Question Time AU

Matter of Public Importance

Veterans

House of Representatives · Wednesday 19 August 2026

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The debate centred on the government's decision to introduce a $5,000 annual cap on allied health services for veterans, effective from July 2027. Opposition members argued that the cap contradicted Royal Commission recommendations, would force veterans to ration care, and demonstrated a lack of respect for those who served. Government members defended the policy as part of broader reforms to simplify the veterans' entitlement system, citing increased funding for provider fees and the implementation of other Royal Commission recommendations. The discussion highlighted concerns about administrative burdens and access to care versus the government's focus on systemic efficiency and backlog reduction.

Outcome

The matter was debated without a vote being taken.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

McCormack argued that the $5,000 cap on allied health services was unjust and unnecessary, noting that none of the 122 recommendations from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide called for such a limit. McCormack claimed the government had neglected its duty to protect veterans and cited reports that four veterans had taken their own lives due to anxiety caused by the cap. McCormack criticised the Minister for Veterans' Affairs for initially refusing to meet with a group of decorated veterans and for displaying a demeanour that suggested reckless disregard for their concerns. McCormack asserted that consultation with stakeholder groups should have occurred before the budget was released and argued that the policy failed to uphold the nation's obligation to those who served.

Government response

Keogh stated that the government was committed to improving support for veterans and had increased funding to the Department of Veterans' Affairs to its highest level in three decades. Keogh highlighted that the government had addressed a claims backlog of nearly 42,000 cases and increased funding for health and support services by 50 per cent. Keogh explained that reforms under the VETS Act aimed to simplify the entitlement system and improve access to care through new Veteran and Family Hubs. Keogh noted that the government had implemented a quarter of the Royal Commission's recommendations and was on track to implement two-thirds by the end of the year, including the establishment of the Defence and Veterans' Service Commission.

Opposition response

Thompson argued that the government had let veterans down by imposing the $5,000 cap, which forced individuals to choose between different types of medical treatment. Thompson cited specific examples of veterans with complex injuries who would struggle to afford necessary physiotherapy or psychological support under the new limits. Thompson claimed that veterans had lost faith in the Minister for Veterans' Affairs due to the refusal to meet with advocates and the lack of substantive answers regarding the policy. Thompson called for the Prime Minister to scrap the cap and remove the Minister from office, asserting that the policy was untenable and harmful to those who served.