Mr EDWARDS (3:23 PM) —One of the reasons for this MPI today is simply that the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, the minister representing the Minister for Defence in this place, has chosen to absent herself from the debate on Iraq and the deployment of troops under her care. She is not on the speakers list and, given her responsibilities, I think that is an absolute disgrace. By doing that, she has done our members of the Australian Defence Force and their families a disservice. Not only does she show them a lack of courtesy but also she allows to pass an opportunity to update the House on the status of a number of reports which go to the welfare of the Australian Defence Force personnel and their family members. They have been waiting for these reports for some time—in some circumstances, six years. I am looking around the chamber and I cannot see the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. I hope that she is not going to squib this debate.

One of the things that I want to put to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs is: where is the military compensation and rehabilitation scheme rewrite? With all of the responsibilities that the Prime Minister has, I can understand that he does not know that. But the Minister for Veterans' Affairs is directly responsible for this rewrite, and she should be here to explain to the House, to members of the ADF and to their families where this report is and why we have been waiting over six years for it.

We are also waiting on the release of the health study into Gulf War illness—once again, a report for which this minister has direct responsibility. That is a study that I embarrassed this government into conducting back in 1999. As I understand it, the results of that report have been made available to the minister—I am pleased that the minister is back in the chamber—but it is interesting to note that she has not released it. Where is it? She may have some good reason for not having released it, but I hope she can tell the House what that reason is. I hope this report has at least been made available to the Australian Defence Force, particularly in view of the fact that we have now redeployed troops who will serve and, indeed, are serving in that very same region. Where is that report, Minister? And what health issues will confront members of the ADF who are serving and who will serve in that area? That is an important question.

The other thing that we in the opposition, members of the ADF and their families want to know is the conditions of service of the troops who have been deployed. Why haven't they and their families been told their conditions of service? I understand that those deployed on the Multinational Interception Force are covered by what is classified as `warlike service' but those deployed under Operation Bastille are not—or at least some are not. So those members of the SAS, for instance, who are already on the ground and who are conducting warlike training are not classified as being involved in a warlike service, but those on ships in the Gulf are. By classifying their service as `warlike', would the PM be admitting to the people of Australia that these troops have already been committed to war—something that the PM denies.

So what we have is mate against mate, digger against digger; some are classified and some are not. Some are entitled to be covered under the Veterans' Entitlements Act and some are not. That is why that classification is crucial to these members of the ADF. If they do not get that classification, they do not have coverage under the Veterans' Entitlements Act. Then we come to the FA18 pilots and their support crews. What are their conditions of service? Are those on HMAS Kanimbla under the same conditions of service as those serving on the Darwin and the Anzac? No wonder members of the ADF and their families are up in arms. We want to know the truth. It is a disgrace, and all of this is happening during a debate in which the minister cannot be bothered involving herself.

The Prime Minister has said that the Kanimbla is going to the Gulf as part of the MIF. That puts those personnel on warlike service if they are going to enjoy the same conditions of service as other people who are up there on Operation Slipper. So we have some members of Operation Bastille on warlike service and others not. I say to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs that, when she responds to this MPI, I hope she will clarify these situations for the people of Australia, the members of the ADF and their families. Yesterday in the Senate a question on whether that service was routine or warlike was put to the Minister for Defence, Senator Hill. He said:

If the general provisions apply, these troops who have been deployed under Operation Bastille will not have the coverage of the Veterans' Entitlements Act. As I said, you will have some troops up there covered by the Veterans' Entitlements Act and some not. The minister needs to clarify that situation. If I am wrong, I want the minister to tell me, and I want her to tell the people of Australia, members of the ADF and their families what the true and real situation is.

We still want to know why we are waiting for the release of the Clarke report. That review has been conducted. It has been completed. We know that the minister has had the review for at least a month. But she has not yet released it. I want to say to the minister, `Where is the report and why are you sitting on it?'

I now want to turn to the issue of Mrs Kylie Russell. Kylie Russell is one of my constituents, who lost her husband in Afghanistan almost 12 months ago. She is a very brave young lady, caring for her daughter, a daughter who was born about two weeks before Mr Russell was killed. Earlier this week, Kylie Russell called a media conference in Perth. It was a very brave thing to do. Not only did she not want to face the media; she did not want to have her personal circumstances thrown into the community. But she did it, and I am going to explain why, although she explains why herself. It was a very brave thing for her to do and I want to compliment her on her acceptance of the principle of mateship. I want to quote from some of what Mrs Russell had to say:

They are just some of the things that Kylie Russell had to say. They are a part of the very compelling and moving statement that she made.

Once again, in the Senate, the Minister for Defence, Senator Hill, was asked where this compensation scheme is. He said, in part:

On the one hand, we have a government that is prepared to fast-track the deployment of troops to a war zone; on the other hand, we have a government that can sit for six years on a report and on a rewrite of the compensation act, an act that goes to the direct wellbeing of troops and their families.

We in the opposition gave the government the commitment of a bipartisan approach to that rewrite. I have offered it again, as I have responsibility for that, and I again offer a bipartisan approach to the minister now so that we can fast-track this piece of legislation. Of course, our final position will depend on the content of that legislation and on whether it is a fair and reasonable piece of legislation.

In response to the statement that Kylie Russell put out, the Coalition of Australian Veterans also put forward a release. It is headed `Government not dinkum on fair compensation for Australia's serving men and women'. I will quickly quote some of what is in this release:

I know that the minister's office likes to fudge those figures, but that is the truth about the package that Australia's most recent war widow receives.

In conclusion, I want to say this to the minister: she needs to come to this dispatch box and explain those things which I have put before her on behalf of the people of Australia, the members of our Australian Defence Force and their families. She may have been saved by the Prime Minister today, but next week the Prime Minister is away and she is it. We are not going to let her off the hook.