Lees-Galloway Iain: Veterans’ Support Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Veterans’ Support Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 30 July 2014. Volume:700;Page:19714. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North):It is a very great pleasure to speak this evening in support of the Veterans’ Support Bill. It seems in some ways appropriate that we are debating the third reading of this legislation during this period as we move into the commemoration of the centenary of the beginning of the First World War which we will acknowledge on Monday next week 4 August. It is 100 years after New Zealand entered that conflict.It is also very good news I think that we are able to debate the third reading of the legislation now in the final throes of this 50th Parliament. It is a shame that we are doing it in the last gasps of this Parliament but it is pleasing that it will finally after all these years be completed and in a few days’ time will go to the Governor-General for Royal assent and become law.Veterans all around the country have been waiting for a very very long time for this day and indeed the day when this legislation is fully implemented. It is a conversation that started many many years ago and led to the decision in 2006 by the then Minister of Veterans’ Affairs Rick Barker to empower the Law Commission to embark on a period of consultation to discuss the issues that veterans faced—to discuss the ways in which the 1954 legislation had become outmoded outdated and no longer fit for purpose.That was a conversation that was always going to take some time. We all knew that and we all appreciated that. The Law Commission under the leadership of Sir Geoffrey Palmer carried out that consultation well in a very robust fashion in a very thorough fashion so that all the veterans all the veterans’ organisations—not least of which being the Royal New Zealand Returned and Services’ Association—were able to participate in that conversation. They helped the Law Commission to put together an extensive and thorough report that contained within it superb recommendations that were the genesis for this legislation to ensure that in the 21st century we are appropriately providing for all our veterans be it our veterans who served in World War II in Korea in Viet Nam in Malaya in Afghanistan in Timor in the Solomons or in other places around the world.Their needs are not all uniform and there is a very distinct point in time at which the needs of veterans changed—that is 1974 with the introduction of ACC. What this legislation contains at its heart is two separate schemes: one that applies to veterans who served before ACC came into force and another for veterans who served after ACC came into force. That is appropriate to ensure that veterans from those conflicts prior to 1974 have adequate provision and are appropriately acknowledged by the State for the contribution they have made on our behalf and the sacrifice they have made on our behalf.I was pleased with the Green Party’s contribution tonight because like the Green Party we abhor war we abhor conflict and we believe that as a nation we should be seeking every possible opportunity to avoid violent conflict with other nations and with other groups around the world. Increasingly in this century we do not find ourselves in conflict with other nation States but with non-State organisations. But we should always seek opportunities to avoid that.Nevertheless sometimes we as politicians we as Governments ask our people to go and put themselves in harm’s way. To me a veteran is a veteran is a veteran. It does not matter what history might say about the conflicts that have taken place around the world. It does not matter what history might say about New Zealand’s participation in those conflicts or the decision that Governments made rightly or wrongly for us to be part of them. Those veterans served because their Government asked them to and because they believed it was the right thing to do to secure our nation and to maintain peace and prosperity around the world.We should acknowledge the incredible sacrifice that was made by veterans who may have been injured or disabled or simply actually all veterans who are necessarily impacted on by what they see and what they experience when they go to represent us overseas. So it was absolutely the right thing to do to get on and progress this legislation.We do have some points of difference with the Government. Our first grumble I suppose is that it has taken a very very long time to get to this point. The Law Commission did return its report early in the first term of this Government and here we are at the very very last gasps of the second term of this Government finally passing this legislation. I think it is a shame that it has taken so long but let us not dwell on that too much. Let us celebrate the fact that we have made it this far and that we are very close to implementing this legislation at last.There is an obvious point of difference which has been a point of debate throughout the Committee stage and throughout the third reading of this legislation and that is around the lump-sum payments and the accessibility of the veterans pension. We are very pleased that the Government has moved from its original position on the criteria for the veterans pension. It made really no sense at all that there was a requirement that a veteran demonstrate that they were 52 percent disabled in order to qualify for the veterans pension. That it is now universal will be very pleasing. But that is more symbolic than anything else.Where the Government has not been prepared to move sadly has been on the issue of lump-sum payments. This is not an extraordinary amount of money. In terms of the decisions that Governments make something between $7 million and $11 million per annum is not an extraordinary amount of money and it is an amount of money that will decrease over time. That is unusual for Governments. Usually when you put some new spending into the baseline you have to anticipate that there will be an increase in the actual spend over time. That is not the case here. Yet sadly the Government has decided not to recognise the contribution and sacrifice of veterans and their families by agreeing to the lump-sum payment upon the death of a veteran.I appreciate what the Government is saying—that that money will not go to the veteran—but the truth is of course that the families of veterans made an extraordinary sacrifice as well and in the case where a veteran is significantly injured and disabled as a result of their service then often the family has an ongoing responsibility to support that person through their life. I think it is absolutely justified that we as a nation recognise that sacrifice and that support as well.In the legislation there is also provision for a code of veterans’ and claimants’ rights in their dealings with Veterans Affairs New Zealand. That certainly is something that came out of the consultation with veterans and their representative organisations. There need to be some fundamental rights that veterans have when dealing with veterans affairs to ensure that they get a fair deal and to ensure that they get fair service every time.Overwhelmingly Veterans Affairs delivers a very very good service for our veterans and as a nation I think we compare extremely well with some of the other Western nations around the world that send their people into harm’s way and then do not deliver when their veterans come home. This code of rights underpins that and ensures that all veterans get a fair deal. We do support this bill.