Apex Health has lodged a formal complaint with the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA), calling for the suspension of its updated medicinal cannabis framework introduced last week.
The clinic, which helps thousands of veteran patients to access medicinal cannabis, argues the changes create structural barriers for veterans managing chronic pain and service-related injuries. The rules were introduced without sufficient consultation with large treatment providers, it added.
The updated framework introduced mandatory in-person consultations for first-time prescriptions and certain treatment changes.
It also tightened prescriber eligibility to vocationally registered GPs and relevant specialists, while further restrictions were placed around THC dosing and product categories.
Under the revised settings, DVA will only fund dried herb products for vaporisation using a TGA-approved medical device, with THC concentration limited to 25% or less with a maximum of 2g of dried herb per day.
Patients will also be restricted to no more than three subsidised products.
Subsidies will not be available for edibles such as pastilles or gummies, or for products containing minor cannabinoids.
Apex Health’s complaint, addressed to the Secretary of the DVA, contends the practical effect of the changes is to narrow the available prescriber pool at a time when demand for DVA-funded medicinal cannabis has been increasing.
Central to Apex Health’s argument is workforce capacity.
According to the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s (TGA) Authorised Prescriber dashboard, there were 1,068 active Authorised Prescribers for Schedule 8 (THC-containing) medicinal cannabis products as of February 2026.
Apex Health estimates that once DVA’s vocational registration and specialist requirements are applied, the effective national pool of compliant prescribers falls to approximately 260–360 practitioners.
This, the clinic argues, is insufficient to support a program that, according to DVA data released under a Freedom of Information (FOI) request, funded medicinal cannabis for 7,550 veteran clients in calendar year 2024 – up from 5,384 in 2023.
Apex Health founder Tom Bailey said the key issue was whether the framework was workable in practice.
“We support safe prescribing and appropriate governance,” he said. “But if access settings significantly reduce the number of available prescribers, particularly in regional areas, that raises practical concerns about continuity of care.”
The complaint includes case studies from Hervey Bay, Toowoomba and parts of regional Victoria, where Apex Health says veterans are facing closed books, extended wait times or no locally compliant prescribers.
Concerns about access implications have also been raised externally.
Health journal The Medical Republic reported last week that Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) vice president Michael Clements – a rural GP, associate professor and defence force veteran – acknowledged the likely practical impact of the changes.
“An outcome will certainly be that veterans will no longer get a lot of those products that they are currently using (as they may find it difficult to find specialist doctors willing to agree to prescribe the same products and doses that they have currently been receiving) so will either go off them or pay privately,” Clements told the publication.
Apex Health also highlights what it describes as a policy tension between mandatory in-person consultations and state-based road traffic laws relating to THC.
Under current laws across many Australian jurisdictions, driving with any detectable level of THC is an offence, regardless of prescription status.
Bailey said that for veterans using THC-containing products for pain management, this creates a practical dilemma.
“If a veteran is compliant with their prescribed treatment, they may not be legally able to drive to attend a mandatory in-person appointment,” he said.
He argued that telehealth had previously mitigated this issue for stable patients.
A central theme of Apex Health’s submission is the role of medicinal cannabis in reducing reliance on opioids among veterans who had previously failed conventional treatments.
In a survey of 493 veteran patients enrolled in its DVA-funded Pain Management Program, 67.2% reported positive pain reduction outcomes, 74% reported improvements in mood and mental health, and approximately 52% reported reducing or ceasing opioid use.
In a cohort of 168 patients enrolled in both Apex’s Dose Administration Aid program and its medicinal cannabis program – allowing medication dispensing to be tracked – 149 were no longer receiving opioids, representing an 88.7% cessation rate.
Bailey said opioid reduction should form part of any future policy review.
“If the data shows veterans are reducing reliance on higher-risk medications and reporting improved quality of life, that’s something that should be carefully examined in any redesign of the framework,” he said.
The complaint also references DVA’s FOI response, which confirmed the department did not collect detailed clinical outcomes data specific to medicinal cannabis.
Apex Health argues that future framework changes should be informed by structured outcomes monitoring and consultation with large cohort providers.
Bailey said the clinic was not opposed to regulatory oversight but believed consultation with major providers had been limited.
“There are only a handful of telehealth providers managing a large proportion of veterans in this program,” he said.
“Engaging directly with those providers would provide DVA with clearer visibility over outcomes data and prescribing trends.”
Apex Health has called for the reinstatement of the previous framework while a revised model is developed in consultation with clinics, prescribers and veteran representatives.
The clinic has also launched a public petition seeking restoration of the previous framework, which had attracted more than 7,000 signatures at the time of publication.
Bailey said the objective was collaboration.
“We are ready to share our clinical data and work constructively with the DVA on a framework that protects both safety and access,” he said.
In response to the concerns raised by Apex Health, a spokesperson for the DVA said the updated framework reflected rapid growth in medicinal cannabis prescribing and evolving clinical evidence.
“In the context of this rapid growth, DVA is aware of concerning prescribing practices which may harm veterans’ health and wellbeing,” the spokesperson said. “These concerns are shared by regulators and professional peak bodies.”
The spokesperson said changes to the number and type of products are aimed at “reducing the risk to veterans, while the changes for providers and consultations are aimed at improving the quality of care of veterans”.
In regards to the requirement of in-person consultations, the spokesperson said: “[These] ensure that the provider/patient relationship is strong and a complete and thorough clinical assessment, including an outlining of the contraindications of medicinal cannabis, has been clearly communicated.”
The DVA added that it is aware some veterans may require assistance to attend face-to-face consultations and could provide support in those circumstances.
In terms of consultation with external providers, the DVA said it worked closely with the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing and the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) in shaping policy.
“This has contributed to DVA’s understanding of the extent of the risks associated with medicinal cannabis prescribing, particularly the safety and efficacy issues linked to high concentrations or doses, and prescribing practices that do not adequately consider a patient’s overall healthcare needs,” the spokesperson said.
The department said it did not collect clinical outcomes data specific to medicinal cannabis.