Mr LEE(10.40) —I hope that any veterans who read this debate-none of them would be listening-will turn back a few pages of the Hansard to read the speech made earlier by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Kooyong (Mr Peacock). The Deputy Leader was not saying that we need to spend more on veterans; he was criticising this Government for not cutting Federal expenditure enough. I wonder why the shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs claims that this Government has done all these terrible things to veterans. I would be interested to know whether the shadow Minister obtained a commitment from his shadow Cabinet, when he was drawing up the policy, as to whether a coalition government would restore all of these allegedly terrible cutbacks which our Government has implemented. The shadow Minister listed a whole series of changes which he says were wrong. I will not bother to repeat the claims that he has made.

Is he suggesting to this House that a future Liberal-National Party government would overturn the changes that were made in the May 1985 mini-Budget? He studiously seeks to ignore my comments because he knows as well as I do that no future Liberal-National Party government would reverse those decisions. The truth is that the Liberals and Nationals voted in the Senate for those changes in 1985. Yet they run around the country seeking to whip up a frenzy amongst veterans when their own senators voted for those changes in May 1985. The shadow Minister knows that he cannot give veterans a commitment that there will be any change because people such as the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Wentworth (Dr Hewson), and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Howard) will ensure that there is no money for veterans. In fact, veterans will be pretty lucky if there is any Department of Veterans' Affairs under a future Liberal-National Party government.

Mr Tim Fischer —Rubbish!

Mr LEE —Well, I wish he would tell us whether he can give veterans a commitment that the decisions, which he has complained about tonight will be reversed. Now he turns his back to me because he knows he cannot give that guarantee. He cannot tell veterans that there will be any change at all in all those decisions which he listed tonight if there is a future Liberal-National party government. Yet he has the hide to claim that his policy, which was released during the winter break, was the catalyst to this Government's adoption of the extreme disability allowance (EDA).

Mr Tim Fischer —That is right.

Mr LEE —He interjects and claims that the Opposition was responsible for the adoption of the EDA. Why does the honourable member not get off his backside and talk to his colleagues in the New South Wales Liberal and National Party Government and get them to change the decision they made in July this year to take away from New South Wales veterans their right to legal aid?

I would have thought that the honourable member for Mackellar (Mr Carlton) was interested in the rights of veterans in his electorate to obtain legal advice when appearing before repatriation bodies. He probably is not aware that the Legal Aid Commission of New South Wales has taken away from veterans in his electorate their right to legal advice when they are appearing before the Veterans Review Board, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the Federal Court. The Legal Aid Commission of New South Wales has taken upon itself the decision to take away from veterans that automatic right to obtain legal aid. In New South Wales the Legal Aid Commission has decided to impose a means test on veterans. New South Wales veterans have always had an automatic right to obtain legal aid in the past. I would have thought that if the honourable member for Farrer thinks that his policy was responsible for our Government adopting the EDA allowance, he could use a little of the magic catalyst he has in his pockets to get his Liberal and National Party colleagues in New South Wales to overturn the decision to take away from veterans the right to obtain legal aid.

What is an even more important question is what has happened to the money, because the New South Wales State Liberal and National Party Government has received more than $27.5m to provide legal aid to New South Wales citizens, including $500,000 for New South Wales veterans to give them the automatic right to this legal aid. I put the question to the shadow Minister: if the Federal Parliament is allocating $500,000 to his friends in New South Wales to give this legal aid to veterans and now they are no longer receiving it, where has the money gone? What has happened to that $500,000 which should be providing New South Wales veterans with that legal advice? The silence on the other side of the chamber is the real thing that I hope my veterans understand.