Starting your Submission to the Senate

Stop tip-toeing. The question is no longer “Should we tread carefully?” but “Will we lead?”

During my five years as a veteran representative, I frequently heard cautions like, “Don’t challenge the Minister— we could lose our seat.” My answer then, as now, is simple: if holding a seat requires silencing veterans, then you are in the wrong job. That, to me, is authentic leadership. Many senior veterans shared the same conviction.

As you shape your Senate submission, you have a choice: file down the edges until it is harmless, or state the unvarnished truth. I am committed to the latter. Anything on the Australian Veteran Community site is at your disposal; use it, then put the argument in your own words.

Remember, the government needed to achieve just three things in this legislation:

1. Enshrine a commission that is genuinely independent.
2. Give that commission its own Act of Parliament.
3. Ensure it sits outside the Defence portfolios.

They missed the mark. Our job now is to say so—plainly, firmly, and on the public record.

The Royal Commission’s Call for a System-Wide Reset

Recommendation 122 of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide (RCDVS) called for nothing less than an uncompromising, system-wide reset of the Commonwealth’s approach to veteran wellbeing.  At the centre of that mandate is an independent entity, armed with real powers, credible data and an unambiguous brief: to hold Defence, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs and every connected agency publicly to account.  Its job is to interrogate commitments, test whether programs do what Ministers claim, expose gaps the numbers reveal and demand further action where lives remain at risk.

Such an entity must also broadcast, unmistakably, that the Australian Government understands the scale of the matter, values veterans’ lives and will pursue suicide-prevention goals relentlessly, year after year.

Why Schedule 9 Falls Short

Schedule 9 does none of this.  Substantively, it withholds the very independence, oversight authority and data-compulsion powers the RCDVS deemed non-negotiable.  Procedurally, it appeared after bipartisan agreement on the Veterans’ Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) (VETS) Bill 2024, it then entered the Senate, rather than the House, with the intent to obtain Royal Assent with minimal if any scrutiny.  Whether that perception is accurate is almost irrelevant; the credibility cost is already paid, reinforcing a pattern of manoeuvres that have previously eroded trust in the Government’s response to the RCDVS.

The Defence and Veteran Services Commission proposed in Schedule 9 is unworkable. It cannot deliver the outcomes recommended by the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide and, therefore, represents a poor investment in veteran lives.

Schedule 9 should be repealed. The funds already earmarked for a September 2025 start-up must be redirected to design, using recognised best-practice governance models, an independent body that clearly signals the Commonwealth’s grasp of the crisis and its unwavering, year-on-year commitment to preventing veteran suicide.

The Imperative for a Genuine Independent Commission

Independence is non-negotiable to the veteran and veteran family community, and to the wider community, and likewise is any model that lets Defence or DVA direct operations or veto reports.

Redirecting Effort – A Project

This activity is a temporary, goal-driven endeavour undertaken to create a unique outcome. It is a project.  It needs and organised and controlled start, an organised and controlled middle and an organised and controlled end.

What we need now is rigorous project-management discipline. Even the Objects clause at the start of the Schedule omits the word “independent,” illustrating how easily focus can drift—much like aiming an essay at the wrong topic and missing the mark, only with far higher stakes. Adopting PRINCE2 would help: its framework is formal, transparent, and uncompromising in flagging anyone who deviates from agreed governance.

Step one: A Project Mandate.  Click here for an Example.  I’ll complete more later.
Step two: a full Project Initiation Document (PID). Because everything so far has happened behind closed doors.  I think we should draft suggestions and add them to the submission and I have one prepared. Both documents need to be put them on the table, setting the standard the project must meet if it’s ever going to succeed.
Step three.  The PID includes:

• Project Definition
• Business Case Snapshot
• Project Organisation
• Communication & Engagement Plan
• Quality Management Approach
• Risk Management Strategy
• Configuration & Change Control
• Schedule
• Benefits Management Approach
• Issue Register and Risk Register