Roy Heather: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Roy Heather: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8153] 
HEATHER ROY (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I agree with everything that the member over here in the Opposition has just said but I will go back and look some more at clause 116 which deals with the election of people to the authorities. I will do that because when Richard Prebble spoke earlier I think that some members in this Committee did not take him very seriously. I am not looking at anyone in particular but there were some members who did not take him seriously. The points that Richard Prebble made were right on the dot because I showed them to him. 
Doctors dentists and pharmacists currently have elections for their registration bodies and professional bodies. 
Steve Chadwick 
: A good thing too! 
HEATHER ROY 
: It is a good thing. At the Health Committee the majority of people wanted to retain that and clause 116(3) states that regulations made under this Act may provide that one or more of the health practitioners who are to be appointed will be elected. But the Minister’s intention has been made very clear in a newspaper article in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 on 22 July which stated: “Mrs King said yesterday that she did not favour elections for such bodies” and she has told us why that is. 
We in the ACT party say—and I think the National Party and New Zealand First agree with us as well—that that is not right. We believe that the elections are very important for a number of reasons several of which have been outlined earlier in the debate on the bill. We have said that it is very important that the environment needs to be right in order for patient safety to be paramount. However something that we have not mentioned previously is the credibility of the registration bodies among the health professionals—the people whom they govern. For the public to be assured of the competence—that term has not been defined but we will not go there again—of health professionals the health professions must be able to have professional self-regulation. We have heard a lot about that. The other thing is that the professions have to be satisfied that they are working in an environment that is conducive to public safety. 
We heard from many groups at the select committee. In fact an overwhelming number of the submissions were adamant that holding elections was very important and that even in the case of those professions that have chosen for the moment to nominate people to the Minister for appointment to these authorities the ability should remain for them to have elected members should they so choose. The dentists the doctors and the pharmacists certainly want to continue in that vein; they have been very specific about that. 
It was interesting to hear the Minister when she jumped to her feet just before the tea break and talked about the doctors. She specifically mentioned doctors. The doctors are so disillusioned with this bill that they do not want to be part of it any more. When the discussion papers before the bill was drafted came forward and even when the bill was initially put forward they were very keen to be part of it. They thought the bill was a good piece of legislation and that it was certainly heading in the right direction. But as time has elapsed and their concerns have not been listened to they have decided they do not want to be part of it any longer. One of their big concerns is that they can no longer elect their own people to the authorities. 
We elect people to the district health boards. I ask the Minister how we know that we are electing the right people to the district health boards. [ 
Interruption 
] I ask Mrs Pettis who is trying to interject whether that means we will have to abandon those elections as well. If we continue to have elected district health board members it should follow through that the professional authorities if they want to should be able to have elections. But no the Minister said that that is no good. 
In looking further into this part and I refer particularly to clauses 119 to 125 we see that those clauses concern the powers of the Minister. I think the Minister was being a bit modest earlier. She said that there would not be great power there and that even if there was she would not exercise it. However the fact of the matter is that all the professions are extremely worried about ministerial power in this bill not just in this part but right throughout the bill. They are worried that— 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: Scopes of practice! 
HEATHER ROY 
: Yes scopes of practice. They are worried in all areas about the powers of the Minister. The ability is there for an awful lot of political interference. The Minister of Health or future Ministers of Health will be able to make decisions that the Minister cannot currently make.