In February 2026, Apex Health surveyed 1,141 Australian veterans about their experience with the healthcare system built to support them. What came back was not a report of minor frustrations. It was a picture of a system in serious trouble — and a community losing faith in the institutions that are supposed to have their backs.

Australia makes a promise to the men and women who serve this country: that their health, wellbeing and quality of life will be looked after. What this survey reveals is the growing distance between that promise and the reality veterans are living every day.

The findings are not easy reading. But they are important — and they need to be heard.

What 1,141 Veterans Are Telling Us

This was not a small sample or a narrow slice of the veteran community. Over eleven hundred veterans responded to this survey, and the results were consistent across every major finding. When numbers are this clear and this consistent, they stop being statistics and start being a message.

A Collapse in Trust

Trust is the foundation of any healthcare system. Without it, even well-designed services struggle to function effectively. And right now, that foundation is dangerously weak.

When trust in an institution falls to 2.6 out of 10, it begins to influence behaviour — whether veterans seek care at all, whether they adhere to treatment, and whether they engage with the system or quietly disengage from it entirely. This is not a satisfaction score. It is a warning sign.

Mental Health Is at a Critical Low

Perhaps the most confronting finding in the entire report. Veterans report an average mental health rating of just 2.8 out of 10. At the same time, more than 40% say they cannot reliably access mental health support when they need it.

Australia has conducted multiple parliamentary inquiries into veteran suicide rates. Invested in programs, launched initiatives, made commitments. Yet here, in February 2026, veterans are telling us their mental health sits at 2.8 out of 10 and they cannot reliably get help when they need it. That should demand immediate government action.

Decisions Are Being Made Without Them

Almost 9 in 10 veterans say they are not meaningfully consulted before major policy changes. This is not a perception issue — it is a structural one. Decisions affecting treatment pathways, access and eligibility are being made without the consistent input of those directly impacted.

Over time, this creates a disconnect between policy intent and lived experience. And it is often in that gap where trust deteriorates most rapidly.

Choice Is Being Eroded

The gap between what veterans expect and what they experience when it comes to healthcare choice is one of the starkest findings in this report. 93.5% of veterans believe they should be able to choose their own healthcare provider. Yet 65% say they do not have genuine choice in practice.

Choice in healthcare is not simply about preference. It underpins continuity of care, therapeutic relationships, and patient confidence. The relationship between a veteran and their treating GP should be of utmost importance to the Department — but recent policy changes suggest it is not being treated that way.

Access Is Getting Harder

Nearly one in three veterans report delays accessing treatment, with administrative burden and policy restrictions identified as the key barriers. For a population managing complex, often chronic conditions, these delays are not inconveniences — they are clinical risks.

When the system becomes too hard to navigate, veterans disengage. Many self-medicate. Many receive no treatment at all. These are not hypotheticals — they are outcomes the survey data points to directly.

Medicinal Cannabis: Strong Support, Tightening Access

Three in four veterans support DVA funding for medicinal cannabis — particularly as a treatment for chronic and complex pain that has not responded to other interventions. For many veterans living with serious service-related injuries, it has been a genuinely life-changing treatment.

Yet policy changes introduced in February 2026, without consultation with industry practitioners or veterans, have created impractical access hurdles through medically unnecessary restrictions. Veterans currently using medicinal cannabis have been clear about the consequences of being forced to stop: a return to self-medication, excessive opioid use, and declining mental health outcomes. These are real risks, not theoretical ones.

A Pattern, Not an Isolated Failure

Individually, each of these findings is concerning. Together, they point to something more significant: a system experiencing cumulative pressure across trust, access and responsiveness.

This is not about a single policy decision or an isolated failure point. It is about a pattern — decisions made without consultation, restrictions introduced without clear alignment to patient need, and structural barriers that accumulate over time rather than being resolved.

The risk is not only declining satisfaction. It is gradual disengagement from the system itself. And increasingly, that is exactly what veterans are telling us is happening.

Our Recommendations

To address these findings, the following actions should be implemented as a matter of government urgency.

1. Enshrine veteran choice of treating practitioner as a non-negotiable principle across all DVA-funded care.

2. Establish a clear, consistent, and legislated definition of “treating practitioner” to prevent arbitrary exclusion of providers.

3. Reverse changes to the Medicinal Cannabis Framework by reinstating telehealth access and removing medically unnecessary prescribing restrictions.

4. Remove structural barriers that direct veterans toward DVA-appointed providers over their own chosen clinicians.

5. Ensure telehealth access is available on equal terms for all providers, not limited to government-contracted services.

6. Align fee schedules with the true cost of service and ensure parity between DVA-appointed providers and independent clinicians.

7. Fund and reduce administrative burden on clinicians to prevent provider withdrawal from veteran care.

8. Guarantee access to clinically appropriate diagnostic investigations regardless of provider type.

9. Eliminate bottlenecks by allowing veterans to access assessments through their own practitioners rather than a single contracted provider.

10. Prohibit the overriding of clinical judgement by administrative processes, particularly in determining condition stability and treatment pathways.