DVA needs root-and-branch review, not just funding

The interim findings of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide should come as no surprise as similar findings have appeared in previous reviews (“Compo maze raises veterans’ risk of suicide”, 12/8).

The upshot is that the Department of Veterans’ Affairs is, in its current structure, not fit for purpose, nor are those responsible for its ongoing management, be they politicians, bureaucrats or uniformed officers. How can a large client services organisation have a backlog of 42,000 unprocessed claims? What number of KPIs were being ignored? This appalling statistic should not be new information to those in charge.

Throwing more money at the DVA is not necessarily the answer. What is needed is a total restructuring of the organisation from the top down, a robust root-and-branch analysis of its core role, and staff who are experienced in the detail that makes the ADF different and who know that claims not associated with scars, bandages and prosthetics are legitimate and require more than ongoing pencil-pushing responses. These men and women responded to our call and were all deemed fit and healthy physically and mentally when they dressed in the uniform of the ADF. We now have an obligation to return them to that same condition without delay.

Tom Moylan, Melbourne, Vic

This week has seen the release of the interim report of the royal commission into veteran suicides. I commend the previous government for starting the process and the current government for the transparency in releasing the interim report.

Sadly, these commissions are often met with scepticism, as we have seen too many reports and commissions in the past and very little actual good outcomes.

As part of the interim report release, the current Veterans’ Affairs Minister stood up and (quite rightly) apologised to all veterans; however, sadly, in the same sentence he threw in the blame game on the previous government. Let’s not forget that within the first week of being in power this current government pushed the veterans’ affairs portfolio from the inner cabinet (frontbench) to the outer cabinet (oh, and appointed the Assistant Minister for Veterans’ Affairs to the additional role of Assistant Minister for the Republic).

Stop using veterans as a political football and actually do something to assist those who have served this country proudly. This is the opportunity and driver to have positive outcomes for our veterans.

Fred Campbell OAM, Bangalee, NSW

SMR stumbling block

John Graham echoes Nick Cater and the Coalition in spruiking small modular reactors as the answer to our energy woes (Letters, 12/8). But have any of them actually done their homework?

According to Reuters, a world-first small modular reactor is currently being built in China. That’s it. There isn’t a single operational small modular reactor in existence on planet Earth.

Energy prices are rising and climate change is worsening right now. We don’t have time to wait for technology in the pipeline. We need to progress with deploying the cheapest and safest readily available form of energy – renewables – by following the Australian Energy Market Operator’s Integrated System Plan as quickly as we feasibly can.

Dr Amy Hiller, Kew, Vic

Unfit is right

I concur with John Howard that, by refusing to accept his defeat at the polls, Donald Trump has proved himself to be an unfit person to ever contest the presidency again (“Trump is not fit for office: Howard”, 12/8).

If a person refuses to accept the rules of their country’s electoral processes, why even bother to enter the contest? Richard Nixon, Al Gore and Gerald Ford all accepted, as graciously as ­possible, their own very narrow defeats. What, apart from an uncontrollable ego, entitles Trump to such an utter lack of ­respect for the way his country chooses to elect its presidents?

Crispin Walters, Chapel Hill, Qld

Pollies aren’t trained

In response to the report on the NSW parliament released on Friday, Premier Dominic Perrottet said, among other things, “If parliamentarians cannot lead and provide an environment where the workplace is safe, what hope do we have for other workplaces across our great state?”

There is danger in this view, simply because parliamentarians are not selected for, or trained to, higher standards. ­Indeed there’s a reasonable chance they have no leadership experience (in a managerial sense) whatsoever.

There is no reason we should assume parliamentarians will ­behave any better than the ­average person on the street who suddenly has power thrust upon them. We need to supervise, ­support and discipline them if we are to expect higher standards of behaviour.

Rob Silva, Lower Hermitage, SA