Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025; Second Reading

Thompson expressed support for the bill's overall intent but strongly opposed the provision requiring notification to the Chief of the Defence Force when serving members access non-liability healthcare or lodge Veterans' Review Board applications. Thompson argued this measure constituted an overreach that could deter personnel from seeking mental health support due to fears of career repercussions or deployment restrictions. Thompson noted that existing safety reporting mechanisms were sufficient for serious issues like substance abuse, and unnecessary notifications for personal matters like marriage breakdowns would create anxiety among enlisted personnel.

Lawrence supported the bill, highlighting the government's commitment to addressing systemic issues identified by the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. Lawrence described cultural and administrative reforms at the Department of Veterans' Affairs, including increased staffing, reduced claim backlogs, and the expansion of Veterans' and Families' Hubs to provide holistic support. Lawrence emphasised the importance of treating veterans with dignity and respect, noting that local RSL advocates had observed improvements in communication and decision-making timeframes under the current government.

Aldred stated that the Coalition supported the passage of the bill to progress the transition to a simplified single-framework system, acknowledging that the current multi-act system was confusing for veterans. However, she echoed concerns raised by Thompson regarding the mandatory notification of the Chief of the Defence Force for healthcare access, arguing it posed privacy risks and could deter care-seeking behaviour. Aldred announced that the Liberal Party would move an amendment to remove this notification requirement, asserting that accessing medical help must not be perceived as endangering one's professional standing.

Joyce supported the bill but criticised the prolonged timeline for implementing reforms, arguing that veterans deserved prompt and respectful treatment of their claims. Joyce expressed concern that the simplification process might result in four acts rather than one, and raised broader issues regarding defence readiness, including submarine maintenance and fuel storage. Joyce also advocated for the reinstatement of regional reserve depots and cadet units to strengthen the connection between the community and the Defence Force, and briefly criticised recent firearms legislation for impacting veterans' recreational shooting rights.

McCormack supported the bill, praising the simplification and harmonisation of veterans' compensation arrangements as vital for reducing duplication and improving consistency. McCormack acknowledged the Coalition's reservations regarding the Chief of the Defence Force notifications but affirmed that the primary objective of transitioning to a single framework under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act was positive. McCormack highlighted the importance of supporting veterans through local organisations and noted that the reforms would make entitlements easier for veterans and families to understand and access.