Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

I am pleased to present legislation that affirms the Government’s ongoing commitment to Australia’s veteran community and assists veterans who have been disabled as a result of their service for our country and our war widows and war widowers.

The legislation increases payments to disability pensioners and war widows and war widower pensioners and changes the methodologies used to index their pensions. This Bill will benefit more than 140,000 disability pensioners and approximately 114,000 war widows and war widowers, and ensure that their pensions retain their relative value and equity across the veteran community.

The amendments will provide a one-off increase of $15 per fortnight to the Extreme Disablement Adjustment rate; a five per cent increase to the General Rate; and a change to the methodology used to index the General Rate pension for veterans—all with effect from the March 2008 adjustment.

The Bill also allows a one-off increase of $10 per fortnight to the former domestic allowance component of war widows and war widowers’ pensions, and amends the way it is indexed, also with effect from March 2008.

The legislation’s one-off increase to the EDA brings it into line with increases to the Special Rate and Intermediate Rate disability pensions introduced in the 2007 Budget. Additionally, the Bill provides a five per cent increase to General Rate disability pensions, which will mean a fortnightly increase of $20 for all pensioners at or above the General Rate. These amendments will ensure equity across all veterans’ disability pensions.

The legislation also changes the way the General Rate pension is indexed, from indexation to the CPI alone, to indexation with reference to both the CPI and MTAWE in the same manner used to calculate service pensions. And unlike the current methodology, the new means of indexation will take into account the present economic environment of wages growth and low inflation to calculate the relative value of all disability pensions.

Currently there are two components in the calculations for Special Rate and Intermediate Rate disability pensions. The General Rate provides compensation for non-economic loss or pain and suffering, while the Above General Rate provides compensation for economic loss. Compensation for non-economic loss is currently indexed to the CPI, while the economic loss component of disability pensions is indexed with reference to both the CPI and MTAWE.

While CPI indexation continues to be used to maintain the value of non-economic loss payments in major injury compensation schemes, some smaller schemes do feature wage related methods of indexation.  In keeping with the Government’s commitment to a ‘best practice’ and beneficial system of support for service related injuries, illnesses and impairment the non-economic loss component of disability pensions will also be indexed with reference to both CPI and MTAWE in the same manner as the Service Pension from March 2008.

The veteran community—particularly those veterans on the Special Rate disability pension—has argued strongly that these calculations are inequitable and should be changed. The Government has worked closely with the veteran community on this matter and I am pleased to present a Bill that introduces a uniform—and a more rational and equitable—method of indexation for all disability pensions.

The legislation also ensures that war widows and war widowers’ will continue to receive equitable pension payments that will retain their relative value into the future. This Bill provides a one-off fortnightly increase of $10 to the former domestic allowance component of war widows and war widowers’ pensions, taking it to $35 per fortnight. Furthermore, this component will be indexed for the first time, also with reference to both CPI and MTAWE.

The implementation of these enhancements is supported by a funding commitment of around $470 million from the March 2008 introduction and through the out-years to 2011/2012.

This Bill continues the Government’s ongoing commitment to supporting Australia’s veteran community and will ensure ongoing fairness and value in the pensions for our disabled veterans and war widows and war widowers.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to incorporate my speech on the Veterans’ Entitlements Amendment (Disability, War Widow and War Widower Pensions) Bill 2007.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

As the Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs made clear in the House this morning, we want more than anything for it to have speedy passage through the Parliament, with no further delays for veterans and war widows than they have already endured.

Labor has unqualified support for the Bill’s measures which seek to restore some of the value of the disability and war widow and widower pensions and ensure against their future continuing erosion.

The Bill will implement the commitments made first by Labor and then by the Howard Government to introduce new indexation arrangements for the general rate disability pension and for the previously non-indexed component of the war widow and widower pension. These rates will be indexed twice annually with respect to both the Consumer Price Index and Male Total Average Weekly Earnings.

This Bill will also increases the rates of extreme disablement adjustment disability pension, raise the general rate disability component of all disability pensions by 5%, and will increase the previously non-indexed component of war widow and widower pension by $10 a fortnight, measures which Labor supports in full.

The erosion in value of the domestic component of the war widows’ pensions has been a longstanding concern for veterans and Australian War Widows, and no doubt, this action on the part of the Government is long overdue. This Bill’s provisions gives veterans and war widows some financial certainty, which they both need and richly deserve. It will ensure that their standards of living no longer erode relative to community norms, as they have done for the past 11 years of the Howard Government.

I warmly congratulate the members of the ex-service community who have lobbied the Government for these changes over a long period of time. This is primarily the result of their hard work, and this Bill is their victory, and the victory of the veteran community.

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am afraid that I do not have a speech to incorporate, so I will have to use the old-fashioned, verbal communication technique. The Veterans’ Entitlements Amendment (Disability, War Widow and War Widower Pensions) Bill 2007 has appeared extremely rapidly, even by this government’s standards. I think it appeared only today in the House of Representatives and it is already here and will pass tonight. It is a true one-day wonder. Fortunately, it is a positive piece of legislation rather than a negative one like some of the others that have been rushed through this place in recent times. It makes the point that when the government wants to move on something they can do it pretty quickly. That is a very relevant issue which I will raise in my amendment in the committee stage. It also goes to the issue that we have been debating a number of times today, including on the last bill, where the government has said that they need to further examine the issue of removing discrimination in a whole range of acts. As senators would know, it was in 1995 that the Democrats first put forward proposals to address that in a comprehensive way. Twelve years later the government is still considering it.

This piece of legislation reflects a government commitment to increase payments to disability pensioners, war widows and war widower pensioners—the disability veterans pensioners—as well as changing the methodology used to index their pensions. This is in response to quite a recent announcement by the federal government and again shows that when the political will is there movement can be quite quick. It is not an inexpensive measure, with the total cost over four and a bit years being $470 million. It is not going to break the bank, particularly at the moment, but it is not loose change either. Again, it shows that when the political will is there, or when the political need is perceived to be there on the eve of an election, then the government can move very quickly, including introducing legislation in what is a relatively complex area. Dealing with indexation formulas for veterans’ disability pensions and war widows and war widower pensions is actually quite a messy area. I know that from having tried to move amendments dealing specifically with indexation of various veterans payments in the past. It is good to see that things can move fast but hard not to be a little cynical about the selective application of that promptness.

However, I do not think it really matters what the motivation is. This is a positive result for many in the veterans’ community and therefore it should be welcomed—and it is welcomed by the Democrats. This legislation provides a one-off increase of $15 per fortnight to the extreme disablement adjustment rate, a five per cent increase to the general rate and a change to the methodology used to index the general rate pension for veterans, with effect from the March 2008 adjustment. It also allows a one-off increase of $10 per fortnight to the former domestic allowance component of war widows and war widowers’ pensions, which as I understand it has not been increased for quite some time, so it goes a fair way to restoring the original value of that allowance. The one-off increase to the extreme disablement adjustment rate brings it into line with increases to the special and intermediate rate disability pensions and also provides a five per cent increase to the general rate disability pension, which will mean a fortnightly increase of $20 for all pensioners over and above the general rate.

There has been a bit of competition in this area between the government and the opposition in recent times. That is something that the Democrats welcome and I would say that it is also something that most in the veteran community would welcome as well. There has been a lot of agitation by a lot of groups for a long period of time. The opposition put forward their proposals and pledges and the government matched them and upped the ante. The opposition immediately matched them back again. Either way it produces better results for the veteran community and, at least in this case, it has produced a good policy outcome. It has not been like what occasionally happens in a pre-election environment where the bidding war breaks out and you get a quite poor public policy outcome, when it is just grabbing a vote-buying opportunity. These initiatives that are being put forward are based on specific issues that have been agitated for a long period of time. They are quite valid concerns that have been expressed by many in the veteran community. So it is simply matching the valid claims and concerns that have been put forward over a long period of time.

More than congratulating the government and before that the opposition for their actions in this regard, first and foremost congratulations are due to the ex-service organisations in all of their forms, sizes and styles for their work in pushing these issues so hard for so long in the face of such resistance. The immense contribution of so many organisations, many of them predominantly voluntary and community based organisations advocating on behalf of many different segments of the veteran community, is something that is quite impressive. Their level of commitment and their passion for the issues on behalf of their own groups and their own constituents, if you like, is very admirable. Bills like this should be ones that they chalk up as clear achievements to indicate that they really are making a difference.

Having said all that, it is appropriate to indicate that there are still further areas that do need to be addressed. There are other issues with regard to appropriate indexation of superannuation for veterans. There are also issues to do with the treatment of taxation of military superannuation. There is, of course, the issue of the ongoing discrimination with regard to people with same-sex partners, which I will address in the committee stage of the debate.

The other point that I do want to take the opportunity to make once again is that, while these changes address some entitlements to war widows, war widowers and veterans on the extreme disablement adjustment rate, there is a need to still further improve the support we provide to other ex-service personnel who have disabilities or health problems as a direct consequence of their service in the armed forces—it may not be from warlike service but from other activities within the Defence Force. There is quite a clear distinction between the type of support provided to people depending on whether the disability or health issue has arisen as a consequence of warlike service or other activities. I think that is a real ongoing problem, not just for the individuals concerned and their families but for the Australian community. I have absolutely no doubt it directly affects the ability of the Defence Force to recruit people and even more so to retain people.

Just yesterday I met a 30-year-old woman who, as a 20-year-old in the Navy, suffered a severe neck and back injury. Her initial treatment was nothing short of absolutely appalling and disgraceful. Her injuries were not properly assessed at that early stage. The long delay in properly assessing that injury seriously compromised her long-term health and her ongoing quality of life. Most people are fit, active and vital when they are 20 or so years old and join the Navy or any of the defence forces. To suddenly go from that to being severely incapacitated as the result of injury directly caused by your service and then to find that you are not getting support both initially and longer term and that you are having to scratch, fight and battle to get assistance with medical treatment is not only an absolute travesty of justice for the individual but it sends a very strong message to many people that it is a pretty bad idea to join the ADF because if you get injured you are not always guaranteed to get well looked after.

There have been improvements in recent times, and I fully accept that. But I see it as part of my task and the Democrats’ task to keep that pressure on to improve things up to a consistently high standard for all injured and wounded ex-service personnel, regardless of where their injury occurred or how their health conditions were generated. If it is related at all to their being part of our Defence Force, if it is related at all to their decision to join the Defence Force and serve their country, then they should get that support on an ongoing basis and in a reliable way. The extra stress people endure from having to battle purely to get support can often be just as debilitating. There is that feeling of abandonment and the mental stress of having to fight for their entitlements. There is also the stress that pushes across onto the family as a whole. That is a consistent picture that I see as well, because the burden falls back on the families, as it does on carers in all sorts of areas in the community. You see that stress and trauma and the compromising of the quality of life spreading out from the individual to the wider family.

I know that goes wider than what is in the bill before us now but I want to take the opportunity to repeat that message. It is still something that we are falling short on and we do need to lift our game much higher. I hope, in this pre-election environment, that there is genuine acknowledgement given to that issue by both major parties. There needs to be a specific focus on the needs of the injured service personnel across the board. We need to lift our game.

The specifics within the legislation are welcome as far as they go. There are still wider issues with regard to indexation of superannuation, in particular, and taxation treatment. They need to continue to be pushed for. There are wider parts, as I understand it, of the policy commitments of both the government and the opposition that still need to be implemented in legislation. The fact that this part of it has been able to be brought forward and put in place so quickly is welcome, but it again begs the question of why it could not have been done sooner and also begs the question about why it can take so long to do something sometimes, even when the government says they fully support it in principle. It can be years in the making and yet, when there is a sudden need to gain, regain or try to regain support on an issue, then the movement can be rapid in the extreme.

Having said that, it is a positive piece of legislation. I would only make the single cautionary remark, as I said at the start: the formulas and different components of allowances, pensions and entitlements in the veterans area are quite messy and complicated. I am not, in any way, disputing the drafting skills of the government, but there is the issue of whether or not you get it right when you rush through legislation this quickly in this area. I am sure that, if they do not get it right—the legislation does not come into force until, as I understand it, March next year—there will be an opportunity to fix it down the track. It does need to be said that, whilst the legislation is positive and assuming it does what the government say it does, there is still the issue of the risk of implementing legislative changes like this in such a rapid form. We need to make sure that we have actually got it right and that it does do what we think it does. I think it does what the government think it does and, assuming it does what they think it does, that is a good thing, so we support it.

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Veterans’ Entitlements Amendment (Disability, War Widow and War Widower Pensions) Bill 2007 delivers great benefits to war widows and war widowers. I commend the bill to the Senate and thank senators for their contributions.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.