This bill is currently before Parliament.
Defence & foreign affairs
Veterans who already qualify for treatment for an injury or disease could not have that treatment limited simply by a preset cost or service cap.
The bill’s sponsors said preset limits can make access depend on an administrative threshold instead of a veteran’s clinical needs. Jacqui Lambie (Jacqui Lambie Network) pointed to a proposed $5,000 threshold for allied health servicesCare such as physiotherapy, psychology or occupational therapy.—care such as physiotherapy and psychology—after which a veteran could apply for approval for more treatment. She contrasted that extra process with an average wait of more than 300 days for a claim establishing whether an injury or disease is service-related. The sponsors said the bill would advance recommendations 71 and 72 of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide by reducing financial and administrative barriers to health care.
Veterans already had treatment entitlements under military rehabilitation and veterans’ affairs laws, but a 2026 budget decision introduced a $5,000 annual allied-health limit, with extra care requiring approval and potentially making access depend on an administrative threshold rather than clinical needTreatment need judged from a person’s health circumstances.. Veterans protested and the Senate voted to remove the cap, after which Senator Jacqui Lambie, Senator David Pocock, Senator Fatima Payman, Senator David Shoebridge and Senator Lidia Thorpe introduced this private bill on 15 September 2026 to prevent predetermined monetary or numerical limits while retaining clinical and safety safeguards.
Jacqui Lambie (Jacqui Lambie Network) criticised the government’s proposed $5,000 threshold for allied health servicesCare such as physiotherapy, psychology or occupational therapy.. She argued that veterans needing ongoing care could face another approval process after reaching it, creating uncertainty and possible delays. She said this was especially concerning when the average claim establishing whether an injury or disease is service-related takes more than 300 days.
Senator Jacqui Lambie, Senator David Pocock, Senator Fatima Payman, Senator David Shoebridge and Senator Lidia Thorpe introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from Jacqui Lambie Network.
Did it become law?
Not yet
Final passage
No final vote yet
The bill has not yet completed passage through Parliament.
Days since introduction
21 days
Updated 06 Oct 2026.
Meaning
Veterans who already qualify for treatment for an injury or disease could not have that treatment limited simply by a preset cost or service cap. The rule would cover treatment under Part 3 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, treatment under Part V of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act, and treatment covered by any further provisions prescribed by regulationsAdded through detailed rules made under the Act..
The protected treatment could not be capped by the cost of one treatment, the total cost over a set period, or the number of times treatment can be used during that period.
The bill would not guarantee that every treatment is funded. Other conditions could still apply, including rules about whether treatment is clinically appropriate, safe and of suitable quality, as well as safeguards against fraud, abuse and inappropriate provider conduct.
The changes would apply to treatment a person is entitled to from commencement, including where their underlying entitlement arose earlier. The bill would commence the day after Royal AssentFormal approval that turns a passed bill into law..
(1) This section applies in relation to: (a) treatment to which a person is entitled under Part 3 for an injury or disease; and (b) treatment to which a person is entitled under Part V of the VEA for an injury or disease; and (c) treatment to which a person is entitled under a provision prescribed by the regulations. (2) The entitlement to treatment must not be subject to a condition (however described) that would limit the entitlement so that: (a) the cost of treatment (or a particular kind or class of treatment) provided to the person must not exceed a specified amount; or (b) the totaMilitary Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans’ Healthcare Without Caps) introduced text
(2) The entitlement to treatment must not be subject to a condition (however described) that would limit the entitlement so that: (a) the cost of treatment (or a particular kind or class of treatment) provided to the person must not exceed a specified amount; or (b) the total cost of treatment (or a particular kind or class of treatment) provided to the person during a period must not exceed a specified amount; or (c) the number of times treatment (or a particular kind or class of treatment) is accessed by the person during a period must not exceed a specified number. Note 1: For example,Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans’ Healthcare Without Caps) introduced text
The effect of new section 303A is to ensure that an otherwise existing entitlement to treatment cannot be restricted solely because a predetermined monetary or numerical threshold has been reached. The provision does not prevent entitlement to treatment from being subject to other appropriate conditions that are not inconsistent with new section 303A. This may include conditions relating to clinical appropriateness, quality and safety, or other requirements applying to the provision of treatment.Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans’ Healthcare Without Caps) explanatory memorandum
3 Application of amendments The amendments made to the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 by this Schedule apply in relation to treatment that a person is entitled to on or after commencement, whether the entitlement first arose before, on or after that commencement.Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans’ Healthcare Without Caps) introduced text
Context
Veterans already had treatment entitlements under military rehabilitation and veterans’ affairs laws, but a 2026 budget decision introduced a $5,000 annual allied-health limit, with extra care requiring approval and potentially making access depend on an administrative threshold rather than clinical needTreatment need judged from a person’s health circumstances.. Veterans protested and the Senate voted to remove the cap, after which Senator Jacqui Lambie, Senator David Pocock, Senator Fatima Payman, Senator David Shoebridge and Senator Lidia Thorpe introduced this private bill on 15 September 2026 to prevent predetermined monetary or numerical limits while retaining clinical and safety safeguards.
Veterans’ treatment laws are simplified and harmonised
The Act amended veterans’ affairs and military rehabilitation and compensation law, forming part of the legal settings governing veterans’ treatment when the later cap dispute arose.
Australian Taxation Office ↗2026 budget introduces a $5,000 allied health cap
The federal budget introduced a $5,000 annual limit on veterans’ allied health expenditure, although veterans could apply for more funding through an additional approval process.
ABC News ↗Senate votes to remove the $5,000 cap
The Senate voted in favour of overturning the recent budget announcement to cap veterans’ allied health care at $5,000 annually.
SBS News ↗Veterans lay down medals over healthcare changes
Veterans laid down their service medals outside Parliament House, marking two years since the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide delivered its final report and escalating opposition to the healthcare changes.
Sydney Morning Herald ↗Five senators introduce the Veterans’ Healthcare Without Caps Bill
Senator Jacqui Lambie, Senator David Pocock, Senator Fatima Payman, Senator David Shoebridge and Senator Lidia Thorpe introduced the private bill in the Senate to prevent veterans’ treatment entitlements being limited by predetermined monetary or numerical thresholds.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Key criticism
Jacqui Lambie (Jacqui Lambie Network) criticised the government’s proposed $5,000 threshold for allied health servicesCare such as physiotherapy, psychology or occupational therapy.. She argued that veterans needing ongoing care could face another approval process after reaching it, creating uncertainty and possible delays. She said this was especially concerning when the average claim establishing whether an injury or disease is service-related takes more than 300 days.
Lambie acknowledged the government’s position that the $5,000 threshold was not a cap because veterans could apply for more treatment. She also said the bill should preserve clinical oversight, quality and safety standards, and safeguards against fraud and inappropriate provider conduct. The supplied debate ended after her speech, so it records no response from another speaker.
Further sources
Votes
No recorded votes have been found yet for this bill.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Jacqui Lambie urges the Senate to support the bill because veterans with accepted service-related conditions should receive clinically necessary treatment without arbitrary financial or service caps, while retaining proper clinical oversight and safeguards against abuse.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
1 speaker · 1 support
“I am calling on the major parties to put the interests of veterans first and support this Bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
