Allied health care is essential — and veterans, widows and families deserve certainty
On 12 May 2026, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) announced a $5,000 annual monetary limit on allied health services for Veteran Card holders as part of the Federal Budget.
The proposal
Taking effect on 1 July 2027, the cap on allied health services will cover services such as physiotherapy, psychology and occupational therapy. From the Government’s perspective, the policy is intended to reduce overservicing. At the same time, the Budget announced an increase in fees paid by DVA to allied health providers, described as “the largest investment in allied health fees for veterans in over 20 years.”
This proposal has drawn significant criticism and concern within the veteran community, including from war widows who hold DVA treatment cards.
To date, DVA has confirmed that card holders requiring care beyond the $5,000 limit will not be cut off. Funding may be extended above the cap where there is a valid, ongoing clinical need. However, what this means in practice remains unclear. It also appears that approval for funding beyond the cap may need to be renewed annually through a GP.
While the cap has been announced alongside a long-awaited increase in allied health provider fees—bringing DVA fees in line with the NDIS—there is a significant tension between these two policy settings. That tension has the potential to leave veterans, their families and widows worse off.
Allied health services are essential
Allied health services provided to veterans and widowed partners—such as physiotherapy, psychology and occupational therapy—are not discretionary supports; they are essential to maintaining independence, managing chronic conditions, and supporting quality of life.
While we acknowledge the Government’s investment in increasing allied health provider fees, the introduction of a $5,000 cap on services raises significant concerns.
Based on the announcement, the annual cap appears to apply not only to veterans, but to anyone with a DVA health care card, including widowed partners. Many of these widows are older, managing multiple chronic conditions, and increasingly reliant on allied health care to remain independent. For this cohort, allied health care is often preventative and maintenance-based—reducing hospitalisation, preserving mobility, and helping people remain out of aged care. Data from our recent Veteran Families Survey indicates that 51% of war widows already experience difficulty accessing health care services, 27% have experienced mental health challenges in the last 12 months, and 40% have experienced difficulty accessing mental health care. The proposed cap on allied health services is likely to further exacerbate these challenges for the widows of our veterans.
Census data indicates that veterans are four times more likely than the general population to have a long-term health condition, including arthritis and mental illness. Placing limits on allied health services that help veterans live with these long-term conditions as a result of their service is a poor way to express our nation’s gratitude. When long-term conditions are not well managed or supported, stress and pressure on veteran families also increase—particularly given that veteran families are already twice as likely as the general population to experience mental health challenges.
While we accept that there may be some overservicing occurring in the sector, a blanket cap on services is not the right way to address it when the evidence shows that need remains high. Although there appears to be a mechanism for DVA to approve service levels above the financial cap, we are highly concerned that this requirement will introduce additional administrative burden, often falling to the unwell individual or their family at a time when their capacity to navigate complex systems may already be limited.
The lack of clarity around how “clinical need” will be defined and approved may lead to delays, disrupted treatment pathways, and increased anxiety for widows and families seeking to maintain continuity of care. For those in regional and rural areas, where access to providers is already constrained, these challenges are further amplified.
We are also concerned that the policy may inadvertently increase the burden on families and informal carers. Where care is delayed, reduced or uncertain, families are often required to fill the gap—impacting their own wellbeing, financial security and ability to continue providing support.
Finally, this is a confusing policy that sends mixed signals to the community. On one hand, it says fees paid to allied health providers are being increased to improve access to services; on the other, it places an annual cap on the value of services a person can access. These two elements work against each other and may have the net effect of reducing the number of sessions a veteran or widowed partner can access from 1 July 2027.
Reforms to accessing allied health care for veterans and widowed partners must be designed in a way that reflects the lived experience of veterans, widows and their families, and does not compromise the stability of the care they rely on to live well and remain connected in their communities.
What we want to see
First, we want to see the annual monetary limit removed from the policy altogether. If that does not occur, the annual monetary limit should, at a minimum, be removed for Gold Card holders. If the Government proceeds with the policy, we must see the following safeguards:
- Continuity of care safeguarded – ensuring there is no interruption to clinically endorsed treatment once it has been established.
- Streamlined approval pathways – multi-year or standing approval pathways for veterans and widowed partners with chronic health conditions or high support needs, particularly for ageing veterans and widows and for veterans who meet the threshold for a Gold Card.
- Minimise administrative burden – ensuring DVA designs and delivers a process that does not rely on family or carer intervention and is simple, timely and transparent.
- Clear operational guidance – publishing clear criteria on what constitutes a “valid clinical need”, who determines it, and the relevant approval timeframes and review processes.
- Ongoing monitoring and transparent reporting – regular reporting from DVA on implementation of the policy, including key metrics such as whether it is reducing overservicing, approval rates, access issues, and the impact on older veterans, regional veterans, and widowed partners.
