4 Field Regiment (SVN) 'Old Boys' Sep 25 Newsletter

a bit strange. Even stranger I thought, was that one was with Transport in Vietnam - how could he have developed PTSD? More on that manner of thinking later. Anyway, I had not long retired when I saw in the papers a notice calling for applications to join the VRB. That grabbed my attention, I hadn’t heard of the VRB but with an interest in military things generally and being open to part-time work, it looked interesting. I did the research and everything about the job seemed attractive - the subject matter, the flexible conditions and the remuneration; and it seemed I had the qualifications. So I applied and got the job. Later the national boss of the VRB (Bill Rolfe) told me that he had also been seeking an ex-baggy arse/private soldier like me as he had concerns, and regular complaints, that the typical Boards around the country were daunting for applicants as they comprised very senior former officers while the majority of applicants were ex-private soldiers or junior NCOs. I guess many of you would have known, or known of, Bill Rolfe. He was a platoon commander with 2 RAR during the 1970-71 tour of HQ and 107 Batteries, and he and another platoon commander each lost both legs in the same mine incident. Bill was a good bloke and went on to be the Repatriation Commissioner. He died some years ago. So, here are just a few of my experiences from serving on the VRB and some of the lessons learnt. Firstly, for those not familiar with VRB hearings, they are free and non- adversarial; applicants can’t be legally represented at the hearing, but can have a lawyer prepare their case or have their lawyer accompany them at the hearing but not as a legal representative. So the hearings are meant to be a low-key, comfortable setting. Most applicants have an advocate to present their case - most commonly these are from an ex-service organisation and free of charge. The Board is a panel of three - a “Senior” who is a lawyer having legal oversight of the process, a “Services Member” nominated by an ex-service organisation and bringing service experience and perspective, and a “Member” who is meant to bring independent, community balance and perhaps relevant expertise and experience (such as medical qualifications). I was a Member. The Board’s role was to take a fresh and independent look at the case and make the correct or “best” decision - to “affirm” the original decision (agree with it), to “set aside” the original decision and substitute a new decision, or to “vary” the original decision in some way. Importantly too, as an appeals tribunal we didn’t get to see the claims that went straight through successfully at the primary level. Instead all our claims had been firstly rejected by DVA (strictly speaking it was by the Repatriation Commission) so an initial step was to examine their reasons for rejection; but not to get too hung up on their reasons for we were there to have a fresh look at the overall application. I soon found out it was hard work and you earned every bit of the remuneration. The normal case load was three hearings a day, so 15 cases a week. There could be one or two fewer if some individual cases were particularly complex. You had to pre-read and be familiar with the file material for every case - this was essential so you had a focus going into the hearing on the key issues that needed to be explored; and it was owed to the applicant to show that the Board was fully examining his case. Typical files were about 20 to 30 pages, many several hundred pages - it was a lot of close reading and a lot to digest. And you often had to research some background aspects of a case - historical, medical etc. Probably the hardest task was that for every hearing a Board member was