On budget night this year, Australian veterans found out that the Minister for Veterans' Affairs had decided to cap allied health services. I was so alarmed that I put out a media release which pointed out that capping care for veterans flies in the face of the recommendations by the royal commissioners, that access to timely health care supports was key to getting veteran suicide numbers down.

Just a few minutes ago, Minister Keogh told Australian veterans that the cap had been scrapped. I thank the minister for hearing us loud and clear, but we still need the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans' Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026. We need it to protect veterans into the future. I would like to thank my co-sponsors, Senator Pocock, Senator Shoebridge, Senator Thorpe and Senator Payman.

This bill is about a very simple principle. If a veteran needs treatment because of their service, they should be able to get that treatment. It should not come down to a number on a spreadsheet and a limit imposed by Canberra. The government said that it was not a cap because veterans can apply for additional treatment once they reach that threshold. But let's be honest about what that means. A veteran who needs ongoing physiotherapy, occupational therapy, psychology, exercise physiology or another allied health service may reach that threshold.

Veterans have a trust deficit with the Department of Veterans' Affairs, and they have had it since the Vietnam War. Who can blame them, when the average liability claim takes the DVA over 300 days to process? Numerous reports, not to forget the seven-volume report from the royal commission, confirm that the DVA has made these assurances before and has failed to deliver. Placing an arbitrary cap on these allied health treatments just confirms what we already know, that the DVA will do whatever it can to make veterans fight and wait for the care they need.

For some veterans, like me, these services are not optional extras. They are what allow us to walk, work, manage pain, keep our independence, take part in family and still belong to the community. This bill prevents any limit on costs for individual treatment, total costs during a particular period or a limit on the number of treatments for a service related injury. This extends beyond just allied health treatments and can apply to medical specialists, hospital and rehabilitation services, mental and health professionals and any other treatment for service related injury. The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide made it very clear that timely, accessible and ongoing health care matters. Recommendations 71 and 72 are directly concerned with improving access to health care for veterans and strengthening the health system that supports them. This bill says that, when a veteran has an existing entitlement to treatment, that entitlement should not be cut off because a particular amount of money has already been spent or because a particular number of services has been used. It would prevent treatment entitlements from being limited by the specific cost for an individual treatment or a total cost over a period for a specified number of treatments. That means there's no arbitrary limit on allied health treatment where more treatment is clinically required.

It also means the same principle can apply across other healthcare settings where treatment is needed. Veterans might need ongoing treatment from GPs, medical specialists, hospital and rehabilitation services, mental health professionals and other appropriately qualified health professionals. For some veterans, these services might be required regularly, while for others it's for many years because of the nature of their service related injury or disease. Their access to necessary treatment should not be restricted simply because some bean counter somewhere thought he could save the department money. You can never ever put a price on a veteran's life.

I also want to be clear about what this bill does not do. It does not mean there should be no oversight or that every treatment should be automatically funded. There should still be proper clinical governance. There should still be standards for quality and safety as well as safeguards against fraud, abuse and, critically, inappropriately provided conduct. That is why we're standing here today—because of provider conduct. But those safeguards should not be confused with an arbitrary financial cap.

I'm calling on the major parties to put the interests of veterans first and support this bill. Veterans should not have to wait for another review or another approval process before they can access the treatment that is needed, because it plays terribly on their mental health. This is about making sure that, when a veteran has accepted service related injury or disease, they can get clinically necessary treatment when they need it.

Finally, I would like to thank all the veterans; the advocates; the mothers, especially you, Julie-Ann Finney; and the Australians, especially the over 30,000 that shared and signed my petition. You got this done. When we stand up united, we win.

Later today, this chamber will have the opportunity to consider two bills which substantially advance the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. These bills will implement 20 recommendations and support the implementation of an additional 20, and I look forward to that debate because I acknowledge the commitment in this chamber to supporting the veteran community. I acknowledge, in particular, Senator Lambie, who, in her entire time in the Senate, has chosen to use that time to advocate for the veteran community and, in doing so, has engaged in a very constructive way with our government. That is something that we appreciate very much.

Our government has deep respect for our veterans, who have served and who continue to serve our country, and anyone who pulls on the nation's uniform to serve in our name deserves nothing less than respect. Our 2026 budget featured a proposal to make the biggest increase to allied health fees, paid by the Department of Veterans' Affairs to support veterans, in 20 years. This proposal was coupled with a plan to reduce the administrative burden for 90 per cent of veterans, allied health practitioners and GPs, with the removal of the current treatment cycle in favour of a new system. The proposed threshold measure set out to reduce the burden on veterans to go back to a GP every 12 allied health visits for a new referral, instead expanding this to a $5,000 threshold before a veteran's care is reviewed.

We've been consulting on this measure, and we have heard from veterans that there are concerns about this approach. We've been listening carefully, and today the government is taking the proposed $5,000 threshold off the table. We will not change our commitment to improving access to allied health care through the fee increase to allied health providers. Fees for allied health providers supporting veterans will increase on 1 July 2027, as planned.

We will continue to engage with the veteran and provider community on how we can continue to deliver on the objective of achieving better veteran wellbeing outcomes while ensuring the integrity of the system. I thank those members of the veterans community who have engaged with us on this question so far. We appreciate very much the constructive nature of that engagement and your feedback.

As I said, I wish to thank Senator Lambie for her advocacy and cooperation on this measure in particular. We cannot support the bill that is being brought forward today by Senator Lambie because of the changes that we've announced today and because the way it is drafted potentially introduces unintended consequences, but we will continue to work with the veterans community and we will continue to work with Senator Lambie as we continue our work to support veterans.

I too rise to speak on the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans' Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026. At its heart, this bill is about the principle. When an Australian veteran has an accepted service related injury or disease, access to treatment should be determined by clinical need, not by an arbitrary monetary or numerical cap imposed by the government.

That brings me to what has just occurred, and that is the announcement by the Albanese Labor government that the $5,000 cap on allied health will no longer be proceeded with. Let's just remember, though, how we got to this stage and, in particular, why Senator Lambie has today brought this bill before the Senate. Sadly, this is not because the government listened. This is because the Australian Senate, the Australian people and veterans across Australia shouted their disgust at what this government had proposed.

For over two weeks now in this place, the Australian Senate, the opposition and the crossbenchers—not the government side—have made it clear to the government that we are opposed to this disgraceful treatment of our veterans. In fact, the Australian Senate—again, not the government senators but the entire opposition and crossbench—united to amend a bill, the Statute Update Bill, to scrap this $5,000 cap.

That was last week. On Monday, that bill was presented to the House of Representatives. Instead of acknowledging the pain and suffering that they had caused our veterans; instead of acknowledging that veterans had travelled to Canberra and had laid down their medals at the front of Parliament House; instead of acknowledging the will of the Australian Senate, on behalf of the veterans of Australia, in saying that this $5,000 cap was nothing more and nothing less than cruel and, what's worse, a budget saving by the Albanese government, who've lost control of spending—do you know what the Prime Minister and the Minister for Veterans' Affairs did? They said, 'We'll deal with it at another time.'

Instead of owning their mistake—we'll go through the number of mistakes that this government has had to own when it comes to our veterans—they didn't have the guts to deal with it there and then. They didn't have the guts to deal with the fact that the Australian Senate—again, not the Labor senators; they'll go down, don't worry; it's recorded in Hansard where their vote went—the entire opposition and crossbench, united to say this is wrong. We amended legislation and sent it to the House. The government didn't have the guts to deal with it.

Then the government today—not because they listened, but because of the political pressure that has been put on the Minister for Veterans' Affairs yet again—has had to stand up and say they won't proceed with the $5,000 cap. But, as with anything that this government does, I suggest you listen to the announcement and then you read the press release because, whilst they may not be proceeding with their cruel $5,000 cap on our veterans' allied health, the press release makes pretty clear they've still got to look for savings. What a total joke.

So this government hasn't actually made a considered policy choice today. It's backflipped because the Australian people yet again united against Mr Albanese and Mr Keogh. They stood up and they said, 'We have had enough,' on behalf of the veterans of Australia. The veterans stood up. Let's not forget how Minister Keogh treated them when they came to parliament. He didn't want to meet with them. He was then forced to meet with them. When they arrived at his office, he didn't shake their hands. The minister for veterans didn't shake the hands of men and women who have actually fought for this country, men and women who protect our freedoms on a daily basis. He didn't want to shake their hands. It's been reported by veterans that he rolled his eyes at them. What's worse is he crossed his arms and then said: 'I could have been down at drinks with the blasted Governor-General.' You've got to be kidding me. That's how the Minister for Veterans' Affairs treats our veterans.

The veterans stood up. Their families stood up. The Australian people stood up. Veteran advocates stood up. Allied health professionals stood up. The Australian Senate—minus, of course, the Labor senators, and, as I said, don't worry; you can make as many excuses as you like today but your vote is there on the Hansard record—all stood up. Australians who simply believe—and this is what this bill that Senator Lambie has brought before the Senate does today—that the men and women of our country who served our country deserve better stood up.

Today we've seen the end result of what happens, Australia, when you stand up and you speak with one voice against the government. The government hasn't made a considered policy decision, sadly, but it has been forced to backflip. The message I think that all of us here today have for the government is: 'Don't think you're getting off the hook. There's a bill before the Senate here today that you could support.' What we've just heard from the government is that they won't be supporting it. Why don't you show the veterans here today that you stand with them? Why don't you support Senator Lambie's bill? You're happy to come here and congratulate Senator Lambie on what she does each and every day for our veterans, but then you won't support her bill.

So we put the government on notice that we will watch them in this space, because they have a pattern of behaviour here, sadly, of making decisions that are not in the best interests of veterans and then, because of public pressure, they have to back down. Look at the pattern. On retrospective honours there was a retreat. There was the Baird family. I have to say, coming from Western Australia, in particular, where we are the home of the SAS, that decision to take away the funding that was given to Cameron Baird's parents so that they could travel around our great country and just remind people of what our veterans do and why people like their son are actually awarded the Victoria Cross—a measly few thousand dollars—I will never understand. I will never understand how the Minister for Veterans' Affairs signs off on a brief that says, 'Take that money away.' On taking money from Invictus Australia they've retreated. On refusing to meet with veterans who came to the parliament they retreated. And now there's the $5,000 allied health cap retreat.

Sadly, as so many now say, the minister for Veterans' Affairs in this country doesn't deserve the privilege of being this minister. It doesn't really matter what he says today or what the Prime Minister says today because of their actions and the pattern of behaviour that they have indulged in since they have been in government, taking decisions that are actually not in the best interests of our veterans. We'll remind the Australian people of them each and every day—don't worry about that—because they know that you are not dinkum when you stand up today and you say that you're backflipping on the $5,000 allied health cap. Let's see what else you do to your veterans, and we will hold you to account.

The Senate spoke, the veterans spoke, the Australian people spoke. We have Senator Lambie's bill that is currently before the Senate. As I said, it's a very simple proposition in terms of what it actually does. We should never forget why we are today in the position that we are (a) as a Senate debating this bill but (b) listening to the minister make the backflip. Veterans fought, families fought, Australians fought, and the Australian Senate minus every one of those Labor senators fought. They stood up and they said: 'We're going to hold you to account, Mr Albanese. We're going to hold you to account, Minister Keogh, for your disgraceful behaviour when it comes to the veterans of Australia.' Our veterans fought for Australia. They should not have to keep fighting their own government. They deserve better, and I commend Senator Lambie for bringing this bill before the Senate today.

We've had the announcement this morning that the government will no longer hurt the allied health provisions for our veterans, but it needs to go further. Part of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans’ Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026 is going further. It's about helping them. Not hurting is not good enough. We have gone through this process. So many people in this room—Senator Lambie; Senator Scarr, who's not here; Senator Shoebridge; and I—heard this when we were in estimates and went down that path. We knew it was wrong then. It has come to this point two or three months later. It's taken this long. Veterans have gone through all of this journey, being worried about what would happen. Senator Lambie did a great speech the other day when she said, 'Don't worry. We've got time to fix it. We're going to get it fixed,' to try and help some of their mental health that was exacerbated. Their problems were exacerbated even by saying this was going to happen.

We've got a backdown. We don't know how solid that will be. We don't know if the increasing in fees that was part of this will be there. We don't know the help—the things that have to happen to help veterans. We don't know what form this backdown takes. That's why passing this bill is important. We need to solidify and concrete these aids. We need to get on the record that we value the service of our veterans. We value the vow they made to defend our country, and we will not change our word. We will not go back on our deal. We will support them in black and white. This is what we'll do—not words, actions. That is why we hijacked—let's be honest; this Senate hijacked—the statute bill. We had to. We had to have something they had to consider over there. We had to have something they needed to pass to get this through.

This is not a victory for the Senate. It's not a victory for most people. It's a victory for the veterans. It is for Dr Tim Nelson. It is for Ruth Rogers in Singleton. It is for James Burns in Scone. It is for Phil Thompson. It is for Senator Lambie. It is a victory for the people that honoured their word to defend Australia while we decided to revoke ours. We can't celebrate this backdown. We should commiserate that it ever had to get to this. We should question a government that decides a saving is more important than our veterans. We should be saying, 'How is this a thing?' When we saw these people, as Senator Cash said, laying down their medals, when we saw them coming in trying to meet people and get their—'I needed a cup of tea with a Governor-General.' Having a cuppa with the Governor-General is more important than honouring the people you're meant to represent in the cabinet.

We've got the announcement. It's time for action. This bill is the action we need to codify what we expect, to codify the changes and to make sure this cap is not just gone but dead, buried, cremated and then distributed to the far corners of the Earth. Anything short of that can be turned around tomorrow. 'Let's just change it tomorrow.' That is why we brought it in here today. We're going to have a long, big, deep dive into how this has failed, because there are so many failures.

A friend of mine sent an email the other day. They've got medallic recognition for something. They can purchase their own medal if they want to wear it. I always thought the first medals were free and replacements cost money. But, no, they can purchase their medallic recognition. We've heard about the other failures.

So well done to the veterans out there. Well done for standing up. You shouldn't have to fight your own government simply for volunteering to potentially fight our enemies. That is the sickness of where this has come to. And, if there's one thing this government has shown to every other group out there, it's to get angry and get vocal. We know their answers on just about everything aren't working. On just about everything—they'll pass some legislation; they'll move some stuff—they aren't working. They're not doing what they want them to do. You have to get vocal, you have to get angry, you have to stand up and you have to put the government in a position where they have to do something they don't want to do and where, though they don't want to do the right thing, they have to do the right thing. Well done, veterans. Once again, we value you. Congratulations on your victory. We will support this bill. You need more victories like this.

It's pretty extraordinary that we need a piece of legislation that says the government can't put arbitrary caps and ceilings on the legitimate health services for veterans. It is extraordinary that we have to come in here and legislate to say, for any class of Australians who need allied health care and medical help, that the government can't put an arbitrary dollar cap on it. But that's what we have to do today.

To all those veterans out there who were feeling so anxious—and they were right to be anxious—about what this government had decided to do to them—to put in place a $5,000 cap on allied health; to all those veterans who had the mental strength, the social connections and the political connections to come together and campaign against that; to all those veterans who needed their friends, colleagues and partners in this place to do it—to all of you, I want to say congratulations on the campaign. We just saw this morning the government cave in and say they're going to scrap the cap, and that's been the call from veterans.

I want to give a shout out to Senator Lambie for her work in this space. Bringing lived experience onto the floor of this chamber is absolutely critical. Telling it like it is—someone who's been ground through the system—is absolutely critical. I think it cuts through in this space and lets us do work around her and support that work to actually get outcomes for veterans. So I want to acknowledge the work of Jacqui—Senator Lambie. But I absolutely want to give acknowledgement to the veterans community.

I know that there is this position from the coalition that somehow Labor is uniquely bad on veterans. It's just not true. Labor are following a great coalition tradition of screwing over veterans. When the coalition were in government—I can't remember how bloody long it was, but it was the better part of a decade—the wait list for veterans to get basic entitlements had blown out to the tens of thousands. Veterans were waiting years to get a decision out of Veterans' Affairs.

I'm going to beat up the Albanese Labor government every time they fail, but I'm going to acknowledge that they put the funding into Veterans' Affairs to deal with those wait lists. It was a real thing; it was a real investment. And I'm going to say that I saw Minister Keogh try and drive through that change—tick! But what the bloody hell was with the caps? You do all that—you start building trust amongst veterans—and then you just wipe it all off the table by coming in with a $5,000 arbitrary cap on allied health care. The little bit of trust that veterans might have been getting with the system just shattered again. And they're sick of it. Veterans I talk to are sick of it. They're sick of having to be political playthings and having to play politics to just get basic decency out of the government. Just like they had to play politics when the coalition wouldn't process their claims and left them hanging for years without treatment and without compensation, now they've had to play politics again and find everyone they can work with in order to overturn this appalling $5,000 cap. Again, I am going to say it is good to see the minister finally accept reality today and scrap the cap.

I can tell you this: we've got Senate estimates coming up in a few weeks time, and I and my party, the Greens, are going to make bloody sure that the cost saving of three-quarters of a billion dollars that the government wanted to gouge out of veterans is stripped out of that budget. We can have all the talk we like in this place about legislation, but, at the end of the day, it comes down to their putting their money where their mouths are and our making sure they're not ripping three-quarters of a billion dollars away from veterans' health care.

This was always a budget cash grab. If we were going to find out where the real nasties are in government, I reckon it was the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and some of the other senior leadership team in government, no doubt including the leader of the Senate here, all coming together and working out how they could get three-quarters of a billion dollars back into the budget. And they thought veterans would just suck it up—well, they didn't. Veterans got organised and started contacting my office and Jacqui's office. They probably started with Jacqui's office. They contacted the crossbench and then they went to the coalition as well because they just needed the numbers. To all those veterans listening, and I reckon a few of them are listening, I hope you've learnt that there are people who'll stick up for you and basically stick up for decency. That's actually a lesson we need to keep remembering in politics—that it's not all just a bunch of self-serving weasels who want to suck money from you. You need to lean into decency in politics when you see it, and veterans did. Congratulations to all of you for doing that work.

But I also say this: I don't reckon this is over. I reckon the budget cutters—the Prime Minister and the Treasurer, no doubt—are probably still looking to get a cost saving out of veterans, and, if they can't get it through the front door, I fear they're going to try it through the back door, and we will be there fighting for you each time. The Greens went in to fight for people on the NDIS who had the government come after them to shamefully take away their benefits. And the government did that. They got the coalition onside and they stripped away benefits for people on NDIS, just a few weeks ago. We fought for the entitlements for hundreds of thousands of Australians on the NDIS. We didn't win that one, but we're not going to forget those Australians either, who deserve entitlements and deserve their benefits.

I will finish with this. The government are saying they won't support this bill because of unintended consequences. This seems to be now a Labor pattern. I don't know if anyone remembers, but it was barely a week ago when they said they wouldn't support sanctions against illegal Israeli settlements because of 'unintended consequences' on Palestinians. They seem to not want to take action to protect a group because taking action to protect the group in the large may have tiny unintended consequences over the side here. That is a rubbish reason for not supporting this bill—unintended consequences on veterans. I reckon, if you did a straw poll of 1,000 veterans and said, 'Are you willing to take as yet unspecified unintended consequences floated by Labor in a bill that says they can't make arbitrary cuts to your entitlements? Or do you want the bill to go through which says they can't do arbitrary cuts on your entitlements?' 100 per cent of veterans would line up and say, 'Support the bloody bill.'

Senator Shoebridge, I'll just interrupt you for a second. I've listened intently since I've taken the seat, and I know you're passionate about this, but there are schoolchildren on the second level behind you and I ask you to consider your choice of words, please.

I don't know what schoolkids you mix with, but—

I don't need an argument, Senator.

I think a word beginning with 'b'—

Resume your seat. I don't need an argument. I'm quite happy to entertain it should that be the case, but I'm not going to embarrass this chamber anymore in front of our visitors. There's another group of schoolchildren over there. I've asked you to consider your language. I didn't ask you to withdraw—I could do, but I didn't.

The standing orders wouldn't support you getting me to withdraw that. There have been multiple rulings, so you can ask me, but I won't.

Senator, for your social medias, that might be pretty cool. I didn't ask you to withdraw. You have the call. I ask you again: please choose your words cautiously.

Thank you. I do choose my words carefully. I've got to tell you this: veterans are red-hot angry about what this government has done, and they're red-hot angry about politicians who are going to vote against this bill, and they're red-hot angry at the Labor Party for trying to shut down debate. They're red-hot angry about the Labor Party bringing in legislative measures to strip away three-quarters of a billion dollars from veterans without ever talking to them. And they're red-hot angry about politics in this place that tries to disguise the reality of what's happening. And they're red-hot angry about politicians who won't speak the truth about what's going on. And they're red-hot angry about this. They use language far, far coarser than I've used in this debate, and they direct it at the Labor Party and at politicians who don't tell the truth. So I'm not interested in having the Labor Party police my language in this. I'm not interested in talking nice about a plan to gouge three-quarters of a million dollars from veterans who need their health care.

I'll tell you what: veterans aren't interested in being tone-policed by a government that wants to strip away their rights for life-saving treatment. That's why they're saying: 'Support this bill.' They don't want a tone language from the Labor Party trying to hide and disguise their reasons for voting against this bill. Do you know what? If you want to stop the red-hot language, then stop attacking people with less power than you.

I rise in support of Senator Lambie's bill the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans’ Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026. I want to start by thanking Minister Keogh for the roundtable last night where he heard directly from Canberra veterans about their concerns. He stayed until after 9 pm, answering every question. I appreciate all the Canberrans who came to really engage in good faith. They put questions to the minister and raised concerns, trying to interrogate some of the reasons behind this $5,000 threshold, as the government has started calling it, and really point out the consequences of that—the consequences for gold card holders, for widows and for their children who are wanting to access psychology and just how much stress this has placed on the veterans' community and the stress placed on them in the broader context of a DVA system that many of them feel grinds them down. Yes, we should acknowledge the Labor government's investment in DVA, but there is still a lot of frustration with the way the system is working. I think this is just another thing, and we have to congratulate the veteran's community on the way they have come together, campaigned, contacted elected representatives and run an outstanding campaign against this cap.

While last night's roundtable was welcome, there were clearly very serious frustrations. At 9 pm last night, it seemed like it was full steam ahead with this $5,000 threshold. This morning they scrapped it, when they were faced with a Senate that said, 'Absolutely not. There is no pathway for you to do anything like this in this parliament, with this Senate.' This is a win for veterans. But it's a fight they should not have had to have had. They've got other issues on their minds. They didn't need yet another thing to say to the government and to the country: 'Listen, we've served you. Our understanding was that you'd look after us, and now you're placing yet another barrier, another thing, another piece of paper, another visit to the doctor for us to worry about.'

Something that's been on my mind as this debate has unfolded is the question of whether it's a cap or a threshold. The government is at pains to say that this is not a cap, and how dare those in the opposition or on the crossbench refer to it as a cap. So my team went back to the budget papers where all of this started, and it says this:

Savings include:

I think most Australians would read a 'limit' as a cap. You don't read 'limit' as 'threshold'. Clearly, given the very swift backlash from veterans, this limit has now been called a threshold. The talking points have been updated, but it's very clear that it started as a hard cap. Terminology aside, I think the concerns from veterans have been really well articulated in the added burden this places on them. It's another hurdle to accessing critically important allied health care to help them be well.

I really welcome this move from the government. I wanted to thank Senator Lambie for her advocacy in this space. She has been a steadfast and tireless voice for veterans in this Senate over many, many years now. I think she has huge respect amongst the veterans community for her work. I also wanted to acknowledge Senator Collins, who had an inquiry before this place to look at this issue, Senator Shoebridge and his work on this, including at his outstanding work at estimates, Senators Hanson and Cadell—I know Senator Roberts has had a lot to say about this too. There's been a lot of good work done in this chamber to raise voices from our states and territories and to hold the executive to account, and I welcome it.

I say, as the Senate, we should be working more together to hold the executive to account, because that is what the Australian people expect of us. I'd also like to acknowledge those in the other place on the crossbench who've raised concerns about this, as well as Phil Thompson and Michael McCormack in the coalition. This is a victory for veterans. It's a victory for the Senate holding the executive to account, and I support this bill.

The Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans' Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026 will ensure that eligible veterans can access treatment for accepted service related injuries and conditions based on their clinical needs rather than on the arbitrary monetary or numerical limits that this uncaring Labor government was trying to introduce. The Senate amended the government's statute update bill last week, yet, in the House, the government deferred it. That was a big middle finger to vets, to serving ADF and to all Australians, in fact.

The budget cuts that drove this were short-term budget cuts because of Labor's waste. They cut veterans services and other services around the country, and they increased tax, because Labor's waste is driving high expenditure, high spending. The people pay—always the people pay—directly or indirectly. As other senators have mentioned this morning, we are winning. The vets are winning. Thank you for your strong advocacy to the veterans. I also thank Senator Lambie for this bill and thank all senators who support it and who are supporting this campaign from the vets. Thank you. As Senator Pocock said, it is amazing what can be done when we take a united stand.

The Labor policy driving this unfortunate situation arose out of the recent Labor budget designed to steal from and punish Australians. This bill establishes that an entitlement to treatment must not be subject to a predetermined and arbitrary limit on the cost of treatment, pitched at $5,000, being the total amount that may be spent during a particular period, or the number of times a treatment may be accessed. In David Farley's seat, where he is representing the seat of Farrer in southern New South Wales, and across Queensland—we have some very large electorates. Vets have to travel for treatment, and the travel eats up this $5,000 limit.

Early in my listening to serving and retired Australian Defence Force personnel and veterans during the last 10 years, I became deeply concerned about veterans not being adequately cared for under the previous government and under this government. I raised my concerns with the proposed cap at Senate estimates hearings, where it became apparent that Labor's proposition was not thought through and had raised the levels of anxiety of returned veterans or the already vulnerable to those thoughtless threats to their receipt of treatment.

Veterans already have a very high suicide rate that should not be exacerbated under threats of withdrawal of support. I was told that the bureaucrats in the Department of Veterans' Affairs had developed no objective criteria to determine if funding beyond the proposed cap might be approved—none—nor had they determined what processes may be required to extend the cap nor had they developed what evidence they may need to establish a case for increased funding. No appeals processes had been created—none. That's why there was a limit. It's just an arbitrary slashing of care. It was not clear why this attack on veterans was devised, and I believe penny pinching was a contributing factor. It is, seemingly, the major driver.

If issues of fraud or financial abuse are of concern, there already exist measures that can be taken to address these problems. I was told that, historically, approximately 10 per cent of veterans entitled to treatment have needed allied health care that would cost more than the $5,000 limit. This is thousands of veterans. Why punish these vets, making them jump through hoops in order to receive the care that they genuinely need and that their practitioners tell them they genuinely need? How disgusting it is to try to treat vets on the cheap with such disrespect.

Many very distraught veterans and representative groups have approached me directly, seeking support to oppose the proposed cuts in support. I do support this bill, and I am pleased to see that the crossbench is pulling together on this worthy remedial exercise. How the Labor government could even come up with this punitive idea in the face of the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide is beyond comprehension.

Our veterans represent the best of our Australian community. The vast and overwhelming majority of veterans are honest Aussies who have genuine need for clinically identified health problems. The government is happy to send them off to fight for our freedoms, yet treats them so poorly and with disrespect—sometimes with disdain and neglect—on their return. Many of these veterans come home vulnerable and in need of nurturing care and support. They do not need to face barriers and hurdles, nor should they have to fight to receive the necessary support and treatment. This does not need to be done on the cheap or, worse, with deceit. Many of our vets have given their all and deserve to be treated well, not in a system based on minimum or even token support, with massive red tape which they have to cut, hack and slash their way through.

This bill removes potential barriers, financial and administrative, to veterans' access to allied health care, supporting improved health and wellbeing of our veterans, and I must say it's well written. I call on my colleagues in the Senate and those members in the other house to support this bill as a matter of respect for those veterans deserving of the support this bill will ensure. Veterans and ADF members have served 28 million Australians and have provided us with security. We need to thank veterans with sincere care.

I rise to support this incredible and timely bill, the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans' Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026, from Senator Lambie and I want to thank Senator Lambie for bringing this to the floor of the chamber. Isn't it absolutely wonderful to see a united Senate—a united parliament—on this? The coalition, the crossbench and the Greens are all getting behind this, and it's because we all spoke to the veteran community. We heard them and we knew their concerns about this allied health cap and what it would do to the veteran community. We didn't have to hear those concerns, though, because we knew what this would do. Yet the government made the coalition for veterans come down to Canberra and beg for them to lift this cap.

I am pleased to hear that the cap has been removed today, but the damage has been done. Quite frankly, the damage has been done. People have been hurt. We heard from the coalition for veterans last week that people's mental health has absolutely plummeted from the damaging effects of this allied health cap. So I stand with this bill—no caps, not ever. It is a very important protection for our veterans, the people who put their hand up to serve this nation, whose families have sacrificed so much and whose health has been sacrificed so much. The very least we can do is provide them the support when they need it most.

United we stand against a Labor government that has, frankly, shown a pattern of contempt this year for the defence community and the veterans community. First, it started on 14 February when the defence minister handed down a shocking defence estate audit report with a predetermined outcome to sell off the foundational estate. It came as a complete surprise to the defence community and the veterans community. That was a big hit on their mental health. It still is and continues to be, and, if they follow through with this, it will have a devastating impact not just on the veterans community but on the serving community, the cadets, the reserves and all the communities connected with it. And yet they charge on. They charge on with this.

Then they brought to the other house a bill on the Defence Honours and Awards Tribunal which would prevent our veterans from appealing decisions on awards and medals. That received such backlash from the people that we consulted with through an inquiry. Of the 63 submissions to that particular inquiry, 62 said: 'What on earth is this? Why are you doing this? Why are you doing this to the veteran community and the defence community? We say "no".' Only one submission said that this is a great idea, and guess who submitted that? The Department of Defence. And so, because of the pressure that we put on and the backlash from the public, the Labor government removed that bill.

Then, of course, they went ahead and tried to remove the funding for Corporal Cameron Baird's parents. He was a recipient of the Victoria Cross, and his parents go around the country sharing his legacy and his story of valour and honour, particularly with school children. They tried to take that away that funding. Shame. And now, of course, we've had this battle over the allied health cap.

And so you can see over time the pattern of contempt that the Labor government has shown towards our defence community and our veteran community, and you can see here today that united we stand against that. The message that we have for the defence and veterans community is that we stand with you and we will not let this happen. It shows that you simply cannot trust this Labor government. You cannot trust them. They've gone and backflipped again. They got it wrong. They did the consultations, typical Labor, after making a decision. They go and see the damage that they do, and then they backflip. We will keep the pressure on. When they come forward with these bad ideas, we will keep the pressure on. So, again, I thank Senator Lambie for this bill. Senator Lambie is doing great things for the veteran community. She's a fighter. She will always be a fighter. There are lot of people that count on Senator Lambie. There's a lot of people that count on the rest of us too. But thank you for taking the charge on this. I want to thank the rest of the Senate chamber, too, for standing with Senator Lambie on this important bill. I commend the bill to the Senate.

I move:

That the question be now put.

The question is that the second reading be agreed to.