Craig LizDr LIZ CRAIG (Labour): Thank you Madam Chair. In my contribution I'd just like to focus on clause 28 inserting new sections 122A and 122B which talk about the requirement for performance reviews for responsible authorities because at the moment we've got a situation where the general public really doesn't have any idea about how efficiently or effectively responsible authorities are carrying out their required functions. I think with performance reviews what they provide is that valuable opportunity at a point in time for organisations to reflect and think about how effectively they are functioning and not only thinking about their strengths and opportunities but also taking a good look at some of their processes and policies and thinking about how they could be improved. So what new sections 122A and 122B talk about is the fact that now these responsible authorities will be required every five years to undertake a performance review with that first review happening within the first three years and what the process that's outlined would be is that the Ministry of Health needs to consult with those responsible authorities about the terms of reference for that review and also appoint an independent reviewer. What we've talked about in the Health Committee and one of the recommendations that came through was adding some extra sections there about who else the ministry might consult when they're thinking about those terms of reference because there's a lot of other organisations—for example professional bodies—that are very familiar with the work that the responsible authority does. Having their input into it so that those terms of reference are quite effective in identifying what some of those functions of that responsible authority are—so that's that additional bit of emphasis there so that we can get a much more effective review. But the other thing is it's about transparency. So once completed the reviewer needs to provide a report back through to both the Minister and the responsible authority and what they have to outline is the conclusions they've reached but also any recommendations for the responsible authority to change. With that transparency as soon as possible that responsible authority needs to put that report up on their website so that everybody's aware of what that review identified and those potential recommendations for future change. The original bill though—what it didn't include was any mechanism whereby that responsible authority had to take into account any of those recommendations. So what has been included subsequently was the requirement that that responsible authority in their annual reports immediately after receiving that information—what they need to do is in that report outline which of those recommendations they plan to implement and also the timeline for that implementation. But if they decide that they aren't going to implement some of those recommendations then they need to outline why. So I think what this does in terms of the bill in this particular area is it's going to make it much easier for members of the general public to understand how effectively these responsible authorities are performing their functions. The onus is on that responsible authority to make sure that that information is available to the general public but also to outline very clearly and take very seriously those recommendations and how it's going to implement them and if it decides that it won't implement particular recommendations it needs to be very very clear about why. So I think this actually adds a lot in terms of the bill in terms of the way that we oversee our medical practitioners and our health practitioners and their competency within the sector. Thank you Madam Chair.