Ms JACKSON (4:00 PM) —I rise in support of the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 3) 2002. As many members have identified, this is a fairly noncontroversial piece of legislation which essentially addresses anomalies in the Veterans' Entitlements Act by amending a range of provisions to bring it into line with similar provisions in the Social Security Act and with the Veterans' Entitlements Act generally. Some of the amendments will either close loopholes or correct oversights and will also, I concede, introduce some minor improvements. As such, I do support the bill.

In debating this bill, I also take the opportunity—as many other members before me have done—to address some related issues with regard to veterans' entitlements. I think it is particularly appropriate to do so at this time when, as a nation, we currently have troops committed in Iraq. I think we need to consider the welfare of our veteran community as well as the welfare of currently serving defence personnel. It is ironic that, while the government has been very quick to send our troops to fight in Iraq, the level of priority that has been given to the health and quality of life of those who have served this country continues to be very low. You have to ask what level of confidence those young men and women who are now involved in the conflict in Iraq can have in this government when it comes to the provision of their repatriation benefits.

I particularly want to look at the track record of the Howard government when it comes to the treatment of the veteran community. There has been an awful lot of talk about the government's commitment to veterans and its respect for our troops—but, frankly, very little action. On the last occasion that I spoke on legislation before the parliament concerning veterans' affairs, I spoke about the concerns of some of my constituents with respect to the veterans gold card. Many doctors are now refusing to provide free medical treatment to gold card holding veterans and many are threatening to pull out of the scheme because of the government's failure to negotiate an agreement with doctors that will enable them to provide an adequate level of care to gold card holders. We are told that the doctors claim that the schedule fees—that is, the Commonwealth medical benefits scheme rates—are now below the actual cost of providing some services.

I believe that the government and certainly the minister are fully aware of the problem and, it seems to me, are refusing to address this issue. Indeed, veterans are likely to be made to seek medical treatment as general patients and pay the gap between the Medicare rebate and the fee being charged by the doctor. I believe that veterans deserve to have free access to health care, especially in their older years or if they are suffering from service related injuries. They are entitled to free treatment—the free treatment that they have been promised. This is part of the deal we do with them when we ask them to make a commitment to serve their country. As I say, that is particularly relevant given those Australian service men and women currently serving in the gulf as I speak today. They are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country and they deserve to be provided with an adequate level of health care on their return.

One cannot talk about veterans' issues without a passing reference to the Gulf War Veterans Health Study. The belated, obviously politically timed, release of the Gulf War Veterans Health Study—and I say that because it was released well after the deployment by this government of troops to Iraq—demonstrates the government's lack of commitment to veterans and the welfare of service personnel. With almost 20 per cent of Gulf War veterans currently receiving compensation for illness or disability, the early release of the report would have provided important information for the troops who are now serving in Iraq and for their families who are anxiously waiting for them at home, and could very well have served to better prepare them for their time in the gulf than those who served in 1991.

The Prime Minister was able to fast-track the deployment of our troops to the gulf, so why hasn't he or his government been able to fast-track the release of this important report? This report does not contain sensitive strategic information that needed to be kept secret. Service personnel and their families, as well as veterans and their families, deserve to be told the truth. The Defence Force health information and record keeping deficiencies that have been exposed in the report need to be rectified to ensure that complete and accurate service personnel medical histories are maintained for future evidence in the event of permanent illness and compensation claims.

I also want to address the report that was released following the Clark review—the recent review of veterans' entitlements by Justice Clark which was commissioned by the government to address the obvious gaps that existed in the veterans' entitlements scheme, which this legislation seeks to amend. While veterans will be pleased with some of the recommendations contained in the review, many veterans and their representative organisations are, and will be, disappointed. Several recommendations contained in the review reflect clear needs in the veteran community, such as war widows being denied rent assistance and the inclusion of disability compensation payments as income in the Centrelink means test. These should have been addressed. It should be noted that the latter recommendation is a Labor initiative that the government has rejected on a number of occasions.

Some of the recommendations in the review have been well received by the veteran community. The onus is now on the government to clearly state what parts of the Clark review it accepts and will implement and to provide a clear timetable for that implementation. All the signs from this government are that they are more than prepared to throw money at sending young Australian men and women to war but not spend on repatriation and compensation when they return. As the review has highlighted, the level of repatriation for veterans is inadequate and the government needs to act now.

One of the issues in the Clark review that I was particularly concerned about—and I raised it last time I addressed the Veterans' Entitlements Act in the parliament—was that the counter-terrorist training undertaken by our Special Air Services personnel should be recognised and declared as hazardous service so that they have access to entitlements under the Veterans' Entitlements Act. I am disappointed that the recommendation of the Clark review does not seem to have led to a speedy resolution of this issue. Counter-terrorist training has not at this stage been recognised as hazardous service for which those personnel involved should be properly recognised.

Imagine my concern when I see news reports of statistics such as these, which appeared in the Age on Monday, 24 February this year in an article entitled `A matter of honour':

Frankly, those statistics put in stark relief the kind of training we are asking of those specialist SAS troops who deal with counter-terrorism. If we are hoping to encourage people to become members of the Defence Force and participate in this important area of training, we need to recognise that service and properly compensate them when they are injured—or, indeed, their families when they are killed. I again call on the government to give serious consideration to this important and outstanding problem in the area of veterans' compensation.

As I have said, all the signs are that it is vitally important at the moment that we show our support to the veteran community and that we effectively express our support to those Defence Force personnel who are currently serving in Iraq. As part of that, it is important to be open and honest about the kinds of things that people have been confronting in their past service.

One of the other criticisms that has recently been made of the Clark review, particularly by the TPI Association, is that, contrary to undertakings given by both the Prime Minister and the minister, not all of the information and material placed before the review has been made available or open to members of the veterans' community. I join my voice to that of the TPI Association in calling on the government to ensure that the full body of material that was put before the committee and used for it to base its conclusions upon is made available to the ex-service community so that they can understand the basis of the committee's recommendations.

Before I conclude my brief remarks in respect of this legislation, I wish to mention the national service medals that the government has finally made available to national servicemen. I express my great concern at the delay in providing those medals to a number of my constituents who have requested and are due those medals. Indeed, I understand that the processing of those medals has not occurred for some months now. I make a particular request in light of the fact that Anzac Day is only weeks away and many of those servicemen wish to have their national service medals so that they can proudly display them during Anzac Day ceremonies. Perhaps the minister in her response generally to the legislation might give us a clear idea of the efforts being made to have those medals made available in a timely fashion—hopefully in time for Anzac Day.

I conclude my remarks by commending those organisations in my electorate which continue to lobby on behalf of veterans and veterans' organisations, including my RSL clubs, the women's auxiliaries that support them, the TPI Association and the Vietnam Veterans Association. The work they do for returned service men and women is commendable, and I certainly record my gratitude for their ongoing work. I look forward to being with them this Anzac Day, when I know that many of them will be feeling a great sense of concern for their comrades at arms who are currently deployed in the Middle East. As I said, I support this bill. I will close by extending yet again my best wishes and those of my constituents to those troops who are currently deployed in the Middle East.