Press Conference, Sydney

SUBJECTS: Expungement of Defence convictions; Four Corners expose on veteran support providers; The recent fatality of a soldier during training; safety in training exercises.

MINISTER FOR DEFENCE PERSONNEL, MATT KEOGH: Well, good morning, everyone. It’s a wonderful morning to be here in Sydney at the Anzac Memorial and also here where the Mardi Gras commences. It’s a great location to be announcing today that we’ve made significant law change to enable the expungement of Defence convictions in relation to consensual homosexual acts. 

This is long overdue reform. It's something that happened in states and territories decades ago, and it relates to offences that are not even offences today. And it’s really about a matter of equality and justice for people that had their character maligned by being convicted through the Defence discipline system of offences that we don’t consider to be crimes today and impacted upon people that we very proudly have serve in our Australian Defence Force. 

So these legal changes to enable this passed through the parliament at the end of the last sitting, and now current and former serving members of the Defence Force can apply to Defence to have their records updated to expunge offences through the Defence discipline system for consensual homosexual offences that are no longer offences today. 

We’re also making an additional change allowing people to apply to Defence to have their records updated where they were either forced out of Defence or made to leave the Defence Force because of homosexual issues, because of their sexuality, because of being threatened with being disciplined for things that are not offences and being discharged for those reasons, making sure that they can get their records updated to have that properly reflected. This is an important matter of equity and justice for people that were negatively impacted by practices that we would not see as being acceptable today. 

We’re very proud to make these changes. It’s been a long time coming. Organisations like DEFGLIS, people who are here with me today have been campaigning for this for a long time. These are matters that people have sought to be changed because, as I said, in the state and territory level, in the criminal system, these changes were made some time ago. Defence is the last jurisdiction in Australia to enable the expungement of these offences from people’s records so they don’t have this hanging over them, so that it can be clear on their record, but also for those people that were forced out of Defence for these reasons, being able to get their record administratively updated as well to properly reflect what occurred to them to make sure that they have justice in the way their records appear on the Defence file as well. 

As I said, there’s been a long-running campaign for this occur. DEFGLIS has been at the heart of that, as have many across Australia, many who were forced out of Defence for the wrong reasons. And I’d like – Rachael might like to say a bit more about the campaign that they’ve run and how important this is for people that have been negatively impacted today. 

RACHAEL COSGROVE-WHITE: Thanks, Minister. Yeah, Minister Keogh, thanks very much, and to obviously all of those that have taken part in advocating and really driving the wheel behind this level of leg reform. The people of the Australian Defence Force of the LGBTI community have had a long historical discriminative effects on their wellness, their livelihoods, and even their careers. So to be able to stand here today as somebody that recently retired from the Australian Defence Force and be able to stand as a leader of the LGBTI community for Defence personnel, the veterans and their families, to understand that today is not only just the leg reform and the changes to those administrative values that will have these historical effects extinguished from our records, it's the start to something new. It's the start to full inclusion. It's the start of full equality across all those that serve with pride across the Australian Defence Force. 

Our LGBTI people served in silence for a number of years. That silence today has now been broken down with reform such as this. And I couldn’t be more prouder of where we are and where we’ve come from today and all of the support and all the advocacy that has supported us along the way and the brave people that have stood up and told their stories through their own health and wellbeing and their own measures of success to be here today. And it’s a great day to be an LGBTI person that’s a veteran alongside other veterans and service people. Thank you. 

KEOGH: Any questions? 

JOURNALIST: This policy ended in 1992. Why has it taken 34 years to get to the point where people can apply to get these records expunged? 

KEOGH: I think, like many things that should have happened decades ago sometimes, let’s face it, I was in primary school back then. So I can’t explain why it’s taken all of this time. But certainly from our government’s point of view this is something that I’ve been engaging with the LGBTIQ veteran community about for some time. And as part of the various pieces of law reform that we’ve been bringing forward around implementing recommendations of the royal commission and also modernising and upgrading the Defence discipline system, it’s meant that we’ve been able to bring forward this very important change through the work our government has been doing in improving the range of systems in terms of how we support our current serving personnel and our veteran community as well. Our government is very proud to have been able to bring about this change here. 

JOURNALIST: Given the wide ranging impact of this policy, this law, why not make the expungements automatic? Why do people have to apply? 

KEOGH: So it’s actually really important to place the agency in the hands of the veteran or serving member. For some, they may want to keep that on their record in that way because it stands for something for them, and it’s really important that we recognise that. But it’s also important to recognise that in some cases some of those offences that people were convicted of were not consensual. That puts a very different context, I guess, to the record then for that person. And so each case needs to be looked at individually, and that’s why it’s done on an application basis. 

JOURNALIST: In terms of that, what’s that practically look like? If you want to apply for it, [indistinct] record process? 

KEOGH: Yes, so it’s a relatively straightforward process of a form and people explaining their record and background and seeking to have it expunged. Or if it’s a bit more detailed where it’s around where they were forced out of Defence with a resignation or administratively discharged from Defence and looking to have their record updated to appropriately recognise the circumstances. But that will be – in either case, that will be looked at by a group within Defence who will then review the records and make those updates to the records appropriately. 

JOURNALIST: Does this change [indistinct] compensation [indistinct]? 

KEOGH: There’s not a compensation package related to this. We have had some other processes in the past looking at a range of different compensation mechanisms that have existed for certain ways in which people have been treated by Defence across a much broader range of issues in the past. But this is about making sure that people’s records properly reflect who they are as a person and that we don’t judge them negatively for that and that they have an opportunity to have that reflected on the record. 

JOURNALIST: And will you be making an apology of some kind for this statement to encompass this? 

KEOGH: So the government has committed to making a formal apology later this year, yes. 

JOURNALIST: Just a question of the day – 

KEOGH: Okay, anything else on this stuff? No? That’s fine. Okay. 

JOURNALIST: The Coalition is expected to announce [indistinct] net overseas migration to a hundred thousand in its first term of government if it’s elected. What’s your government’s response, and are you trying to chase One Nation to lower [indistinct]? 

KEOGH: Well, I think the Coalition is going to have to explain why it wants to smash the Australian economy with this approach. And it need to say to the Australian people, you know, which hospitals are now not going to have enough staff to operate. You know, we’ve been having a lot of discussions over the last few weeks, for example, about making sure we provide appropriate veteran health care. This would smash opportunities for health care to be not just for the Australian community in general but for veterans as well. We need to make sure we have good health care options. We need to make sure we’re building more houses in Australia. The levels that the opposition is talking about would smash that, and they’re going to have to explain how that’s going to work with those sort of numbers in terms of making sure that Australians continue to get good access to health care, to other services, that houses are being built at the levels that we need, that we're able to have, you know, the fruit picked that we need to have. At those sorts of numbers, that is absolutely catastrophic for the Australian economy and the services that Australians rely on. 

JOURNALIST: Minister, what is your reaction to the Four Corners program last night investigating [indistinct] service providers [indistinct]? 

KEOGH: I think the sorts of behaviours that we saw last night in Four Corners are incredibly disturbing, and I can understand they’ll create quite a degree of anxiety in the veteran community where veterans have been taken advantage of by providers because they just want to make a profit. Now, this is some behaviour that we’ve started to see come into the system in particular since we’ve invested in improving DVA’s processing, since we’ve been able to make sure claims are being dealt with more quickly, that people have sought to take advantage of those improvements and take advantage of veterans and taxpayers. 

We’ve now been making investment for some time in improving our integrity measures as well, working with AFP in some instances, with the Fraud Fusion Taskforce, which is doing work across government looking at DVA, looking at NDIS, for example. We don’t think this is the sort of behaviour that Australians frankly would expect from medical providers or businesses that are purporting to be in the space of supporting our most vulnerable veterans. 

And I think the RSL President put it very well last night when he described this behaviour as immoral. And it’s certainly not what Australians would be expecting. And it’s why we as a government are making sure that we’re taking steps always to improve the integrity of our systems, to make sure that veterans get the care that they think they’re signing up to get and that taxpayers are not being taken advantage of either. 

JOURNALIST: Should government not have been alive to this kind of predatory behaviour, particularly after what we’ve seen with the NDIS? 

KEOGH: So that’s why we’ve made an over $200 million investment some time ago now in improving our integrity measures. And we’ve been working through the system in issuing notices to providers that have been doing the wrong thing. We have a number of investigations going on with AFP at the moment. There are some matters before the courts. 

This is something we’ve been alive to and monitoring, and we’ve made further investments. And when it comes to the advocacy space, those people who are there to support our veterans in making claims to DVA and being able to access medical reports that they may require, that space – you know, we’ve been really lucky in Australia. We’ve had over a hundred years of volunteers working through organisations like the RSL, through RAP, through DVAA that have been supporting our veteran community. And they’ve been doing it as volunteers and they haven’t charged veterans a fee. And we still have a great community of people that are supporting veterans without charging a fee. And I say to all veterans, those services are available through ex-service organisations to support you without charging you a fee. 

But because we've seen people come into this space charging veterans fees, sometimes quite inappropriate commission-based fees in particular, government has already said that we will be looking to regulate this area. We undertook consultations in the first half of the year around what that could look like. And we’ll be putting forward a model shortly around what that could look like in legislation to come forward next year as well. 

JOURNALIST: Would you [indistinct] measures [indistinct] regulate [indistinct] operators [indistinct]? 

KEOGH: Well, I think to be really clear, when we’re talking about people that are defrauding the commonwealth by claiming fees from DVA for services that they didn’t even deliver, that is already a crime. So this is already a regulated space, and that’s why we’ve been working with the AFP on some of these areas. 

Where it comes to people that have been not complying with fee-charging guidance or using – you know, maybe they haven’t properly understood how those items should be charged, we’ve been working with those providers to make sure that they can come into compliance, that they’re doing the right thing, but also there’s a role for the health regulators, those regulators that have charge of those different health professions, to make sure that they are working with their health professionals, that they are doing the right thing and conforming with their obligations with their only health regulators as well. 

JOURNALIST: Do you regret imposing a $5,000 allied health services [indistinct]? 

KEOGH: So, look, we’ve brought forward a measure to come in next year around changes to allied health. That had a number of different elements. One of those was a threshold. We’ve announced that we’re not – after we did consultation with the veteran community we’ve been engaging on what that may look like and how it may operate. Many meetings across the veteran community and with providers. We’ve announced that we’re not going to proceed with the threshold. That had not come in anyway because it wasn’t until next year. 

But what we are continuing with are things like the increase in fees to allied health providers, because we’ve been seeing that some allied health providers have been withdrawing service from veterans. It’s the biggest increase in fees in two decades, so it’s very significant. And also the opening up through MyService, which is the online portal for veterans, to be able to see what services they’re using and what’s being charged against them. And if we look at some of the examples we saw in Four Corners – and, in fact, in discussions I was having only yesterday with veterans – they want to be able to see exactly how those charges are being allocated against them so that they can see if providers are doing the wrong thing and also alert DVA through those processes. And that will continue to be part of what we’re rolling out with those reforms as well. 

JOURNALIST: What about the issue of [indistinct] offering inducements like free smart watches or headphones to get them to sign up for DVA services? 

KEOGH: So I think, you know, that’s – I think what’s really concerning about some of the behaviours that we’ve seen is that you’ve had companies, operators, that are seeking to primarily make a profit instead of being primarily focused on what supports the veteran. And, you know, advertising and marketing, that’s all fine where what’s actually delivered meets what’s being offered. And they’ve been purporting to be all about providing coordinated care for veterans, checking in, providing a broad suite of medical and support services to make sure that the veteran, especially those with complex needs, are properly looked after. And that’s exactly what Australians would expect. It’s what veterans want. It is what government wants to see delivered. 

What was exposed in the Four Corners episode last night, though, was where there’s been providers marketing that but not delivering that but still charging government for what they said was being that. And that’s where I think we’ve got a significant gap. We’ve been working with the medical providers themselves. We’re also looking at other enforcement activity which is being undertaken, and I’m not going to go, obviously, into the details of that, what that involves. 

JOURNALIST: What would you say, finally, to veterans who have either been harmed by the services [indistinct] or haven’t received the services that they are entitled to? 

KEOGH: So certainly I would say to veterans, if you’re aware that you’re being charged for services that weren’t delivered, please let DVA know that. Also, we do find that veterans get the best service when it’s coordinated by their usual treating doctor. Their GP that they’ve been with for some time knows them best and is in the best position to be able to connect them to the specialists or other services that they may need to provide support and treatment or to provide reports to support claims with DVA. And if you work through ex-service organisations and the advocate register, you can find an advocate to work with you, to support you with your claims who won’t charge a veteran any fee and that you know has undergone the appropriate training and will provide good service to support our veteran community. And I think it’s important veterans know that that support is out there to support them without any charge to them. 

JOURNALIST: Do you have a dollar figure on how much money the government has paid out or how much has been spent on going to these for-profit companies that should [indistinct]? 

KEOGH: I don’t have the figure exactly as you’ve described it there. But certainly what we have seen is that there’s a small number of providers – and can I say the vast majority of the health providers, of the advocates, the people working to support our veteran community do the right thing. You know, they give up their time. They go above and beyond to support our veteran community, and we are all incredibly grateful for that great work that they provide. But of the thousands of providers that are out there supporting our veteran community, there is a small number that seem to have generated some quite excessive amount of fee revenue in the work that they have done, which is disproportionate to what we see across the vast majority of providers, and that’s very concerning. 

And to give people a context here, when we came into government there was about $10 billion a year being expended on supporting our veteran community through health and support services as well as compensation. Now that number has lifted up to over $15 billion. And so over the course of the last four and a half years we’ve increased expenditure going directly to support our veteran community by around $19 billion. Now, that’s significant and really important. I think every Australian agrees and understands that our veteran community, when they need support, should be getting that support, and that’s exactly what our government has been about delivering. But at the same time we’re making those investments to ensure that there is integrity in that system and that providers are not taking advantage of our veterans or of taxpayers. And where we’re seeing that, we will be and we are taking action against those people to make sure that there’s trust and integrity in the system and, importantly, to make sure that veterans get the support and the services that they need and, frankly, they deserve to be able to access.

SPEAKER: Thanks very much, everybody.

JOURNALIST: Are you just able to give us more information regarding [indistinct]?

KEOGH: Look, very tragically, we had an Australian Army soldier pass away last night from participating in some training that was happening [indistinct]. Our condolences go out to that soldier's family, friends and the entire Australian Army community. It's very sad whenever we lose anyone from our strong defence force, no matter the circumstances. The family has been notified, and there's a number of other injured, and the family are all aware of that. So all, best wishes to those who have been affected and [indistinct] to the family.

JOURNALIST: Do we know how old they were? Male, female? Anything about them?

KEOGH: I don't have any of those details at this time, and the Army will make a further statement later today.

JOURNALIST: Do we know what activity they were participating in?

KEOGH: Yeah, I think it's more appropriate that Army goes to all of the details later day.

JOURNALIST: And just one final question. Obviously, in the past couple of years there have been several deaths involved in the training activities. Do you have any comment around that?

KEOGH: I think no matter how someone in our Australian Defence Force passes away, it's tragic and we want to make sure that they, their families and the people who work with them are supported whenever that occurs. But we also have been making sure that our training systems are fit for the purpose and the training is conducted in the safest way possible. And that's something we've engaged with the Army and the entire Defence Force around ensuring that those systems are as safe as they can be, recognising that there are unique circumstances when it comes to Defence Force training that mean there are high levels of risk, because we need to make sure that our forces are trained to be able to confront the circumstances that they have to, that are obviously quite unique. And so that is something that Army has been looking into to make sure, as they have the other services, because we want to make sure that everyone is as safe as possible. And it's important that they have those sureties around their systems. And of course, whenever there's a loss of life, there's an investigation into what has occurred, whether there needs to be any improvements in safety. But I'll let Army talk about what those processes will be as they go through that. But our condolences go out to the family, and those that work closely with the soldier who's passed away, and the entire Australian Defence Force family will be feeling and grieving with us at this time.

JOURNALIST: Thank you so much. Thank you for your time.

ENDS