As we are discussing this bill, the National Commissioner for Defence and Veteran Suicide Prevention Bill 2020, an inquest is underway in Sydney into the death of Sergeant Ian Turner. According to the reports of the inquest that I have been following, Sergeant Turner had enlisted in 2000 and been deployed seven times to Afghanistan, Iraq and East Timor. He took part in combat operations for nearly three years. The evidence being given is distressing. The evidence from his family, his doctors and his own letters indicate he was overwhelmed by PTSD, depression, anxiety and drug and alcohol dependency in the months before he took his own life in July 2017. He sought treatment at various places over the years, including at St John of God hospital in North Richmond, which is in my electorate and has a special focus on defence member and veteran mental illness treatment.

This coronial inquest and so many others give us some insight into the treatment veterans and Defence Force personnel can access, how they transition into civilian life, how mental illness is treated within that cohort and how the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans' Affairs each operate in these situations. What they don't do is bring together all of those isolated cases and look for the way forward at a broader policy level. Nor do they have the power to make anyone make any changes. That is why it is so important for this parliament to be looking at these matters. It's absolutely important to the communities that I represent in the Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury. The presence of St John of God in our community and the large number of local staff who work at that hospital, combined with the Richmond and Glenbrook RAAF bases and the past and present personnel who live locally, means there is a really strong awareness of the need for things to change in the way that we support defence personnel and veterans who struggle with their mental health. There is a strong recognition that we need to change things so they don't kill themselves.

I know from the conversations that I've had with personnel and veterans within my community, where they sometimes do disclose their own challenges or talk about those who have lost their struggles, that this is a very real issue. I've also spoken with veterans and their advocates from the RSL who have been guiding people through the processes of the Department of Veterans' Affairs. I'll never forget one young man who was applying for assistance to transition into civilian life and move on with his career plans. He brought me his file, which was at least 40 centimetres thick, and he was in the early stages of trying to get the assistance that he needed. He was coping with those documents and having to provide more and more reports and documents, all while battling the challenges of mental health issues that were as a result of his service. I looked at that pile and shook my head and just wondered, 'How could we have let it come to this?'

The overwhelming nature of dealing with the Department of Veterans' Affairs is a common theme when we're talking about suicide within this community, and it struck a chord with me when Julie-Ann Finney—the mother of David, who died last year—who has been such a fierce advocate for a royal commission, said:
The claims process is so difficult and so complex and so long-term that by that time they're not coping and we're ending up with all these suicides …

The wait for appropriate treatment, the stigma about even disclosing mental health problems, the myriad issues that contribute to the loss of a life: these are the things that do need to be exposed publicly, not behind closed doors. And families need to be able to share their stories, as do those who have survived suicide attempts. In fact, they have some of the best insights for us to learn from. What stopped them? What actually worked?

The latest data is another horrible reminder of the extent of this issue. The most recent data that I saw was from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. It releases an annual update. There were 465 suicide deaths of serving and recently discharged Defence Force personnel in Australia between 2001 and 2018. We know that those currently serving in the armed forces full time, or in the reserves, are considerably less likely to die by suicide than men in the general population. But, among ex-serving men, the figure jumps considerably, to 21 per cent more likely than other Australian men, so that it's 28 deaths per 100,000. While the rate of suicide amongst ex-serving women is lower than for men, it is still more than twice the rate of women in the general population. We sometimes forget these women who have served their country in just the same way men have; they are suffering, too. The report also shows—which we know and this parliament knows well, as it is often the case—that men who are discharged for medical reasons are more likely to die by suicide than men who voluntarily discharge. Hence our raising these issues time and again in this place, on both sides of the parliament.

For those reasons, Labor and I supported the calls last year from families and advocates for a royal commission into veterans suicide. We were disappointed that the government didn't. When the government made its announcement of a National Commissioner for Defence and Veteran Suicide Prevention earlier this year, we cautiously welcomed it as a step in the right direction, if not ideal. What's happened in the nine months since then is that many of the families whose sons and daughters have, tragically, taken their own lives have increasingly become worried about the powers of a national commissioner—that it won't be, as the government has claimed, better than a royal commission. My view is that a permanent body like a national commissioner would be much better informed by a royal commission being held, and that is what we will continue to urge this government to do. We will work through the details of the national commissioner, but, fundamentally, a royal commission will remain one of our principles. Only a royal commission can, for example, have absolutely unambiguous powers to hold public hearings, to summon witnesses, to compel the production of evidence, to pursue disciplinary proceedings, to refer charges of criminal or official misconduct to the appropriate authorities and to make recommendations for compensation.

I have to say I was a bit concerned earlier today to hear the member for Lyne say that a royal commission is a big hoopla and then things just fade away. We don't think of royal commissions in that way, and I really hope those opposite don't either. Look at what has come out of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse—a truly significant process for the people who experienced child sexual abuse within institutions. And we are still, with them, fighting through to ensure that the compensation they need emotionally and financially is delivered to them.

I certainly hope it's not the attitude that the other side of this parliament has when I think about the current royal commissions underway. There's the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability. That needs to lead to genuine changes, as does the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements, which is crucial to communities like mine who suffered so much in the last summer bushfires. And then there's the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. There's no way we will let that be anything other than a fundamental changing point—a place where we can finally fix a system that is so flawed and is letting down so many people. That's the sort of power a royal commission can have. My view is that the families of people who have suffered mental illness that lead to suicide deserve the respect of this place—that is, to put it before a royal commission.

I think it goes to one of the key differentiators of what we would like to see to what the government's proposing and that is that a royal commission can provide closure, healing and restorative justice for the Defence and veteran community and their families. I'm sure nearly everyone in this place will have had conversations with family members of people who've served in the Defence Force. I haven't recently spoken to a family member who has lost someone, but I have recently spoken to family members who can see the toll that serving in the Defence Force has taken on their child—for example, a grown man paying the price for the choices that he made—that we asked him to make—to serve this country and to be prepared to defend and to die for his country. When he comes back home, what his family deserves and expects is that we support him to live, and to live a rich life beyond his service in the Defence Force.

I believe only a full royal commission can really help us pull together the threads that are needed with the resources. We're talking of the financial resources that come with a royal commission and of the time frame that it brings with a clear start date and a clear end date. One of the concerns I have, when I look at the coronial inquests that happen into the individual cases of people who commit suicide having left the Defence Force, is that this national commission will end up being not much more than a glorified federal coroner. That would be a real lost opportunity.

Let's think about how we could move forward about this. The devil will be in the detail, which is why we have committed to having the Senate look at the detail of this to, most importantly, work through with the people who have fought to have their voices heard, like Julie-Ann Finney, the Bird family and other people whose children have taken their own lives, especially those who have battled with the DVA over a long period of time. The detail that we look at in the legislation will be absolutely key.

We also think there should be further genuine consultation with stakeholders. They should be able to scrutinise the proposal. I meet with, for instance, the advocates who are part of Windsor RSL. They are those who support families going through all sorts of processes with the DVA. These are people who have lived experience not only of being in the Defence Force but also of trying to navigate the complexities of getting assistance for people who are transitioning and have left the forces. They have extraordinary insights into things that can really make a difference. They don't often get their voices heard in a coronial inquest, but a royal commission would give them a place to do that. In lieu of a royal commission, a Senate inquiry into this bill will provide an opportunity for them to give us their insights. And that would allow us to show the community that, as a parliament, we are genuine in wanting to tackle this scourge of suicide. It really is a blight on our name as a parliament that we allow this to go ahead without doing absolutely everything in our powers to do.

There is still time for the Prime Minister to reconsider his view and to allow there to be a royal commission. It isn't too late. Having to appoint an interim and temporary national commissioner without a full terms of reference is obviously difficult. Whoever becomes the permanent commissioner would be so empowered by the findings of a royal commission. It would create a terms of reference for that commission that would unquestionably have the support of the veteran community and of this place. So I would urge the Prime Minister to consider that. We want to work in a bipartisan way on this matter. It's a very synergistic coincidence, I suppose, that today is headspace day. I heard the member for Ryan speaking about headspace yesterday. We know the lengths we need to go to to encourage young people to seek help early. We need to look and see what we can do so that veterans and those serving in the defence forces are able to seek help.

We remain absolutely committed to a royal commission, whether the Prime Minister changes his mind or not. It's what defence members deserve, it's what veterans deserve and it's what their families deserve. We ask so much of them. They