Page 371 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 7 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
regard to the purported changes to eligibility. There was a determination made in April 1996—if my memory serves me correctly it was a Liberal government at that time. The Commissioner for Housing excluded disability pensions, payments and allowances paid under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. This exemption replaced an earlier, somewhat narrower exemption of the extreme disablement adjustment pension. This exemption does not and did not include the war widows pension, which is not specifically a disability payment. There has been no new determination or amendment to the Housing Assistance Act 1987 relating to veterans’ entitlements.
Mrs Burke: That’s not true. I’ve got the proof.
MR HARGREAVES: Check it out.
Mrs Burke: I have done.
MR HARGREAVES: Stop making a fool of yourself. Any amendment or change to a gazetted program must be tabled in the Legislative Assembly and is subject to disallowance. The determination was amended in 2006 for internal clarification purposes; that is, that only disability payments and allowances—not all payments and/or allowances, which Mrs Burke would have us believe is the case; it referred only to disability payments—were exempt. This was a clarification rather than a change of policy or practice. The internal clarification did not and does not alter veterans’ entitlements.
I do not know how many times I have to say this before it gets into the minds of those opposite. I wish I could draw pictures for Hansard. The really silly people across the chamber need it in pictures. There has been no change to veterans’ entitlements. When Mrs Burke went out to frighten the horses in the media, the first thing I did was get hold of a copy of the two determinations, and I read them both. There was no reference to veterans’ entitlements at all.
Mr Pratt: Will war widows be affected in any way?
MR HARGREAVES: Give it a rest, you parrot. I looked at both determinations. One of them clarified the definition of disability by placing the word “disability” more prominently than in the previous determination. That is all the change that was there. There has been no change to the veterans’ entitlements. Yet again, Mrs Burke has got it wrong or is being mischievous. You have a choice of people being either incompetent or mischievous. I give her credit: she is incompetent. You could have looked it up and had a little bit more of a look. Also she could have asked us, and we would have quite happily told her.
Mrs Burke has taken the case of a particular person. I spoke to that particular person this summer. I said, “Do get in touch with us and we’ll clear it up”. That is exactly what we will do. I also asked my department to check whether our treatment was any different to other jurisdictions. Guess what? No. We are no different to anybody else. The reason is that we have not changed anything.
I challenge Mrs Burke either to come into this place, table the change that specifically refers to veterans’ entitlements and which contains the words “veterans’ entitlements” or
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .