Jessica Collins (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to also speak to the report handed down by the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee, relating to advocacy services for veterans accessing compensation and income support. Like my colleague Senator Henderson, I was really pleased to see this report handed down and the fantastic work that was put into this report. At the heart of this inquiry is an effort to show our veterans respect and to ensure that they receive what they are owed for the sacrifices that they have made for our nation. In representing the coalition, I'm proud to have done my small part to try and show that respect for their service.

At a recent inquiry into this issue, my colleagues and I heard troubling evidence from witnesses that veterans desperately seeking to find resolution to cases regarding compensation payments are being overcharged by commercially minded advocates who are taking commission based fees for representing veterans, some of whom are understandably vulnerable to exploitation. These fees can be as high as tens of thousands of dollars from the veterans' compensation payouts, sometimes for as little as forwarding a simple email.

I want to make it clear that there are some very good, very ethical providers that are providing advocacy for veterans, and they are doing the right thing by our veterans. But, in this unregulated space, some veteran advocates stand to cumulatively make tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars off veterans' compensation payments when using the commission-for-service model. As we just heard, some commissions go as high as 29 per cent of the compensation payment. These commission-for-service advocacy companies also push veterans into accepting lump-sum payments, rather than opting for pension-style payments over time, so that the commissions can be paid as soon as the compensation is paid out. That critical choice between lump-sum and trickle payments is taken from veterans under this model, and I don't think that's fair. These veterans paying high prices are people who have served to defend our freedom, have earned their compensation and are suffering from the effects of service. Every effort should be expended by the Senate to protect those who have protected us. Now they need our protection from unscrupulous advocacy providers chasing the money.

Free and fairly price-structured advocacy services already exist. Let's be clear. There are decent advocates that are being fair about their price structure, where veterans don't get ripped off but pay for what they get, which is good advice and adequate support, commensurate with the fees that they pay. And they are taking the pressure off the free services already provided to veterans too, which is a good thing. But, because this is an unregulated space, in the end vulnerable veterans bombarded by constant advertising on social media platforms see no other choice than to sign away their compensation advocacy to commission based services.

Having looked up a veterans advocacy website, I am now personally bombarded, via my social media algorithm, by company after company presenting as the promised land for veterans seeking compensation payments. It is ruthless. In this inquiry, submitters raised concerns with the fee-for-service model. They raised concerns about ethics and about troubling behaviours and business practices taking over the sector. Others from the for-profit advocacy businesses argued strongly that there were valid needs and legitimate roles for fee-for-service providers. Why? Because the system of compensation is not working for veterans. It's very complex. Sometimes it's openly cumbersome and sometimes it's too much of a headache for veterans who need help with navigating the bureaucratic process.

The proliferation of these commercial entities, as the result of the limitations of the Department of Veterans' Affairs, can impact on veterans and can impact on their wellbeing. Make no mistake; this proliferating cowboy industry is also the result of this Labor government paying out money into an unregulated system without consideration of the unintended consequences and without urgently needed regulation. Rogue advocates, those there for not the compensation but the money, are following the money. More evidence in this inquiry showed that professional oversight of work standards and conduct is severely limited. This lack of oversight and recourse options reduces the quality of advocacy services, leading to unacceptable advocate behaviours and poor outcomes for veterans.

Let me be clear again. The fact that this industry exists at all is an indictment of our current system. The veteran compensation system is opaque, and an entire industry has grown around navigating it. The fact that fringe cowboy commercial ventures are the controversial part of it shows you how much the Overton window has shifted. The integrity of the DVA entitlement system is at risk, and it's not the fault of DVA but the lack of oversight on this problem.

As senators in this place we must never forget those who committed themselves and their families to defend this nation. They deserve access to equitable, ethical and effective advocacy. They have rights to compensation and support entitlements. If we turn our backs to the rogue commercial advocacy entities that are in it for the profit, we are turning our backs on our veterans.

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.