Wednesday, 18 March 2026

 David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (10:03): I lay on the table a statement of compatibility with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, (the Charter), I make this statement of compatibility with respect to the Equal Opportunity Amendment (Medical Treatment) Bill 2026.

In my opinion, the Equal Opportunity Amendment (Medical Treatment) Bill 2026, as introduced to the Legislative Council, is compatible with human rights as set out in the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview

The bill amends the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 to ensure that a person with a disability who is taking medication for a disability or receiving medical treatment for a disability cannot be discriminated against for doing so.

Human rights issues

Recognition and equality before the law (section 8)

By amending the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 the bill does not restrict any Victorians’ rights but rather enlivens section 8 of the Charter – recognition and equality before the law – by supporting the rights of Victorians receiving medical treatment for a disability or taking a prescribed medication for a disability to be free from unlawful discrimination.

The bill supports the right of people with a disability who receive medical treatment or take a prescribed medication to be treated equally under section 8 of the charter.

Conclusion

I consider that this bill is compatible with the Charter.

David Ettershank

Member for the Western Metropolitan Region

Legalise Cannabis Victoria

 David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (10:03): I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Every single day, tens of thousands of Victorians battle chronic pain. Whether people suffer from arthritis, endometriosis, autoimmune conditions or a legacy of wounds sustained in service to their community or their country, they seek nothing more than to get on with their lives – caring for their families, earning a living, enjoying a well-deserved retirement, participating in public life and contributing to their communities.

Similarly, tens of thousands of Victorians wrestle daily with the existential dread of living in this post-pandemic, globally warming, conflict-ridden world that has a devastating impact on their mental, emotional and physical wellbeing. Their aspiration to get on with their life is often hindered by their complex medical conditions.

These are a few examples of our fellow Victorians who look to our health system for support.

And despite its much-publicised flaws and inequities, we have in this country – indeed in this state – a world-class health system.

We have an incredibly skilled and dedicated health workforce, we invest billions of dollars in our health infrastructure and we have access to cutting edge pharmaceuticals and therapies.

In short, while it could always be improved, there is much to be thankful for in our access to medical treatment and medications.

How ironic is it then that those thousands of Victorians dealing with illness and injury, who access our medical system for support to get on with their lives, regularly face discrimination for simply undergoing a medical treatment or taking a prescribed medication.

But that is the current reality. Whether it be in employment, housing, education or accessing services, Victorians are not currently protected from this medical discrimination – and that is, to put it bluntly, a disgrace.

The aim of the Equal Opportunity Amendment (Medical Treatment) Bill 2026 is simple – to end the discrimination against people with a medical condition who access medical treatments or take prescribed medication to treat that condition.

Our bill reflects the recommendation of the Victorian equal opportunity and human rights commissioner to the inquiry into workplace drug testing in December 2023 that there is no explicit protection against unlawful discrimination for people taking prescribed medication or undertaking medical treatment.

Their submission was based on the many complaints and enquiries the commission receives from people facing disciplinary action or termination of employment because they are taking prescription medication.

The types of prescribed medication recorded in these complaints include opioids for pain management or sleep disorders, amphetamines prescribed by a psychiatrist for the treatment of ADHD, and medicinal cannabis.

While discrimination is not confined to the workplace, the types of discrimination commonly occurring in workplaces include being dismissed by your employer for taking prescribed medication, despite being medically cleared to perform work; testing positive for a prescribed medication during a workplace drug test and being dismissed, even though it was safe for the person to perform their role and there were no side effects from their medication; employers relying on dubious ‘health and safety’ concerns to dismiss an employee on prescribed medication, rather than making reasonable adjustments in the workplace; and stigma and discrimination around disclosure of use of prescription medication.

The commissioner identified this as an area in desperate need of reform and proposed a simple amendment to the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 to address this omission.

Our bill gives life to the commissioner’s recommendation – a recommendation that was unanimously supported by all members of the committee – government, opposition and crossbench alike. It amends the act to provide that a person with a disability who receives medical treatment or uses prescribed medication is protected.

We live in an age where our ability to treat medical conditions with new treatments, including new medications, increases every day. Not only has our understanding of how different medications and practices grown over recent years but our social and cultural perception of drugs has evolved. Drugs that were once inherently ‘evil’ are entering mainstream practice. The widespread research and use of substances – previously deemed to be dangerous – for therapeutic purposes would have been unheard of even a decade ago.

Chronic illnesses that were untreatable in previous times can now be managed, if not cured.

Medications can now treat chronic pain, decrease inflammation, soothe damaged nerves and prevent seizures. People might be prescribed analgesics, muscle relaxants, anti-seizure medication and even antidepressants to treat a range of physical and psychological conditions.

It is not uncommon for people with neurological conditions, such as autism and ADHD, to be prescribed medication to manage their symptoms, and these numbers are rising. We are seeing an increasing use of medications to treat mental health conditions.

But our laws lag behind these advances in treatments. While a person with a disability is protected from discrimination if they require physical support to manage their condition, this is not extended to people who require support in the form of medication or medical treatment.

The Equal Opportunity Amendment (Medical Treatment) Bill 2026 makes a simple but important reform to extend protection to people who receive medical treatment or use medications prescribed by a registered health practitioner.

The bill amends section 4(1) of the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 by inserting the definition of a registered health practitioner as ‘a person registered under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law to practise in a health profession within the meaning of that Law (other than as a student)’ and section 7(3) of the act by inserting:

(3A)   For the purposes of subsection (2) –

‘What is discrimination?’ –

if a person with a disability uses medication that has been prescribed to the person by a registered health practitioner for the medical treatment of that disability, using that medication is taken to be a characteristic that a person with that attribute generally has.

(3B)   For the purposes of subsection (2), if a person with a disability receives medical treatment from a registered health practitioner for that disability, receiving that treatment is taken to be a characteristic that a person with that attribute generally has …

The Equal Opportunity Act is very broad in its definition of ‘disability’. Disability is simply defined as:

(a)   total or partial loss of a bodily function; or

(b)   the presence in the body of organisms that may cause disease; or

(c)   total or partial loss of a part of the body; or

(d)   malfunction of a part of the body, including –

(i) a mental or psychological disease or disorder;

(ii) a condition or disorder that results in a person learning more slowly than people who do not have that condition or disorder; or

(e)   malformation or disfigurement of a part of the body …

It includes a disability that may exist in the future and, to avoid doubt, behaviour that is a symptom or manifestation of a disability.

I may, for example, suffer from anxiety and insomnia, which falls under partial loss of a bodily function. A health professional may prescribe medicinal cannabis – which has aided so many people in reclaiming their sleep. I should have the right to take that medication without fear of repercussions, so long as it does not pose a threat to others and is consistent with the recommendation of my registered health practitioner.

As I said, our social and cultural perception of medical treatments as well as drugs has evolved over time. We all know someone who has had cancer; we all know someone who suffers from a mental health condition. Many of us may know someone who is being treated for substance misuse. And we know that treatments and medications can have side effects or result in complications that may impact on that person’s ability to live or work to their full capacity without support, without some adjustments.

Why are these people not afforded legal protection?

Legalise Cannabis Victoria has heard from many, many people over the years who have suffered discrimination for taking medicinal cannabis, prescribed by their doctor, to treat a medical condition.

But our bill’s reach is much further. It protects all Victorians who responsibly take prescription medication from facing discrimination because of it.

If I break my leg and am required to walk on crutches, my workplace should make reasonable adjustments, even if I never fully recover. If they do not, I can seek justice under the law.

Other disabilities, particularly when it relates to mental health conditions, are often not visible. They may need to take medication that slows them down a bit, for example.

However, a person facing discrimination because they take medication to treat that condition will find access to justice far more challenging.

The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission know that the number of people who make a complaint about discrimination is merely the tip of the iceberg. Most people who experience discrimination will not proceed with a complaint because they don’t have the time, energy or resilience to go through a process at a tribunal.

It’s introducing that element of proof which is the real barrier to proving at a tribunal that the treatment they’re receiving is captured by the attribute of disability. People need to go through a lot of additional effort to prove that there has been discrimination. The lack of specific coverage for medical treatment or prescribed medication in the act increases the burden on complainants, which is already incredibly high.

We have heard from people who have felt the need to hide the fact that they are receiving treatment or taking medication for fear they will be disadvantaged. That stress and anxiety is compounded for workers who are subject to random drug tests at their workplace.

Workplaces may also have no understanding of the effects of changing medications. Flare-ups and side effects or issues with new medications can leave people feeling unwell – perhaps not to the point where they need to take a sick day but definitely leaving them feeling less than up to the job.

Or they might be a worker in our increasingly casualised workforce who is not in a position to take time off work to manage their symptoms. They may need to work from home for the day. They should not face judgement and discrimination. This would be unacceptable for a person with a physical disability. So why do we not give people with chronic conditions the same protection?

We have heard from someone with ADHD whose manager believed they were faking their symptoms. Another manager told them that ‘everyone has a bit of ADHD’ and that they just needed to ‘not let it affect them’.

They were unable to use a company car because their boss mistakenly believed that their legally prescribed medication would test positive for illicit drugs at a roadside drug test.

These attitudes are borne of ignorance and stigma and are incredibly harmful. People are reluctant to disclose their medical history or what medications they take if they believe they will be judged and face discrimination, and who can blame them?

Of course, I have more than a personal passing interest in this matter. I have experienced years of chronic pain due to back injury and, until a few years ago, an autoimmune condition polymyalgia rheumatica. That I stand here today, making this speech, has only been made possible by my access to wonderful health practitioners and sophisticated medical treatments.

And apart from the fact that I am standing in this place today moving this bill, there is absolutely nothing unique about my medical experience. It is shared daily by far, far too many Victorians.

When your morning starts with a battle to push through the pain, to summon the willpower just to get out of bed, to feed your kids, to get to work, to simply live your life with some quality, why should you also face discrimination for accessing the treatments that make that possible?

Of course, discrimination occurs in settings above and beyond the workplace. We continue to hear of people being stigmatised and discriminated against for their use of prescribed medicinal cannabis.

We know of a person admitted to hospital who had their prescribed medicinal cannabis confiscated. The patient was taking medicinal cannabis to treat fibromyalgia, which was administered in the form of a herbal vaporiser. They were not able to take their prescribed medication anywhere on the hospital grounds – including in the smoking area. No adjustments were made, no attempt to speak with the prescribing doctor – just an outright ban. Worse still, when that patient, who had a previous addiction to opiates, was denied access to their medicinal cannabis, they were offered instead the very opiates that had almost been their ruin. There’s no justification for this sort of medical bigotry.

In discussions around this proposed amendment, questions have been raised about any potential detrimental consequences to, for example, employers or service providers. By way of response, I would simply note that the Equal Opportunity Act provides a range of exemptions to the act and defences against claims of discrimination that have proven to be both robust and effective in dealing with what is, after all, a complex problem – for example, the test of ‘reasonableness’ that is applied to the modification of workplaces or work processes.

In advancing this amendment to the act, we would simply note that nothing in this bill serves to undermine the scope or integrity of the exemptions and defences provided for in the act.

Our society is ageing rapidly and we are living longer – due in no small part to the advances in medical science that have allowed us to live longer. The first of the baby boomers are now hitting 80. And we know that the need for medical treatments and medications increases exponentially as we age.

The World Health Organization estimates that roughly 1 billion people – or one in seven people – suffer from mental health disorders – generalised anxiety disorders, depression, bipolar disorder, PTSD – with wideranging symptoms that can severely impact a person’s ability to live a functional life, let alone a fulfilling one. These conditions are more often than not ameliorated through medical treatments and medications.

We need safeguards in place to ensure people’s right to access treatments that suit their needs without fear of discrimination.

People are entitled to seek healthcare services and treatment that meet their needs. In fact, that right is enshrined in the Australian Charter of Healthcare Rights.

It is time to afford Victorians who take medication or seek medical treatment compassion and understanding and, importantly, protection under the law from unlawful discrimination.

There would not be a member in this chamber who doesn’t have thousands of their constituents who experience or risk discrimination for simply accessing entirely legal and justified medical treatment and medications. Those constituents, those voters, deserve the simple, considered and modest protection recommended by our own Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and also by the Legislative Council’s joint party inquiry.

I urge members to support this bill.

 Lee TARLAMIS (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:21): I move:

That debate on this bill be adjourned for two weeks.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned for two weeks.