Instrument No.9 of 2002
Amendment of Statement of Principles
concerning
CHOLELITHIASIS
ICD CODE: 574
Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986
- The Repatriation Medical Authority amends, under subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, Instrument No.33 of 1994, as amended by Instrument No.223 of 1995, by:
- in paragraph 4 deleting the definition of “mature onset diabetes mellitus”.
2. The amendment made by this instrument applies to all matters to which Instrument No.33 of 1994 and section 120A of the Act apply.
Dated this Ninth day of January 2002
The Common Seal of the )
Repatriation Medical Authority )
was affixed to this instrument )
in the presence of )
KEN DONALD
CHAIRMAN
Overview
The Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 was enacted to provide for the payment of pensions and other benefits to veterans and their dependants. The Act aims to ensure that those who have served in the Australian Defence Force receive appropriate recognition and support for any injuries or conditions they may have acquired during their service. One of the legislative instruments under this Act is the Instrument No.9 of 2002, which amends the Statement of Principles concerning Cholelithiasis ICD Code: 574. This amendment was introduced by the Repatriation Medical Authority under subsection 196B(2) of the Act, to address the need to refine and update the criteria for determining veterans' entitlements related to specific medical conditions. The policy objective is to ensure that the criteria for assessing and awarding benefits remain current and accurately reflect the medical understanding and needs of veterans.
Scope and Application
The legislative instrument modifies the Statement of Principles concerning cholelithiasis (ICD code: 574) under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. This amendment, executed by the Repatriation Medical Authority, specifically involves the deletion of the definition of “mature onset diabetes mellitus” from paragraph 4 of Instrument No.33 of 1994, as previously amended by Instrument No.223 of 1995. The amendment extends to all matters governed by Instrument No.33 of 1994 and section 120A of the Act, thereby impacting the eligibility criteria for veterans’ entitlements related to cholelithiasis. The amendment reflects a deliberate exclusion of the previously defined condition, mature onset diabetes mellitus, which could have implications for the assessment and approval of related claims. This adjustment, executed by the Repatriation Medical Authority, underscores the legislative intent to refine and update the criteria for veterans’ health-related entitlements.
Key Provisions
The primary operative sections of this legislative instrument involve the amendment of the Statement of Principles concerning Cholelithiasis, as identified by the ICD code 574, under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. Specifically, this instrument modifies Instrument No. 33 of 1994, as previously amended by Instrument No. 223 of 1995, by deleting the definition of "mature onset diabetes mellitus" from paragraph 4 (Section 196B(2)). This change is intended to streamline and refine the eligibility criteria for veterans seeking benefits related to cholelithiasis.
The obligations and requirements imposed by this Act are primarily concerned with the administration and assessment of veterans’ entitlements. The Repatriation Medical Authority, as the governing body, must ensure that all veterans’ claims related to cholelithiasis are assessed without the conflation of criteria that previously included "mature onset diabetes mellitus." This means that the Authority must apply the current, amended Statement of Principles to all relevant claims, ensuring consistency and fairness in the evaluation process.
Should there be any non-compliance with the provisions outlined in this instrument, there are potential consequences. While the specific offences and penalties are not detailed within this particular legislative instrument, it is understood that breaches of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 can result in both civil and criminal liabilities. For instance, misrepresentation or fraudulent claims can lead to criminal charges, and failure to comply with the Authority's directives can result in civil penalties. The maximum penalties may vary depending on the severity and nature of the breach, but they can include fines and other sanctions as prescribed by the relevant legislation. This underscores the importance of adhering to the statutory requirements to avoid any adverse legal repercussions.