Skip to Content

Veterans’ Advocacy and Support Services Scoping Study

Veterans' Advocacy Scopy Tudy

An independent study is investigating how veterans and their families are assisted to access entitlements and services. The Veterans’ Advocacy and Support Services Scoping Study is being led by Mr Robert Cornall AO, former Chair of the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce. The advocacy study is expected to recommend a model to the Australian Government in December 2018.

Two parliamentary committees have recommended changes to the current advocacy system.

The aim of the advocacy study is to recommend the most suitable advocacy model for Australian veterans and their families so they have:

  • a sustainable, consistent and reliable advocacy service which is scalable based on demand
  • an efficient and effective service to assist them to access their entitlements so they can focus on more important things, such as rehabilitation and their civilian life
  • a level of service which, at a minimum, is comparable in quality and value with other cohorts accessing government entitlements
  • a service based on their needs, irrespective of age, and which adequately protects their interests, and
  • if their claim is not accepted, access to advice on why it was unsuccessful and options for appeal.

For more information read the Terms of Reference.

Public consultation

The veteran, ex-service and Defence communities are being widely consulted as part of the advocacy study, including younger veterans, female veterans and veterans’ families. The study is also seeking the views of relevant policy and other stakeholders, including the Veterans’ Review Board, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, and representatives from the legal, community, health and disability sectors. The study will also consider comparable overseas advocacy services for veterans.

Meetings will take place in all capital cities and in regional centres from June to September 2018. To see the dates and locations and to book a meeting time go to Consultation sessions.

Discussion paper and submissions

There is a discussion paper to generate discussion and to assist you in preparing a submission. It asks questions about issues raised in the Terms of Reference. The questions are numbered and you can respond to as many or as few as you like.

There are two questionnaires which you can use as the basis of your submission. One is for organisations and individuals (including ESO members, advocates, veterans and other interested parties). The questions mirror those in the discussion paper. The other questionnaire is for veterans and members of their families who want to share their personal experience. In both versions you can answer as many or as few of the questions as you like.

Publication of submissions

  • Open: Submissions and questionnaires will be published on the website unless you specify ‘Name Withheld’ or ‘Confidential’.
  • Name Withheld: You can indicate if you do not want your name and/or the name of your organisation published with your submission or questionnaire by marking it ‘Name Withheld’.
  • Confidential: Confidential information can be submitted and will be not be published on the website. Mark your submission or questionnaire ‘Confidential’.

For privacy reasons, all personal details such as addresses, email addresses, signatures and telephone numbers will not be published.

Submissions or questionnaires which are offensive, potentially defamatory or out of scope for the study will not be published.

Closing date

Submissions and questionnaires will be accepted until 31 July 2018.

How to make a submission

To make a submission you can:

Privacy of your submission                                                 

Read the Privacy Policy and Website Privacy Policy for information about how your personal details are handled and the security of your information.

Questions

If you have any questions about the advocacy study, the questionnaires or about making a submission, please send an email to advocacy.study@dva.gov.au.

Read submissions

Average: 3 (4 votes)