Claire Clutterham (Sturt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025, which continues the government's response to the recommendations arising from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. This bill, which is further designed to simplify the veterans entitlement system, goes hand in glove with the amendments made in the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 1) Bill 2025, which was introduced into the parliament last year.

Also a feature of last year was the passage of the Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Act 2024, or the VETS act, which operates to streamline and simplify legislation relating to veterans from 1 July 2026 by removing the complex tri-act system. Under current arrangements, veteran entitlements are provided under three separate compensation acts—the MRCA, the Veterans' Entitlements Act and the DRCA—and eligibility under one of these acts depends on when the veteran served and which periods of service caused or contributed to the condition being claimed. The simplification act modifies these arrangements by providing that, from 1 July 2026, all claims for compensation and rehabilitation will be determined under an improved MRCA.

Significant consultation was undertaken between 2022 and 2024 to ensure the simplification act reflected the lived experience of veterans and their families. The amendments made in this bill will implement certain aspects of the policy intention that was developed under that consultation. Pursuant to the VETS act, from 1 July 2026, all veterans' rehabilitation and compensation claims will be dealt with under a single piece of legislation—not three—which is known as the MRCA or the recrafted Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. To ensure that that date can be met, a number of technical amendments to the VETS act are required, and that is what the bill before us does. In essence, it supports effective implementation and effective governance. What it doesn't do is change the intended operational effect of the VETS act.

In terms of the other operational effects of this bill, it also amends recovery provisions so that amounts already paid under the Veterans' Entitlements Act from any Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act arrears payable to a dependant for the equivalent benefits for the same period can be subtracted. In addition, it clarifies the circumstances under which a partner may receive additional lump sum compensation for service related death claimed on or after 1 July 2026, and it ensures that this amount is available in respect of all service related deaths on or after this date.

Further, with respect to funeral compensation amounts already payable under the MRCA, the bill sets out that the higher rate is available to anyone who meets the eligibility criteria, even if they also fall within the criteria for a lower amount. Veterans who meet the criteria for additional disablement amounts or special-rate disability pension do not need to meet additional criteria to enable their eligible children to access education assistance through the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act education and training scheme. Equally, the bill clarifies that gold cards are provided to eligible veterans without requiring them to meet additional criteria, and it amends the service pension criteria so that, after the date of 1 July 2026, the partners of eligible veterans are eligible for the partner service pension from the age of 50, to harmonise with current eligibility and age requirements that are available to partners of extreme disablement amount veterans under the current veterans entitlement framework.

Importantly, the bill will also make amendments to continue to exclude the Victoria Cross allowance and decoration allowance from income test arrangements and clarify that there is coverage for conditions resulting from the unintended consequences of treatment provided or paid for by Defence during service, or later by the DVA. Lastly, the bill makes amendments to ensure existing access to non-liability healthcare arrangements for serving members are maintained through the transfer from the Veterans' Entitlements Act to the MRCA.

These technical amendments that have been outlined are being implemented to ensure that all of the legislative requirements are in place so that the shift from the tri-act system to just the one act can be done smoothly. It is so important to get this right. So, although the amendments are minor and seem technical in nature, they are critical to facilitating an understanding of entitlements by veterans and their families and critical to facilitating faster claim processing times. The simplification and harmonisation of the veteran compensation system form some of the most significant reform in a century to how veterans are supported in this country. The changes will enable veterans and their families to get the support they need and deserve when they need it. That is why this bill deals with so many matters—the review pathway, compensation for dependants of deceased veterans, funeral compensation, access to the MRCA education scheme, additional disablement amounts, Victoria Cross allowance and decoration allowance, service injuries, diseases and death arising from treatment and treatment for serving members. It is so broad reaching because we respect and are deeply grateful for the service, courage and dedication shown by active service personnel and veterans, all for the people of this great country.

Often when people finish service, they do require care and support, but they also have a lot of life left to live, a lot of diverse contributions to make to their community. So we need a system that is fair, accessible and easy to use so that veterans can live life and contribute to the community and so that active service personnel can access the support they need to enable them to do their critical work effectively. And we know that there are thousands of active service personnel and veterans making incredible contributions to society. One such champion lives in my electorate of Sturt and was recently awarded the Citizen of the Year Award at the Campbelltown City Council Australia Day Awards. I first met Jordan Box, a corporal in the Australian Air Force Cadets, and his beautiful OPK9 dog Sally in 2025. Jordan has lived a life of service, and every day he exemplifies the highest ideals of citizenship through his extraordinary multidecade commitment to this country and to community service. His contribution spans emergency responses, youth development and cultural preservation. Jordan's selfless dedication transcends ordinary volunteerism, representing a lifetime philosophy of 'service before self'. What really sets Jordan apart is the remarkable breadth and depth of his contributions, which are sustained and meaningful and impact diverse sectors in our community, from life-saving emergency medical services to nurturing future leaders through youth organisations. Few individuals demonstrate such sustained excellence across diverse sectors. Jordan's ability to mentor young people while simultaneously serving as a frontline first responder showcases exceptional character and time management skills that benefit the entire community. Through his extensive volunteering with the Campbelltown St John Ambulance cadet division and the Stradbroke scouts, Jordan mentors young people, instilling essential life skills, leadership qualities and strong civic values that shape those young people into responsible, community minded citizens who may be minded to serve their country in the way that Jordan did.

There is only one Jordan, but there are thousands of active service personnel and veterans just like him, making huge contributions across society. This bill is part of the Albanese Labor government's drive to provide them and their families with simple and accessible care and support when they need it. I am proud to be part of a government with this motivation, and I stand with the Prime Minister and Minister Keogh in support of this commendable purpose. I commend this bill to the House.

Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To all those that continue to wear the uniform and to our veterans and their families: the freedoms that we enjoy today are on the back of hard-fought battles, wars and sacrifices that you have made. On Anzac Day we say, 'Lest we forget.' We reaffirm our commitment to always remember those that have been killed in action, have died in training or have succumbed to their war within back here on home soil. On Remembrance Day we say the guns fell silent, but the guns haven't fallen silent since. In natural disasters—fires, floods and cyclones—our brave men and women are there. In peacekeeping missions—East Timor, Fiji and Solomon Islands—our brave men and women are there. In combat operations—Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea and many more—our brave men and women were there. It's our job in this parliament to make sure that we pass legislation that supports our current serving and our veterans—those that stand up for us, those that are there when they're called.

As a whole, the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025 looks fine from the outset, but there are parts of this bill that I personally don't agree with. I don't believe that, if someone has put a claim in and it gets reviewed by the Veterans' Review Board, there needs to be a notice sent to the Chief of the Defence Force. There are already mechanisms in place for reportables. For example, if someone is a truckie and they have a drug problem and have spoken to a professional—they have gone through their process and put a claim in—that is their reportable, which would then go through to the unit and subsequently other people to make sure that that they are now not in the position where they could put someone's life at risk. We want to encourage people to see a mental health professional through non-liability health care. We want to encourage those who are doing it tough to be able to speak to someone without fear of their career being halted or of not being able to continue to serve.

For example, if someone has had a marriage breakdown—let's say a platoon sergeant in an infantry unit has had a marriage breakdown and it was decided through the advocate that it was to do with their service—they would then go through the claims process. If they found themselves at the Veterans' Review Board, I don't think it's an appropriate measure to then go to the Chief of the Defence Force with a notification that a platoon sergeant has sought professional help, has got that help and has gone to the VRB. If that now sits with the CDF, I think that's a gross overreach, because I would hate for that then to go back down the chain and lead to a situation where now that platoon sergeant can't become a warrant officer class 2 or can't be on deployment or receive promotion. We've seen it happen in real life where someone may not be travelling well. They're okay—they're functioning and ready to do their job—but, because of a kneejerk reaction because of bad policy, they get put on a no-weapons chit and can't go out in the field and can't deploy—all these things as an unintended consequence because we haven't properly gone through the legislation and policy that we do here. I don't want to slow down the passage of this, because it is part of the recommendations from the royal commission, but there are unintended consequences of not doing it right. I think having the VRB as the crux to notify the Chief of the Defence Force becomes quite challenging.

I also don't believe that this has been taken out to the veteran or ADF community to ask what they think. Let's look at who this will affect the most. This will affect the private soldier. This will affect the sailor and the aviator. This is not going to affect the senior officers. These unintended consequences will sit with the enlisted. As a former private soldier—never promoted—and now sitting here, I can feel the anxiety that they will have about something like this. Now, I've heard that there are other parts of provisions and bills that have a recommendation—or a kneejerk—that go to the CDF. I've heard people talk about that. Well, that's probably still a problem too. I don't know that saying it happens in other places means we should let it go through here. I do think that Darren Chester and his office have done some great work going through this. I spent some time last night working and talking through it with Angus Taylor, who has taken up that part of the portfolio at the moment.

Whilst I believe this is well intentioned, and whilst we don't want to stop these miscellaneous measures going through, I do think that that we must take heed and ask: what is the unintended consequence here? If someone has a drug problem or an alcohol problem, or if someone has any sort of reportable that's already in legislation now, when they get that help—whether it goes through the VRB, DVA or anything—it is mandatory for the healthcare professional to report it into the chain of command, because there's a safety issue. You can't drive your truck in the morning if you're drinking in the morning. You can't handle weapons if you're addicted to ice. There will be supports and help for those people that have these addictions and problems. But, if you've had a marriage breakdown or if you've returned from a deployment and you're going through a bit of a tough time, but you can still operate and do your job and there isn't a mandatory reportable, I don't think the CDF needs to open his email—or her email—and see that Private Such-and-such has gone through the VRB for a mental health concern or gone through the non-liability healthcare system. If that gets reported back to the chief, I just think it's an overreach. I think it's more red tape, and I want to make sure that our brave men and women feel comfortable and confident to be able to continue to serve and do their job with whatever it may be. The coalition has our position on this, and the shadow minister read it out last night.

In closing, I just want to say that we serve here on the back of our brave men and women who've served this nation. We have the privilege and the freedoms to be able to pass laws and legislation and live freely in this country because of our brave men and women. I want to make sure we're keeping warfighters warfighting. I want to make sure we're keeping our service personnel fit and happy to be able to continue to do their job. I don't want this to hang over their heads so people question whether they should get help or not. It's one fear that I do have. I think if this were taken out to the public, to those currently serving—not to the veteran community, because it's not for them; it's for our still-serving Defence Force personnel—then we would get similar feedback. We do plan on working with the government and with the minister. I know this has already been raised with him. I do note the other member in the House and her service as well. This isn't from a place of anger or fight. This is just from a place of thinking, and we need to find our place where we can land to make sure that we're not fighting and we're here to serve the people that send us here and our Australian Defence Force personnel.

Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I begin, I would like to thank the member for Herbert for his speech, for his words and sincerity and for looking to ensure our veterans are fully supported. I also thank him for his act of service.

I too rise to speak on the matter that indeed goes to the heart of our national character: how we honour, support and stand beside those who have served Australia in uniform and how we support their families as well, who serve alongside them. We heard just before from the member for Herbert about the different kinds of service that I think are all very familiar to people who head off to different missions around the world in conflicts. But there are also peacekeeping missions. There's the seemingly never-ending requirement to support our affected communities domestically on the back of bushfires, floods and cyclones. We lean on and call on our Defence service personnel for a lot more than they ever thought that they were signing up for. The enormous work that they do in communities around the world in building beautiful relationships and trust, in order to avoid conflict in the first place, is something I think is quite immeasurable.

I want to acknowledge that the work of Albanese Labor government is very much going to ensuring that we all take the work of our veterans as well as our Defence personnel seriously. This is being led by the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, the Hon. Matt Keogh, and has been done with absolute seriousness of purpose. He has full respect for the lived experience of people like the member for Herbert as well as the current serving personnel and really understands what is needed and what the commitment to reform should look like.

In my electorate of Hasluck, veteran issues are not abstract; they are personal, they're local and they're enduring. Across Hasluck, we have a number of RSL sub-branches, including those that serve communities from Ellenbrook to Bassendean, as well as the surrounding suburbs. They play a vital role not just in commemoration but in the day-to-day support of veterans and also of those who continue to serve. They are places where veterans find camaraderie, advocacy and a sense of belonging long after their formal service has ended. I want to place on the record my sincere thanks to and gratitude for the volunteers, the advocates and the committee members of those RSLs. Their work often goes unseen, and it's essential. They are helping veterans navigate complex systems, supporting families in distress and ensuring that no-one is forgotten. I know, from my meetings with them, that the toll of being able to maintain records, the systems and obligations that come with any committee—be it a sporting club, a not-for-profit or an RSL sub-branch—is increasingly felt by people who don't feel necessarily fully equipped with the computer skills required. That bit of stress, even on that level, is something that we're working to take away because their focus, rightly, is on supporting veterans to navigate more complex issues than doing the paperwork.

They have been clear to me about what matters most, which is the veterans that they support. They want a system that listens. They want decisions made in reasonable timeframes, and they want dignity, clarity and fairness. That was what was lacking when we came to office, and it's precisely what this government has set out to deliver and, frankly, is now delivering.

One of the most important differences under the Albanese government has been a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths, particularly in relation to veteran mental health and suicide. The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide existed because families, advocates and veterans demanded honesty and accountability. Minister Keogh made clear that this government is committed to responding fully and meaningfully to the findings of the royal commission. Indeed, we did not wait for its final report to begin making those changes, because, for too long, veterans experienced the Department of Veterans' Affairs not as a support system but as an obstacle course. Long delays, repeated reassessments and complex legislative frameworks left many feeling disbelieved and worn down.

But, under Minister Keogh's leadership, I'm happy to say that we've seen really systemic and cultural changes in veterans' affairs. The government has invested in hundreds of additional staff at DVA. They've improved the training, modernised systems to reduce the claims backlogs and improved the decision-making timeframes. They're not cosmetic changes; they're practical reforms that mean veterans can receive support when they need it and not years later and maybe never. Local RSL advocates in Hasluck have told me that, while challenges do still remain, they are actually seeing progress. They're seeing their claims move more quickly, they're seeing better communication, and they're seeing a minister who is prepared to engage with them and with the sector directly. And that matters.

Another area of genuine reform has been the expansion of the Veterans' and Families' Hubs. The hubs recognised something veterans have always known: that wellbeing is not just about compensation but about connection, purpose and access to the right help at the right time. By providing a single entry point for mental health services, employment assistance, advocacy and social support, these hubs reduce fragmentation. They remove barriers. They also acknowledge that families are central to veteran wellbeing, not an afterthought.

I had the real privilege of being able to participate in a roundtable last year with the families of veterans. To be fair, I know that it's not in all cases, but in many cases they are women who are there supporting the serving defence person. The stories that they shared were really quite something. They were very impressive in being able to give really succinct stories that covered quite different spectrums. There were situations where their own career was stymied as a consequence of the nature of the defence personnel's role, as they need to move around the country and sometimes internationally. Some were not necessarily getting the support that they needed, where perhaps their partner had their employment within Defence severed on health grounds and suddenly it was on them to be able to provide that full wraparound service for issues they may not have a full line of sight to. That was quite concerning. I've been continuing to work with the minister to ensure that area is prioritised for support as part of family wellbeing.

If I might—and I'm running down the clock—I have just one other example from our discussions at that roundtable. It's providing support to serving defence service personnel and then veterans on their return to home. Often when they're away for extended periods of time—this could be six months or a year—and they come back, it's that adjustment back to being within a family, where discussions are not about direction. It's about collaboration; it's about consensus. Suddenly having teenagers say 'no' is a challenge. It's a challenge in any house, but it's a challenge when you're in a workplace where it's about following orders, and then suddenly you're in an environment where you might get some pushback. Even just something like how to make sure the family network is solid and resilient is so critical too.

The Albanese government's expanding hubs nationally reflects that simple truth: that early, local and holistic support really does save lives. And, further, the Veteran Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill is part of the government's ongoing effort to ensure that veterans legislation is clearer and fairer and is better aligned. The amendments encompassed by the bill include measures dealing with compensation for dependants of deceased veterans, funeral compensation, injuries arising from treatment, access to education and appropriate notice, as well as other matters. I really do want to acknowledge the cultural change that is being driven through the veterans system.

But we know policy reform is not enough. Veterans have told us that how they are treated, whether they are believed, whether they are listened to and whether they are treated with dignity matters just as much as the outcome of any claim. Minister Keogh has made it clear that empathy, accountability and transparency are not optional extras; they are core expectations. And that message is filtering through. While there is more work to do, it represents a meaningful shift—one that veterans and their families deserve.

Another initiative that underscores the collaborative nature of the government's approach is the decision by Minister Keogh to form a Veterans' Affairs Ministerial Advisory Council. There are currently notices across media calling for expressions of interest to serve on this council which will inform the minister in relation to the operation of the sector and particularly in relation to the compensation framework. The notice calls for applications from persons with expertise in one of the areas of health, including mental health; rehabilitation; aged care; financial supports and compensation; and, importantly, lived experience.

No government, obviously, can undo decades of systemic issues overnight, but what we are doing is changing the direction. We've moved from denial to acknowledgement, from delay to action and from mere defensiveness to engagement.

Many of us here attended the last post ceremony at the War Memorial this week. Veterans and their families deserve more than gratitude expressed once or twice a year at formal ceremonies. They deserve a system that works, every day, quietly, competently and with respect. In Minister Keogh they have a minister who understands the weight of that responsibility, and in the Albanese government they have a government committed to doing the work, legislatively, administratively and culturally.

To the veterans and RSL communities of Hasluck, I say this: your service is valued; your voices are heard; and here, with this legislation and the other reforms that have already commenced, we are delivering. For my part, in Hasluck, I will continue to advocate strongly for the interests of those who have served. In the north of my electorate, I will look for ways to support the Ellenbrook RSL in finding their own permanent space—a safe space for local veterans to meet and seek support. I will continue to support the Eastern Regional RSL in Bassendean as they plan for their future. Regardless of the nature of service and missions, I will ensure that, wherever people have served, they are appropriately acknowledged for that service.

I served in the Army Reserve. Obviously—relative to the experience of the majority of defence service personnel—it was a limited prism through which I looked at the defence forces. But, through that experience, and also through my parliamentary participation on the defence programs, I'm determined to ensure I stay connected to the issues that matter to our current serving personnel but to those of our veterans as well, because 'lest we forget' applies to the living as well as the fallen. I commend the government's work and the ongoing reform of veteran affairs to this House.

Mary Aldred (Monash, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a privilege to follow the member for Hasluck, and I thank her for her service to our nation. In commencing my remarks on the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025, I follow the member for Herbert in his contribution. In my short time in this place, I've been inspired by his veteran story. He served in East Timor and Afghanistan, and he talks about his 'alive day', where he was very badly injured by an improvised explosive device, and about his journey to recovery and also his lifelong dedication to helping and supporting veterans in his community. In fact, he's the recipient of an Order of Australia medal for that service. So I think we could have no finer speakers than the two members that I follow in making my remarks.

It is an absolute privilege to represent the veteran community in the Monash electorate. I've worked very closely with a number of RSLs and ex-service organisations, and I just want to acknowledge the outstanding contribution that they make, like Ben Vahland and Lynn Mizen at the Warragul RSL. I had the great privilege of attending the West Gippsland Veterans Welfare Centre opening just a couple of months ago, where Ben Vahland, particularly, has really dedicated a huge amount of time to getting that up and running. In my work with veterans across the region, there have been Christine Thompson, Lindsay Guerin and Kevin Walsh from the Inverloch and Wonthaggi RSLs; Steve Mayes from Moe RSL; and Richie Cunningham and Rod McNabb from Drouin RSL. I acknowledge their service and look forward to continuing to work very closely with them in the pursuit of improving veteran welfare.

I've got my colleague the member for New England, who, of course, is a former veterans affairs shadow minister, and I just want to acknowledge two points he drove very strongly in that time. He made the point that veterans affairs should be a cabinet portfolio. It shouldn't be subsumed into the broader Defence portfolio. Veterans have a unique set of needs and they deserve to have a strong voice around the cabinet table. I also acknowledge his work in putting pressure on the government to progress the implementation of the veterans royal commission's findings and recommendations.

I represent a large number of constituents in Monash who have previously served—in fact, it's 3,560 constituents. As of September last year, we had 1,761 DVA clients in my electorate, 1,294 veterans and 474 family members or dependents. Every one of them relies on the system to work properly. I go to great lengths to assist constituents—whether it's with a Services Australia, Centrelink, issue or any other issue—but one of the greatest privileges is being able to pick up the phone and assist a veteran who has been waiting 18 months for assistance. While it's a great privilege to be able to get something to happen quickly, it really shouldn't take that long. For the remainder of my time in this place, I want to make sure that, as a parliament, we do a better job to recognise the needs and expediate the support that veterans deserve for the sacrifice and the work that they've done in serving our country.

I've met with members of nearly every RSL organisation across the Monash electorate and the message that I consistently hear is that it's never been harder to access services through the Department of Veterans' Affairs. In the short time of about nine months now, I've had over 20 veterans come to my electorate office in Warragul seeking assistance and seeking support because they cannot get the answers that they need or the support that they are seeking through the department. In that context, I want to touch on a couple of things in this bill which should be considered.

The coalition supports the passage of this legislation because it is necessary to progress from the VETS reform framework and ensure the transition to a single, simplified rehabilitation system from 1 July 2026. We supported the royal commission's recommendation to simplify veterans compensation arrangements because having multiple different acts of parliament is complicated enough for bureaucrats, lawyers and politicians. It is so much more confusing and difficult for veterans and their families to try and navigate that, so we support the simplification of narrowing it and making it more user friendly.

The Liberal Party—and the National Party as well—support the objective of a single framework under the MRCA that reduces duplication, improves consistency and makes entitlements easier to understand and access. I've had particular feedback from the West Gippsland veterans welfare group and other veterans, like Rod McNabb, who does an absolutely amazing job. Many of them are volunteers. The Drouin veterans welfare centre was operating for 30 years and had a very small but dedicated army of volunteers that would painstakingly go through veterans claims. But it is incredibly difficult to navigate, and I think anywhere that we can reduce duplication, improve consistency and make entitlements easier to understand and access is a good thing.

This bill contains largely technical and consequential amendments, but they do matter, and my colleague the member for Herbert has made a number of observations. While, at a broad level, the Liberal Party are supportive of this passage, I do think the observations that he's made matter and should be on the record. The technical amendments relate to the ability to clarify and review appeal rights, protect dependent compensation, ensure funeral benefits and education assistance continue seamlessly, preserve non-liability health care and establish clear transitional rules so that veterans are not caught in a legislative limbo, as is too often the case. However, this is now the second miscellaneous measures bill that's been required to fix or complete the government's original reform package, which has taken way too long. They're not new policies; they're operational details that should have been resolved far earlier. I say to veterans in the Monash electorate that you deserve far better.

The Liberal Party will also move an amendment to remove the mandatory notification of the Chief of the Defence Force when a serving member accesses non-liability health care or lodges a Veterans' Review Board application. Care seeking should never feel like a career risk. My colleague the member for Herbert spoke eloquently and empathetically about the balance in making sure that, if there is a serious issue, such as a drug or alcohol dependency issue, the Defence Force is notified for safety and other deployment reasons, but not to the extent that that would act as a deterrent for members of our Defence Force seeking help and mental health assistance. I think there are also some very sound privacy concerns that have been raised in this context. If we're serious about wellbeing and suicide prevention, we've got to be able to reduce those barriers.

We will support this bill because veterans across Australia, particularly those in Monash, who I want to do my very best job for in this role, cannot afford delay. I support the bill but also associate myself with the remarks of the member for Herbert and my other Liberal colleagues. I thank the chamber.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I acknowledge that obviously you, Deputy Speaker Wilkie, served. Obviously it runs in families a bit. Both my grandfathers served; my father served, and I served in the reserves. Veterans affairs was such a fundamental part of the iconography of the family—a bizarre anger sometimes and an attachment to their service.

My father was repatriated during the Second World War; he was smashed up. He became a very successful person in business, but I remember he would spend an inordinate amount of time arguing about his pension. At the time he'd become a little bit serious. He wasn't easy going, but things never fussed him. But he would get a little bit angry when he was arguing about his pension. I can't remember the exact form of the conversation, but it was something like: 'Dad, you've done so well in life. You're turning over places worth millions of dollars. Why would you worry about whether it's $40 or $60?' And I remember him abruptly saying, 'You give me back my leg, and I'll give you back your 20 bucks.' It was something that he'd held on to. When he passed away, we found an account that had all his pension money in it; he'd never spent a cent of it and had just put it in an account. I don't know why. It was something he argued about but never actually used.

What it shows is the depth of feeling—you've got to understand that—that veterans have about their service. They get a sense that, in many instances, they were just sort of kicked out the door. You sign on the dotted line to offer your life for your nation, and then, at the end, it's, 'See you later.' Dad always said, 'When I got out of hospital'—after his fifth or sixth or 10th operation—'they literally just parked my wheelchair on the side and said, "Well, if your family can come and pick you up, that would be great."'

With the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025, you've got to understand that this is seminal. Veterans' Affairs is something that most people know nothing about, but, for the people who are involved with it, it's absolutely core, because it's a reflection of gratitude by the nation for the service they have offered. If you don't have service men or women, you don't have a defence force, and if you don't have a defence force, you don't have a nation. You will lose it. The world has not changed. Reference point 1 is Vladimir Putin and what's happened in Ukraine. Reference point 2 is the growth of totalitarianism, as exhibited quite clearly by communist China. Reference point 3 is the Middle East. Reference point 4—and on you go. Human nature has not changed. You're always going to need a strong defence force, and, if you want a strong defence force, you've got to put all the promises out there at the start to exhibit a sense of, 'Show your patriotism; sign up.' There's a quid pro quo to that, which is, on the way out, gratitude for your service. We look after you. It is not beyond the pale. It's not that everybody has to bow and scrape and you get everything for free. No, I don't think any returned service men or women or ex-service men or women want that. They accept that, if you're back on civvy street, you're back on civvy street. But, if there are afflictions and things that need to be dealt with, they want it dealt with respectfully and promptly. That is what this bill is about: dealing with things respectfully and promptly.

There were a range of recommendations when I was shadow veterans' affairs minister, and I, on behalf of the coalition, was doing my very best to work hand in glove with the minister, because we wanted this to be non-contro. We wanted this through. But we're still talking about it. This has been going on now for years, and it should already be done. It should be finished. It should be complete. What are we in? 2026. So this is something that's got to be prosecuted. I don't know who the shadow minister is now, but it has to be prosecuted in a form that says we've got to expedite this thing and bring it to a conclusion.

Just in passing, I'd like to apologise. I did not attend the last post ceremony last night, because I was still in my electorate. I just want to put an apology in for that. I most definitely would have been there if I had not been tied up somewhere else.

What we also have to acknowledge in this bill is: What is the timeline now for finishing this off? When does this actually come to a conclusion? We have concerns about the processing of claims and the mechanism whereby they process them, where they say, 'Oh, we're getting through the claims,' but then we found that what they're actually doing is duck-shoving things sideways. If a claim's rejected, it goes back to the start, but it's noted as being processed, even though it's really just amended and it's back in the pile again. We need clarity on exactly where this is and where this processing attachment is at. I acknowledge that it has certainly picked up a lot of the slack that was there—100 per cent. But I don't think it's reached the high notes that we needed it to.

As to the streamlining of DRCA, MRCA and VEA, I think that in the end we ended up not with three acts but with four, because DRCA, MRCA and VEA still continue on, and then you've got basically MRCA 2.0, which everybody's going to be part of. Now you've got four. You've got the residue of the previous acts and now the new one that's encompassing them.

I hope that we can understand that our nation, unfortunately, lives in a time when we are going to have stresses placed on us that we've never experienced in our lives, and I don't believe our nation is prepared for them. Obviously, with an assertive China pressuring you into a sort of vassal state relationship, it's going to need resilience for you to stand up against that and push back. You have two approaches to doing that. You can rely totally on the United States of America and believe that your defence policy is them sending their sons and daughters over to our hemisphere to die on our behalf because we weren't ready for it. I'd be very, very worried about that defence policy. That is not a very secure defence policy; that is a very foolish defence policy. The other approach is that you become resilient in your own nature in such a form that you'll never be as strong as the totalitarian power that wishes to put you into a vassal state but strong enough that they wouldn't bother trying. There's too much concern if they try.

We are not there. We are not even close to there. We are a thousand miles from there. It's in so many forms that we are weak. For instance, our Collins-class submarines are basically—well, at times, we can't get one into the water. That's your whole platform, and you're not able to basically get one of your ships into the water. Spare parts—we don't make them. So, if you lose a spare part from one of your platforms, it basically becomes defunct. There are fuel supplies and things you don't even think about. We do not have the storage of fuels to maintain a conflict over a sustained period. If the supply lines are cut—people just have to cut your supply lines and wait for you to run out. That will happen pretty quickly.

The big thing is that we seem to have lost the culture of people going into the services. I'll give you a classic example. In the past, high schools had cadet units. They were everywhere; now they're not. There's only a handful of places with cadet units. Sometimes people think, 'Oh, well, you know, we don't have to worry about that.' You do. To go into the Defence Force, as you would understand clearly, Deputy Speaker Wilkie, is quite an experience, especially when you first walk through the gate. You hear people just screaming at you and throwing your stuff around everywhere and making a noise which is apparently 'left, right, left, right' and marching people here, there and everywhere. How do you break the ice into that? For a lot of people, it's just in your family. There's a family culture. There's an awareness of it because your family has all done it. Unfortunately we had deaths in the family of people that served in wars. But a lot of people just have no connection to the Defence Force whatsoever. Maybe movies would be as close as they get.

If we're going to reinvigorate our nation's capacity, it's this holistic view of getting cadet units going again. Cadet units break the ice for people to go into reserve units. We used to have reserve units in regional towns. They're not there, depots. That's how I got into it, going to my local. I used to drive 200 kilometres to parade at Roma—200 at night and 200 kilometres back home, so a 400-kilometre round trip to parade on a Tuesday night—and then go away to do the things you've got to do. But in the end they moved the depot out of Roma. The depot was going to be on Queen Street, Toowoomba. That's 450 kilometres away. That's basically where it all stopped. I was still enlisted, but I couldn't parade. We've got to move those depots back into regional towns. Places like Parkes or Forbes should have a reserve depot. It should be culturally applicable that people who've been to high school continue on and say, 'You know, I'll just continue on with my service at a reserve depot.'

Also it's very important, as I used to say for Veterans' Affairs, that, when you get out of the services, you should step down not out. 'Stepping down' means still having a connection to the culture of the Defence Force, which reserve units gave you. It's also so good for people coming through to be mixing with regs—to be mixing with people who have been in regular service in the Defence Force. That was done by depots. When I was there, there was Sergeant Brett Field; he'd been in Somalia. I had the great honour of being trained by people such as Warrant Officer Perry, who had been a forward scout in Vietnam and was an Aboriginal gentleman. You wouldn't meet these people unless you had a reserve unit. They still utilise that as their connection. I think that gives people a great sense of psychological attachment to, strength in and resilience for the job they've got to do.

Finally, of course, if you've got reserve units, you get regs because people can make the switch over. I just had a gentleman up the other day who was a very distinguished returned servicemen with his son. They were going shooting on our place. I got into discussions with him, as he was camped on our place: 'How'd you get in?' It was via reserves. Then he did a number of tours of Afghanistan. He'd been in East Timor. He's still in the services now, actually, but he got in via the reserves, and that is something we've got to reinvigorate.

I might just say in closing—I know this is tangential, but it's important—that the firearm legislation that was passed the other day is an infringement on this person's rights. These people are good people, and I don't have one; I have a number who come onto our property to go shooting. That's what they do. They bring their families with them—their sons predominantly. We've brought in laws that are going to start putting caveats on their capacity to stand on the land they love and have served and have offered their lives for, and I think that's wrong. I don't agree with the firearms legislation at all, but there should at least have been an amendment in there for ex-service men and women who don't own properties—they're not wealthy people—but go shooting on properties. These are people who have shouldered arms in defence of our nation and have taken on the terrorists in Afghanistan. We shouldn't be querying why they need firearms. They do it because it's their recreation. They're showing their kids. I was looking at this gentleman's kids and I was saying, 'If there was ever a person who's trained to be in the Defence Force, it's that man's son, who no doubt will follow his dad and do an incredibly good job.'

Obviously, we need the bill. I'm not certainly not going to hold this up. My whole issue with this bill is that it should have been expedited and already completed by now.

Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind members that we adjourn at 7.30. That's a hard deadline.

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

Last night, at the Australian War Memorial, the shrine of remembrance, that remarkable Australian place where the memory of 103,000 fallen is sacrosanct and they are honoured, immortalised and memorialised, we had a service, a last post ceremony, for Major Cyril Herbert Dodson Lane. He was killed at Gallipoli, aged just 27. He was killed at Hill 60 on 29 August in that fateful year 1915.

He was born at Bondi and, whether by design or by chance, it was rather interesting, given what happened there on 14 December last year, that somebody with such a connection to that eastern suburbs beach—that eastern suburb in Sydney—should be honoured at the Australian War Memorial at the last post ceremony commemorating the start of the parliamentary year. I think it's nice, and it's appropriate, that, at the start of each parliamentary year, MPs and senators go across the lake from the front doors of parliament and up that straight line to the Australian War Memorial to honour those who gave us the unique, rare and great privilege of being able to serve a free and fair democracy, because it is the service and sacrifice of those men and women that enables us to do our jobs for and on behalf of Australian people. Whether it be Major Lane or any one of the other 103,000 men and women on the Roll of Honour—bronzed Aussies all, heroes all; any of them—we are able to do our jobs because of them.

I'm very proud that I come from Wagga Wagga, a garrison city, a military town, a defence town. There are 1,576 people, or 2.9 per cent of the population, aged 15 and over who have past Australian Defence Force service. There are 1,489 people, or 2.7 per cent of the population, aged 15 and over who are currently serving in the Australian Defence Force. The proportion of veterans in Wagga Wagga, 2.9 per cent, is higher than the average for regional New South Wales. We've had the Air Force there since 29 July 1940. The 1 Recruit Training Unit is one of the primary defence strategic establishments at RAAF Wagga, where air power in Australia begins. It says so on one of the hangars. In Kapooka is the 'home of the soldier', Blamey Barracks, honouring Sir Thomas Blamey, General Blamey—

An honourable member: Field Marshal.

Field Marshal, indeed. He ensured that we are not speaking a different language, with the work that he did in the Pacific theatre of war in World War II. He was born at Lake Albert. Kapooka has been there since 1951. Since 1993, we've had a very strong naval presence. Personnel from the Royal Australian Navy have undertaken aviation technical training at the RAAF School of Technical Training at the Forest Hill base. So we are very much indebted and wedded to our military.

Veterans are important. Not only do we have an obligation as parliamentarians to ensure that we have the right parameters, the right equipment and everything else for our current serving defence personnel but, when they leave the uniform, when they finish their military careers, we have to be there for them. Many of them are broken; many of them are not. It annoys me constantly that there is this perception that anybody who has served is broken; they are not. Yes, some of them suffer from the wears and tears of their service, and we have to be there for them. That's why the royal commission was so important. If we break them, we must fix them. We must mend them. We must provide the wraparound services, the support, the love and the care to ensure that they can live full and wholesome lives after their service has ended. Many of them are doing some fine things, in small business, private enterprise and many other endeavours. I will give a shout-out here to former prime minister Turnbull for the role that he played in ensuring that many of them are job-ready and the emphasis he placed on ensuring that that there is a pathway there to civilian employment for our ex-service personnel—fine men and women. I commend him for that.

The Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025 is important legislation, as any veterans legislation is. I remember, when I was for a brief moment the veterans affairs minister in late 2017, early 2018, we put through the parliament at that time veteran-centric legislation such that it provided avenues and supports for veterans that weren't there previously. It was good legislation. Every piece of legislation should have a veterans lens placed over it, just like every piece of legislation should have a regional focus on it as well.

I know that the Liberals and Nationals are supportive of this bill, while noting from the Chief of the Defence Force notifications that they want to ensure that veterans are able to access treatment, particularly mental health care, providing and prioritising safe access to care. I know the CDF places this as one of the most important obligations of their duty as well. It's not just the current serving personnel under their care; it's also those who have finished their time. Noting importantly, too, that—and this is a bipartisan thing—these days, if you spend one hour in uniform, one hour with the various tri services, you are eligible and entitled to receive proper and adequate mental health care for the rest of your life, and that is entirely appropriate.

The Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025 makes a series of amendments to veterans legislation to support the implementation of the government's harmonisation and simplification reforms. To that end, I say to the government thank you, because simplifying and harmonising very complicated legislation in the veteran space is so vital. The bill primarily makes technical, clarifying and consequential changes to facilitate the transition to a single ongoing compensation and rehabilitation framework under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act of 2004, the MRCA, from 1 July this year, when the Veterans' Entitlements Act of 1986 and the provisions of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988, the DRCA, are closed to new claims.

I've spoken a number of times to a great friend of mine, former deputy commandant at Kapooka, Bert Hoebee, in relation to ensuring that veterans are looked after. I also note the work that is done in my electorate by a number of organisations. There's Pro Patria at Ashmont. The RSL sub-branch has a very good facility on Bayliss Street, the main street in Wagga Wagga. It's a drop-in centre for veterans. I want to commend the work of the Baks at Bethungra for the work that they do for veterans. I also want to acknowledge the work being done in Cootamundra. On Parker Street, in the main street of Cootamundra, is a drop-in centre that is proving so very worthwhile. On Saturday, Cootamundra's Jacqui Vincent OAM was acknowledged for her 37 years of service with the sub-branch and with veterans. Her legacy will be that drop-in centre. Jacqui has done a power of work. She's unwell at the moment. This luncheon drew veterans and sub-branches from right throughout the Riverina region and was so well attended. They were there to honour the work that she has done. It's people like Jacqui Vincent in Cootamundra, Jason Frost in Wagga Wagga, and Gordon Saggers and Alan Lane at Pro Patria and the work that they're doing through the RSL sub-branch and the drop-in centre at Bayliss Street. It makes such a difference.

The coalition supported the royal commission interim report recommendations to simplify and harmonise veterans' compensation arrangements because the current multi-act system is difficult. It's complicated, it's hard to navigate and it's often very confusing for veterans and their families. We shouldn't make things hard for those veterans who've made life easier for us, which they have, by their very service, made life better for us. We should ensure that—and the coalition does support this; the Liberals and the Nationals support this—the primary reform legislation continues in the objective of a single ongoing framework under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, the MRCA. This will hopefully reduce duplication. It will provide better consistency in administration. It will make entitlements, claims and reviews easier for veterans and families to understand, navigate and access. Surely that is something that we all should very much applaud.

Why hasn't this been done in the past? I appreciate the complexities of it. I appreciate that the royal commission had to come first. I know the harrowing evidence so bravely and courageously given by so many at those hearings, including Wagga Wagga. It must have been difficult for them to speak from the heart about the wrongdoing that was done to them and the need for us as a parliament to stand up and acknowledge and recognise the hurt and the healing that now must take place. So that was obviously a priority. I thank the government for now making this a priority, as well as working on those important recommendations and reforms that must come as a result of the royal commission. That's an absolute must. We do have some reservations about—

Debate adjourned.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:30