Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans' Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026
Senator LAMBIE (Tasmania) (09:01): On budget night this year, Australian veterans found out that the Minister for Veterans' Affairs had decided to cap allied health services. I was so alarmed that I put out a media release which pointed out that capping care for veterans flies in the face of the recommendations by the royal commissioners, that access to timely health care supports was key to getting veteran suicide numbers down.
Just a few minutes ago, Minister Keogh told Australian veterans that the cap had been scrapped. I thank the minister for hearing us loud and clear, but we still need the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans' Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026. We need it to protect veterans into the future.
I would like to thank my co-sponsors, Senator Pocock, Senator Shoebridge, Senator Thorpe and Senator Payman. This bill is about a very simple principle. If a veteran needs treatment because of their service, they should be able to get that treatment.
It should not come down to a number on a spreadsheet and a limit imposed by Canberra. The government said that it was not a cap because veterans can apply for additional treatment once they reach that threshold. But let's be honest about what that means.
A veteran who needs ongoing physiotherapy, occupational therapy, psychology, exercise physiology or another allied health service may reach that threshold. Veterans have a trust deficit with the Department of Veterans' Affairs, and they have had it since the Vietnam War. Who can blame them, when the average liability claim takes the DVA over 300 days to process?
Numerous reports, not to forget the seven-volume report from the royal commission, confirm that the DVA has made these assurances before and has failed to deliver. Placing an arbitrary cap on these allied health treatments just confirms what we already know, that the DVA will do whatever it can to make veterans fight and wait for the care they need. For some veterans, like me, these services are not optional extras.
They are what allow us to walk, work, manage pain, keep our independence, take part in family and still belong to the community. This bill prevents any limit on costs for individual treatment, total costs during a particular period or a limit on the number of treatments for a service related injury. This extends beyond just allied health treatments and can apply to medical specialists, hospital and rehabilitation services, mental and health professionals and any other treatment for service related injury.
The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide made it very clear that timely, accessible and ongoing health care matters. Recommendations 71 and 72 are directly concerned with improving access to health care for veterans and strengthening the health system that supports them. This bill says that, when a veteran has an existing entitlement to treatment, that entitlement should not be cut off because a particular amount of money has already been spent or because a particular number of services has been used.
It would prevent treatment entitlements from being limited by the specific cost for an individual treatment or a total cost over a period for a specified number of treatments. That means there's no arbitrary limit on allied health treatment where more treatment is clinically required. It also means the same principle can apply across other healthcare settings where treatment is needed.
Veterans might need ongoing treatment from GPs, medical specialists, hospital and rehabilitation services, mental health professionals and other appropriately qualified health professionals. For some veterans, these services might be required regularly, while for others it's for many years because of the nature of their service related injury or disease. Their access to necessary treatment should not be restricted simply because some bean counter somewhere thought he could save the department money.
You can never ever put a price on a veteran's life. I also want to be clear about what this bill does not do. It does not mean there should be no oversight or that every treatment should be automatically funded.
There should still be proper clinical governance. There should still be standards for quality and safety as well as safeguards against fraud, abuse and, critically, inappropriately provided conduct. That is why we're standing here today—because of provider conduct.
But those safeguards should not be confused with an arbitrary financial cap. I'm calling on the major parties to put the interests of veterans first and support this bill. Veterans should not have to wait for another review or another approval process before they can access the treatment that is needed, because it plays terribly on their mental health.
This is about making sure that, when a veteran has accepted service related injury or disease, they can get clinically necessary treatment when they need it. Finally, I would like to thank all the veterans; the advocates; the mothers, especially you, Julie-Ann Finney; and the Australians, especially the over 30,000 that shared and signed my petition. You got this done.
When we stand up united, we win.