The Supreme Court's ban was about procedure not principle, says the Queensland health minister.
Two hours after the Supreme Court overturned his ban on puberty blockers Queensland health minister Tim Nicholls threatened to reinstate it — by 6pm Brisbane time, he had made good on his threat.
“Today the Supreme Court set aside the direction issued by the Director-General for procedural reasons, in relation to consultation,” Mr Nicholls said in his 1.23pm statement.
“The Supreme Court was concerned with the circumstances of the making of the directive, not whether a pause on Stage 1 Treatment or Stage 2 Treatment was appropriate.
“The Government’s position on this matter remains unchanged. This proposed direction would implement a restriction on the provision of Stage 1 Treatment and Stage 2 Treatment to children and adolescents under 18 years of age with Gender Dysphoria. Patients who are already on a treatment plan would remain exempt from this directive.
“The restriction would remain in effect until such time as the Government considers and acts on the outcomes of the independent review of Stage 1 and Stage 2 hormone therapies, led by Professor Ruth Vine. The Reviewers will provide a final report to the Director-General of Queensland Health by 30 November 2025.”
By 6pm the directive was back in place.
Yesterday, Justice Peter Callaghan ruled in favour of a legal challenge from a mother of a trans teenager who had argued that the ban’s directive had not been correctly lodged, making it unlawful, due to a lack of adherence to mandatory processes.
Justice Callaghan ruled in favour of this argument, outlining the government’s failure to properly consult with the state hospital and health service executives as required by Querensland law.
“I hope that they actually consult more widely with the doctors working in this area and the families that are affected by a policy like that, to actually have some understanding of how such a policy could affect them or has affected them in the last year or so,” said Dr Clara Tuck-Meng Soo, past president of the Australian Professional Association for Trans Health, before the reinstatement of the ban.
“There’s no requirement for the Queensland government to actually follow any particular advice given by the consultation.
“My concern, that is shared by some other doctors, is that the Queensland government will just do a formality of consulting, and then just go and [ban puberty blockers] anyway.”
Earlier this week, Queensland premier David Crisafulli showed his support for the ban, expressing his confidence that it was legally valid and had children’s safety in mind.
“Adjustments of this nature could not be thought to bear at all on the actual decision – already made – to suspend hormone treatment,” Justice Callaghan said in his ruling.
“The process of consultation required by … [the act] to be observed in the making of the decision was not observed.”
Related
The applicant had also questioned the directive on the notion that health director-general David Rosengren was influenced by cabinet decisions alleged as “political interference”.
The ruling also found that Dr Rosengren had not effectively communicated the directive with the necessary executives before it was announced by Mr Nicholls.
Dr Rosengren only consulted with executives for 22 minutes via video call at the same time as Mr Nicholls announced the decision.
Justice Callaghan ruled that meeting was “functionally irrelevant” and could not stand in as the necessary consultation for the directive.
This article was updated at 9am Wednesday 29 October.
