that through consultation with the ex-service community, additional interpretations and explanations of the decisions in Smith can be made.

Thirdly, I would like to speak briefly about schedule 3 of the bill. The changes proposed in schedule 3 will remove the temporary incapacity allowance. As an alternative, veterans will be entitled to seek access to the loss of earnings allowance. I will not speak in detail on this amendment, but I note that, although these two allowances both provide similar comp­ensation, the loss of earnings allowance provides compensation to a broader group but is restricted to veterans who experience an actual loss.

This bill is of particular importance to the McPherson electorate, taking into consid­eration the large veteran community that we have on the Gold Coast, particularly on the southern Gold Coast, which is my electorate. In McPherson we have a local support group that is directly involved in assisting the veterans community and therefore has a vested interest in this bill. The Veterans Support Centre at Currumbin RSL has been providing high-quality advice and support to veterans in the McPherson electorate for some time now. The support service has been providing services to both members and ex-members of the defence forces and their dependants, assisting them in obtaining entitlements under the Veterans' Entitlements Act, the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act and the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act.

The Veterans Support Centre staff work in accordance with the mission, role and objectives of the national RSL. Services include providing an initial point for welfare matters; assessment and advice in the preparation of primary claims; and applications for increased benefits under the various relevant acts. The organisation also assists with the preparation and presentation of cases for review to the Repatriation Commission under section 31 of the act. The Veterans Support Centre does not discriminate against those not affiliated with RSLs. Support services are made available to all entitled veterans, members and ex-members of the defence forces and their dependants, regardless of whether they hold an RSL membership. The Currumbin RSL's Veterans Support Centre, well located within the McPherson electorate, is the largest of its kind on the Gold Coast. During the first quarter of this year, the centre's staff processed 154 claims. This resulted in an increase in pension and allowances to over $198,000, translating to a projected increase of close to $365,000 for DVA allowances.

The sacrifices that veterans have made for our community are recognised and are reciprocated by the tireless efforts of staff and volunteers at the Veterans Support Centre at Currumbin. The people directly involved in assisting our veterans and Defence Force members and families deserve recognition of their contribution to the local veteran community. I take the opportunity today to acknowledge and thank the chair of the Veterans Support Centre, Joseph Gates, for his continued support and dedication to the veterans community. Joe was recently commended for his contribution to the support centre as a recipient of the McPherson community services award.

There are a number of welfare officers at the support centre, and they have responded to 105 general inquiries. The report for the first quarter has indicated a further 122 welfare referrals in hospitals, 116 in home visits and 119 consultations at aged-care facilities. In total, 357 field visits have been made to McPherson veterans in three months. I believe that the mobile service, in addition to the in-house support, is essential to our ageing community. On any day the support centre handles between 15 and 20 calls for welfare assistance, and it is presently supporting around 200 active clients. I should note that these calls are not quick calls; the support staff at the Veterans Support Centre spend a considerable amount of time talking to and working with each of the veterans to make sure that they fully understand the issues and are providing the highest level of support to them.

Demand at the Currumbin RSL veterans support services outnumbers that at many other support services on the Gold Coast. The inquiries are handled by 18 volunteer officers who donate their time to help. Over 3,400 veterans require assistance in the McPherson electorate alone. The centre has been set up to deal with a large capacity of inquiry. If the centre ceased to operate there would be a long waiting list of veterans requiring assistance with entitlement services.

Considerable expenses are involved in running the Veterans Support Centre. The Currumbin RSL Sub-Branch has donated $100,000 towards payroll and office expenses. In addition, a total of $37,531 has been obtained through grants from the Building Excellence in Support and Training program of the Department of Veterans' Affairs. These grants are provided through veterans' advocacy funding and are currently at risk of being cut by $8 million overall by the Gillard Labor government. If this happens the government will be putting a number of volunteer community services such as the Veterans Support Centre in crisis. The ex-services community was not prewarned about the decision to cut this funding and as a result has not been able to prepare for any alternatives. With a smaller pool of funding to rely on, members of the ex-service community will have to compete with each other to survive. A review of advocacy funding released only 12 months ago did not recommend a cut in funding. A cut in funding will result in a cut in services for our growing and ageing veteran community.

In conclusion, I remind the House that the coalition supports the continuing acknow­ledgement and appreciation of the sacrifices made by our veterans, and I also do so very personally. As I have discussed today, the proposed bill is of particular importance to the McPherson electorate. We have a vast and extensive veterans community within the electorate. Therefore, while the coalition does not oppose this legislation, it should be referred to a Senate committee for further investigation so that our veterans get the recognition they deserve.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Veterans’ Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011. I will make only a few comments, to ensure that other members from this side of the House are able to speak prior to question time today. I note the member for Dunkley is sitting at the table. We share a lot in common, both being former veterans' affairs ministers.

This bill will extend an ex gratia payment to ex-prisoners of war of $500 per fortnight. We in this House welcome that payment, and I am sure that Australians wherever they are would recognise that this is a payment that no-one could object to. This payment will be exempt from income tax for the purposes of the Income Tax Act. The bill will also clarify the longstanding compensation-offsetting arrangements that have been in place in the repatriation system since 1973. This follows a full Federal Court decision which highlighted the need to clarify the legislation. This does not vary the disability pension in any way.

This payment builds on a longstanding commitment from both sides of the House to do whatever we can whenever there is money available to support our veteran community. These amendments certainly build on the strong record of the coalition and the Labor Party in providing assistance to the ex-service community and ex-prisoners of war. On my watch as Minister for Veterans' Affairs, I was privileged to be able to ensure that ex-prisoners of war of the Japanese were granted a $25,000 tax-free ex gratia payment, and this was built on by the member for Dunkley while he was Minister for Veterans' Affairs, when it was extended to ex-prisoners of war from the Korean War and ex-prisoners of war of the Germans and Italians. So I think both sides of the House have a very credible record when it comes to supporting this very special group of Australians who we as a nation should never, ever forget.

As the generations go on, it is important that the new generations understand the reason why we have a veterans' entitlement to protect the interests of our veterans. We see members of our Defence Force serving in peacekeeping operations in East Timor, the Solomons, the Sinai—the list goes on—and in Afghanistan and Iraq. We have many defence personnel serving overseas who are prepared to put their lives at risk in the service of our nation and to do as the government requires of them, always protecting and supporting the values that are enshrined in our Constitution.

This legislation reminds me that next year will mark the 70th anniversary of the Battle of Milne Bay. It reminds me that it will be 70 years ago next February that Singapore fell. It reminds me that next year will mark 70 years since the horrific massacre of nurses on Bangka Island, which we learnt of only after the Second World War. It also reminds me that next year will mark the 70th anniversary of the bombing of Darwin. So in many ways next year is going to be a significant anniversary—not that they are not all significant, but I hope that the government will make sure that we do commemorate the 70th anniversary of such significant events.

The Battle of Milne Bay was the first major defeat of the Japanese. Corporal French of the 2nd/9th Battalion was awarded the Victoria Cross posthumously. Next year we should make sure that we focus on a major commemoration of this. We should also remember the fall of Singapore and the horrific massacre by the Japanese on Bangka island, where nurses were told just to march into the water of the ocean off Bangka island and were massacred from behind with machine guns. The sole survivor was Sister Vivian Bullwinkel, and what an inspiration she was. If it had not been for her miraculous survival of that massacre, the world and we in Australia would never have known of that horrific event. We should remember the bombing of Darwin and other events. But the Battle of Milne Bay was a most significant defeat of the Japanese, which in many ways was a turning point in the battle in the Pacific. We should also remember the 70th anniversary of Kokoda and all the battles across the great archipelago to our north. I hope that the minister, through the department, is able to focus on comm­emorative occasions next year.

I know that the department run a very, very good commemorative section. On my watch and on the current government's watch they have put on very significant commemorative pilgrimages back to the sites of great battles where there was great loss of life. Given that we are debating this bill to do with prisoners of war, I want to say that next year should be a time for significant commemorations—not just pilgrimages to those places across the great archipelago to our north but also commemorations across Australia as we lead up to those dates throughout 2012. We should also engage with the young generations at schools, through scholarships or essay competitions, making sure that our young generations, 70 years on, are still learning something of our military history—the record of Australians and their sacrifices.

I am using this bill to put this on the public record, but I hope that the minister and the government, through the department, which has a wonderful record when it comes to commemoration, look next year at commemorating the Battle of Milne Bay, the fall of Singapore, Kokoda, the bombing of Darwin, the massacre on Bangka island and the Thai-Burma Railway. There is so much there. These are horrific stories to tell but we should never, ever forget. It is important to bring these things to the consciousness of all Australians, particularly our young generations. Next year will be one of those times when we can have a focus on it. I know the government and the minister will be looking at the centenary of Gallipoli in 2015, several years away. I urge the minister, when they look at that, to make sure once again that there is a focus back here in Australia. Whilst Gallipoli is a touchstone for many young Australians for what it meant when we first went ashore—and I think that, at that moment, we as a young nation, so soon after Federation, lost our innocence forever—it is not only Gallipoli that we see as marking major occasions when Australians have been involved in making the world a better and hopefully a safer place. I think it is important that it is not just at Gallipoli but back here in Australia that we connect it to a younger generation particularly, because it is their legacy. The 100th anniversary year in 2015 is a touchstone, but let us make sure that we focus also back here in Australia, because not everyone can have the opportunity to go to Gallipoli, perhaps neither on Anzac Day 2015 nor in their lifetime. As we prepare for that centenary year we should keep our focus not only on Gallipoli but also very much here at home.

I commend this bill to the House, and I thank the House for its indulgence in allowing me to put on the public record a couple of other thoughts I have had to do with next year and the centenary in 2015 of the landing at Gallipoli.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

With great pride, I rise to speak on the Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011. I am very lucky in that I come from the town of Townsville. Townsville is Australia's garrison city, Australia's most significant armoured deployment and home of all three branches of the ADF. We take our veterans very, very seriously, and we have a significant veteran population in Townsville. We like to vary the way we look at things in Townsville. For example, there are the ways that the schools do Anzac Day, from the very formal processes of Townsville Grammar School's presentation on Anzac Day and their school history to those of schools like Heatley Secondary College and Southern Cross Catholic School, which take a more informal but nevertheless reverential look at the sacrifices people have made for us.

This bill in some ways goes to address that with a $500 fortnightly payment to prisoners of war in recognition of the hardship they experienced while serving. We now call it post-traumatic stress disorder; in those days, they used to call it shell shock. I was fortunate enough not to be born at the time of the Second World War, but my parents know and I have family members who know people who were prisoners of war. I was lucky to be born in the town of Quilpie. There were people on cattle properties out there who were Changi prisoners. They came home so emaciated, so skinny, so poor. My mother always told a story about one of those guys who used to lie in bed and his mother would sit there and say: 'Don't you die, Bill! Don't you die!' And he didn't. Nevertheless, there are scars to be carried. That is a very significant thing, and I think it is good that we recognise this, on top of the $25,000 bonus. We should never take for granted what people have given.

All veterans take their work very, very seriously, whether they dress in blue, white or green. We shift them around the country. We shift them around the world. Yes, we do give them trades, we do give them jobs that they will have for the rest of their lives, but every now and then we ask them to go overseas and get shot at or support people who are being shot at. Quite often you find that the people who have suffered the most are not the ones who were actually in the battle but the people who had to go and pick them up from there, the people who had to go and clean up. I was reminded of that with the death of the helicopter pilot in Afghanistan just recently. The American crew who had to go and blow up the helicopter had within days suffered significant losses themselves when they went over an IED. Those are the sorts of things where you have to become very fatalistic. I think the Australian Defence Force professional becomes very fatalistic in those things, and it is up to us as a society to recognise the scars that are incurred by our defence people.

As a nation, we have now embraced our Vietnam veterans, our Somalia veterans and our Rwanda veterans and soon will embrace our Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. If you come to Townsville on Anzac Day, your heart just swells with pride. The street and the Strand are just chock-a-block full of people and families who go through there. Every school in Townsville is full of people from the Defence Force. We are very proud of our military history. But it is those smaller ceremonies that make you proud of your veterans' history. It is the smaller ceremonies for the Battle of the Coral Sea and the celebrations for the Vietnam veterans, not just the big ones of Anzac Day and Remembrance Day, that tell you just how important our veterans are.

You see the guys that come in and they still have a bit of a limp. We had an issue this year when two Second World War veterans wanted to march. People were a bit worried that they would not be able to make it, and they wanted them to go on a car. Like true Australian veterans, they just dug in their heels, thumbed their noses at authority and said, 'Bugger you, mate; we're walking.' So they led the march and did a great job. They led the whole town and got a standing ovation all the way through.

The first schedule of this bill provides a $500 fortnightly payment to prisoners of war in recognition of the hardship they experienced while serving, and that is just. These payments will not be taxable, which is also very, very important. They will not affect current income support payments, and they will be automatically received by all former Australian POWs. I think that is fair and just.

The second schedule clarifies the policy outlined in the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 of offsetting compensation provided under multiple acts. The third schedule restructures temporary incapacity allowances offered to veterans in a more efficient manner.

When it comes to dealing with veterans, I think the government and we as an opposition must sit down and talk to our veterans because they know intimately how they will be affected. My office is very lucky in that I do have a very active and vocal veteran population and they do tell me what is going on, from the intractability of some sections of the Department of Veterans' Affairs to the absolutely sublime work that the department does provide.

We have to learn that these men and women who have served in the Australian Defence Force, and are veterans, do have needs that cannot be fixed just with a whitewash brush. Sometimes we have to look at these things on an individual basis. When it comes to big changes like this, the more information we do put in front of our veterans the better off they will be. They do read it, they will tell you what is wrong with it and they will tell you what is right with it. If we as a parliament can listen to these people, we will end up a better place.

I just digress for one moment here to speak on the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefit Scheme. It is an issue that we took very seriously to the last election. It is something that both sides have made promises about and something that I have launched a petition on. I ask leave of the House to table a petition of some 12,620 signatures of people supporting fair indexation of the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand the petition has not yet been presented to the Standing Committee on Petitions. Leave is granted, subject to the approval of the Standing Committee on Petitions.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the House. The 12,620 petitioners there were gathered in a very short space of time by a network of people who did it by email, telephone and fax. I received emails and telephone calls of support from all over the world—from Canada, Chile, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and Ireland. I got well-wishes from people who were on the road and were not able to download the document or email or fax it back to me. These people have done this in a very short period of time. They take their work very seriously. I ask that their wishes on this Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefit Scheme are taken very seriously.

Since 1972, when the Whitlam government brought it into consolidated revenue, it has only been indexed to the CPI when the pensions of everyone else have been indexed to the CPI or male average weekly earnings and the cost of living index. Slowly but surely the DFRDB recipients have fallen further and further behind.

Some people have said that this is an additional expense to the government. It is not because all it is doing is catching up where they have been missing out. So it should not be viewed as an expense but be viewed as just bringing them back onto line. They are not asking to be compensated for the nearly 40 years that they have been short-changed. They are just asking that from now on those people left on the DFRDB and associated pensions are brought together and spoken to as real people.

The previous member for Herbert, Mr Peter Lindsay, said his greatest failing and his greatest sorrow was that during his 14 years as the member he was never able to get this up. It is not just this government that has let our veterans down but a lot of parliaments all the way back, including this one. The issue goes back to the governments led by Mr Whitlam, Mr Fraser, Mr Hawke, Mr Keating and Mr Howard as well as the Rudd-Gillard governments.

I ask the parliament that we do take this very seriously when it does come through the House and that we do stand up and support our veterans and support the people who have served a minimum of 20 years in the Defence Force to qualify for this pension. I have said before in this House—and I will say it again—that we in this House, on Anzac Day and Remembrance Day and every other day that we can get in front of our veterans, stand up proudly and let their bravery and service to the nation wash over us and reflect the glory. But when we get behind closed doors we do not back that up and support our DFRDB recipients when it comes to actually paying up the cash. That is what they find most troubling. I get on very well with just about everyone in the Defence Force community and all they ask is to be treated fairly. If they were asking for something more than someone else was getting, they would understand, but they do not ask for more than anyone else is getting. They are not asking to be treated differently or any less seriously than any other person in the community. All they are asking is that they be brought in line.

I do urge the government to send the Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011 to a Senate committee and that they get it in front of veterans' organisations such as the Defence Force Welfare Association. I ask that they take their words very seriously. These people have a lot to offer. They know more about the act than we ever will because they are subject to it. I commend the bill to the House.

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a former member of the Australian Defence Force for 15 years, I welcome the opportunity to speak on matters to do with veterans and the treatment of veterans in the debate on the Veteran's Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011. I also thank and pay reference to my colleague the member for Herbert, as the member for Lavarack Barracks and the fabulous 3rd Brigade.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And Garbutt.

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And Garbutt. We cannot let RAAF Garbutt—

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And Ross Island

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And Ross Island as well. A number of defence establishments in Far North Queensland, very well represented by the member for Herbert. I am not so blessed with defence establishments in my area, but I have a number of cadet units which I am very proud of, as are their local communities. I also thank my constituents such as Terry 'Mad Dog' Mulligan, who frequently gives me his views, and other veterans who give me their views on what needs to take place with veterans. I also echo the views of the member for Herbert and those of so many in this place that fair indexation for the superannuation benefits—DFRDB et cetera—is very important for our former members of defence. I take this opportunity to speak on the Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2011. The first schedule of the bill relates to the prisoner of war recognition supplement. The government has announced $500 payments per fortnight for some 900 former prisoners of war, the youngest of whom are in their 70s. I know that these measures are certainly welcomed by those who come under the guidelines for these changes, but it is right to say that this is not the first time that an Australian parliament has provided this form of recognition and gratitude to those who have done great service for our country and suffered greatly for it. In 2001 the previous coalition government made one-off ex gratia payments to those who had been prisoners of the Japanese. Payments of $25,000 were made that year to those veterans and it was certainly right to do so. I know that you were intimately involved in those arrangements, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott.

From what we know of World War Two, stories of horrendous treatment and the worst deprivations are synonymous with what happened at the hands of the Japanese imperial army. The Burma-Thailand railway and the Sandakan death march are well-known events in the history of the Second World War that remind us that some of the worst treatment of Australian prisoners of war occurred at the hands of the Japanese. With the fall of Singapore some 15,000 Australians were forced into captivity as a result of that surrender. There has been some debate since the fall of Singapore in 1942 as to whether it was right to surrender at that time or whether the Japanese might have come to the end of their resources. In any case, the facts are that the surrender did take place and 15,000 Australians were taken into captivity. That started a very long period of captivity for those Australians, many of whom died as a result. I would like to talk a little bit more about that.

It is not right to say that there were any good prisoner of war camps run by the Japanese in World War Two; there were no easy options. The reality for our prisoners of war was that their day-to-day survival was tenuous at best. Many died through starvation and disease. Apart from the starvation, disease and beatings, those who were caught trying to escape were in almost every case summarily executed. Day-to-day life on the Burma-Thailand railway, for instance, would see the prisoners suffering and dying from malaria, dysentery and cholera, along with vitamin deficiencies brought on by their very poor and in some cases virtually non-existent diet. The Japanese also imposed 24- to 33-hour shifts on our soldiers.

An interesting part of the building of the Burma-Thailand railway was that when the Japanese first forced our soldiers to work on the railway they had a quota per man, whether they were sick or in good health—although hardly anyone was in good health. They had to move 0.6 tonnes of earth per day per man. Because the Australians were hard workers they exceeded this amount fairly quickly, so the Japanese more than doubled the amount of earth that needed to be removed as part of the construction of the railway. So it was as much as two cubic metres per man that had to be shifted in the end. Of course, this was certainly no open farmland. Mr Deputy Speaker Scott, I understand that you have been there yourself. This was in the deepest of rainforests and jungles with uneven ground. It was very difficult going that was made even worse by starvation and a range of diseases, tropical sores and illnesses. So it was very hard stuff.

It is certainly clear that those who fought for their country and suffered such deprivation are the appropriate recipients of our gratitude and respect for the service that they provided. Those who put their lives on the line in the national interest are worthy of a special place in the heart of our grateful nation. As I said before, there were 14,972 Australians taken prisoner at the fall of Singapore. By the end, even though some 12,000 Australians had been transferred out of Singapore to work on the Burma-Thailand railway and elsewhere, more than 2,600 of our soldiers died as a result of the privations that they had to endure.

When the Japanese were trying to control our prisoners, they tried to get Australians to sign up to no-escape agreements at the prison camp at Changi on Singapore island. Of course, all the Australians refused to capitulate to the Japanese. That led to anyone who tried to escape being summarily executed. I have spoken about the lack of decent food, I have spoken about the diseases that our soldiers were afflicted with, and I have spoken about the executions, but there were also the beatings.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.