REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY
INSTRUMENT NO. 39 of 1996 - Revocation
VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986
MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004
EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR TABLING
- The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) is of the view that metatarsalgia is not a "disease" or "injury" as defined in section 5D of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA). The Authority has therefore determined, under subsection 196B(9) of the VEA and subsection 33(3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, a Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 39 of 1996 – Revocation, concerning metatarsalgia. This Instrument revokes the existing Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 39 of 1996, determined under subsection 196B(2) of the VEA, concerning metatarsalgia.
2. This Instrument also specifies a date of effect for the revocation in accordance with sub-section 12(1)(a) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003.
3. Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to metatarsalgia in the Government Notices Gazette of 25 June 2008, and circulated a copy of the notice of intention to investigate to a wide range of organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants. The Authority invited submissions from the Repatriation Commission, organisations and persons referred to in section 196E of the VEA, and any person having expertise in the field. No submissions were received for consideration by the Authority during the investigation.
4. On 29 October 2010, the Authority wrote to organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants regarding the proposed Instrument and the medical-scientific material considered by the Authority. This letter emphasised that the Authority is of the view that metatarsalgia is not a "disease" or "injury" as defined in section 5D of the VEA. The Authority provided an opportunity to the organisations to make representations in relation to the proposed Instrument prior to its determination. No submissions were received for consideration by the Authority.
5. The determining of this Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to metatarsalgia as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 25 June 2008.
6. A list of references relating to the above condition is available to any person or organisation referred to in subsection 196E(1)(a) to (c) of the VEA. Any such request must be made in writing to the Repatriation Medical Authority at the following address:
The Registrar
Repatriation Medical Authority Secretariat
GPO Box 1014
BRISBANE QLD 4001
Overview
The Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) is foundational legislation in Australia, providing entitlements to veterans and their families. This Act was enacted to address the need for comprehensive support and compensation for veterans who have been affected by their service. In 2011, the Repatriation Medical Authority, under the authority granted by the VEA and the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, issued Instrument No. 39 of 1996 - Revocation concerning metatarsalgia. This legislative instrument was introduced to clarify that metatarsalgia is not considered a "disease" or "injury" as defined in the VEA, thus revoking the previous Statement of Principles regarding this condition. The Authority sought feedback from various stakeholders, including veteran organisations and experts in the field, though no submissions were received. The revocation was finalised and took effect as specified under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, marking the conclusion of the investigation into metatarsalgia as initially advertised in 2008.
Scope and Application
The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 39 of 1996 - Revocation concerns the determination of the Authority regarding the classification of metatarsalgia, a condition affecting the foot, under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. The Authority has determined that metatarsalgia does not qualify as a "disease" or "injury" as defined in the relevant sections of these Acts. This decision is significant for veterans, service personnel, and their dependants who may have claimed benefits or compensation related to this condition. The revocation of the existing Statement of Principles concerning metatarsalgia formalises this determination and removes any previous recognition of the condition under the Acts. This instrument applies to all persons or entities previously affected by the previous Statement of Principles concerning metatarsalgia, ensuring that there is no ambiguity regarding the entitlement to benefits or compensation related to this condition. The instrument has a national reach as it pertains to federal legislation enacted by the Commonwealth of Australia. There are no specified exclusions or exemptions within the text, and the application of this instrument is comprehensive in its revocation of the previous determination regarding metatarsalgia.
Key Provisions
The main operative sections of this legislation involve the determination and revocation of a Statement of Principles concerning metatarsalgia under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. Specifically, section 196B(9) of the VEA and section 33(3) of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 provide the legal basis for the Authority to declare that metatarsalgia is not a "disease" or "injury" as defined in section 5D of the VEA. This determination, detailed in Instrument No. 39 of 1996 – Revocation, revokes the previous Statement of Principles concerning metatarsalgia. Additionally, subsection 12(1)(a) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 specifies the date of effect for the revocation.
The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority) has several obligations and requirements under this legislation. It is mandated to investigate conditions such as metatarsalgia to determine whether they qualify as "diseases" or "injuries" under the VEA. The Authority must advertise its intention to undertake such investigations in the Government Notices Gazette and circulate notices to relevant organisations and individuals. Furthermore, the Authority is required to invite submissions from the Repatriation Commission, relevant organisations, and any person with expertise in the field. Despite these obligations, the Authority did not receive any submissions for consideration during the investigation into metatarsalgia.
The legislation does not explicitly outline specific offences, penalties, or consequences for breaches. However, the process of determining and revoking Statements of Principles is governed by statutory requirements that the Authority must follow. Failure to comply with these obligations could potentially lead to legal challenges regarding the validity of the determinations made. Additionally, the Authority's determinations and the subsequent revocation of the Statement of Principles are subject to review and appeal processes under the relevant Acts.
In summary, the Repatriation Medical Authority has determined and revoked a Statement of Principles concerning metatarsalgia, concluding that it is not a "disease" or "injury" as defined in the VEA. This process involved advertising the investigation, inviting submissions, and providing a final determination. Although the legislation does not detail specific penalties for non-compliance, the Authority's determinations are subject to statutory and judicial review.