REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY
INSTRUMENT NO. 24 of 2008
VETERANS’ ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986
MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004
EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR TABLING
- The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority), under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA) revokes Instrument No. 90 of 1996 determined under subsection 196B(3) of the VEA concerning polymyalgia rheumatica and death from polymyalgia rheumatica.
2. The Authority is of the view that on the sound medical-scientific evidence available it is more probable than not that polymyalgia rheumatica and death from polymyalgia rheumatica can be related to particular kinds of service. The Authority has therefore determined pursuant to subsection 196B(3) of the VEA a Statement of Principles, Instrument No. 24 of 2008 concerning polymyalgia rheumatica. This Instrument will in effect replace the revoked Statement of Principles.
3. The provisions of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA) relating to claims for compensation commenced on 1 July 2004. Claims under section 319 of the MRCA for acceptance of liability for a service injury sustained, a service disease contracted or service death on or after 1 July 2004 are determined by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission by reference to Statements of Principles issued by the Authority pursuant to the VEA.
4. The Statement of Principles sets out the factors that must exist, and which of those factors must be related to the following kinds of service rendered by a person:
eligible war service (other than operational service) under the VEA;
defence service (other than hazardous service) under the VEA;
peacetime service under the MRCA,
before it can be said that, on the balance of probabilities, polymyalgia rheumatica or death from polymyalgia rheumatica is connected with the circumstances of that service.
5. This new instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 28 June 2006 concerning polymyalgia rheumatica in accordance with section 196G of the VEA. The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence now available to the Authority, including the sound medical-scientific evidence it has previously considered.
6. The contents of the new Instrument are in similar terms as the revoked Instrument. Comparing the new and the revoked Instruments, the differences include:
- adopting the latest revised Instrument format, which commenced in 2005;
- deleting the ICD code from the Instrument header;
- revising the definition of 'polymyalgia rheumatica' in clause 3;
- new definitions of 'death from polymyalgia rheumatica', 'ICD-10-AM code', and 'terminal event' in clause 6;
- revising definition of 'relevant service' in clause 6;
- deleting definition of 'ICD code'; and
- specifying a date of effect for the Instrument in clause 8.
7. Further changes to the format of the Instrument reflect the commencement of the MRCA and clarify that pursuant to subsection 196B(3A) of the VEA, the Statement of Principles has been determined for the purposes of both the VEA and the MRCA.
8. Prior to determining this instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to polymyalgia rheumatica in the Government Notices Gazette of 28 June 2006, 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.
9. The determining of this new instrument finalises the investigation in relation to polymyalgia rheumatica as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 28 June 2006.
10. A list of references relating to the above condition is available, on written request, from the Repatriation Medical Authority Secretariat.
Overview
The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 24 of 2008, enacted to address the medical condition polymyalgia rheumatica, revokes the previous Instrument No. 90 of 1996 under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986. The Authority determined a new Statement of Principles, replacing the previous one, based on the latest medical-scientific evidence suggesting a probable connection between polymyalgia rheumatica and specific types of service. This new instrument also aligns with the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, under which claims for compensation from 1 July 2004 are assessed by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission using Statements of Principles issued by the Authority. The policy objective is to ensure that veterans and service personnel receive appropriate compensation for service-related conditions, reflecting the most current medical understanding.
Scope and Application
The Repatriation Medical Authority Instrument No. 24 of 2008 under the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 aims to revise the Statement of Principles concerning polymyalgia rheumatica, replacing the previously revoked Instrument No. 90 of 1996. This Instrument applies to individuals who have rendered eligible war service, defence service, or peacetime service and are seeking to establish a connection between their service and the onset of polymyalgia rheumatica or death from this condition. The Instrument outlines the specific factors and conditions that must be met to determine a connection to service, thereby affecting claims for compensation under both the Veterans’ Entitlements Act and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act. The Instrument’s application is national in scope, affecting veterans and service personnel across Australia. There are no specific exclusions or exemptions noted in the text, though the Instrument’s provisions are subject to the conditions and definitions it sets out. Any further application or interpretation may be influenced by subordinate instruments or regulations that may be issued in the future.
Key Provisions
The Repatriation Medical Authority (RMA) has revoked Instrument No. 90 of 1996, which previously dealt with polymyalgia rheumatica and death from polymyalgia rheumatica, and introduced Instrument No. 24 of 2008. This new instrument outlines the conditions under which polymyalgia rheumatica and death from polymyalgia rheumatica can be related to particular kinds of military service (section 2). The new instrument is based on the most recent medical-scientific evidence, which suggests it is more probable than not that these conditions can be linked to specific types of service (section 2). Claims for compensation for injuries or diseases incurred after 1 July 2004 are to be assessed by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (MRCC) using the Statements of Principles issued by the RMA (section 3). The Statement of Principles specifies the factors that must exist and be related to certain kinds of military service for a connection to be made to polymyalgia rheumatica or death from the condition (section 4).
The obligations imposed by the Act require the RMA to conduct investigations and base its determinations on sound medical-scientific evidence. In this case, the RMA examined available evidence to determine the likelihood of a connection between polymyalgia rheumatica or death from it and specific military services (section 5). The RMA also had to advertise its intention to investigate and invite submissions from relevant organisations and individuals, although no submissions were received for this investigation (section 8 and 9). The Authority's determination process includes revising the definitions and format of the Instrument to reflect current legislative requirements and the commencement of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (section 6, 7, and 10).
For breaches of the requirements or obligations outlined in the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, the Act does not explicitly detail specific offences, penalties, or consequences. However, general provisions within these Acts and related legislation may apply. For instance, misleading or deceptive conduct in relation to claims could lead to civil penalties under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, while more severe breaches might attract criminal penalties. The precise consequences would depend on the nature of the breach and the relevant legislative framework.