Warren-Clark AngieANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): It's a pleasure to rise and speak on the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill. I have to first note that it was a very collegial process. Our team worked together really well and I mean that across the House. We had some very quality submissions 49 in total and 23 came to submit to us. I learnt a lot from that process as well. So I'd like to thank the select committee members and the excellent and professional work of the officials to craft and hone this bill. We've heard that there were two reviews in 2009 and 2012. So I'd also like to commend the Minister the Hon Dr David Clark for actually bringing this bill to the House.Time is short so I propose to speak very briefly to three sections of this bill—first and foremost the modernising of the practising certificate process. I bring this up and others have as well: it's changing section 29 and section 31 respectively of the principal Act. It's important because the thing that I learnt was that there are over 130000 health practitioners out there each and every one of them receiving their health practising certificate of whatever nature in paper. It is very cumbersome not so good for the environment but also quite easy to store somewhere and lose. So it's really good that these practising certificates can be online can come by email and also that they will be searchable online which is awesome. It means that we can be assured if we need to look for a practising certificate that we can see that that person is in fact there.The second aspect of this bill that I'm delighted about is the option for dealing with practitioners who have been found guilty of an offence. A new clause 13B in 67A has been inserted to allow the authorities discretion in deciding how to deal with a practitioner who has been found guilty of an offence. The professional conduct committee or with the consent of the practitioner can order that practitioner to undergo examination treatment counselling or therapy. Now that is in line absolutely with what we believe here in the Labour Party and our Government—that treatment is often a better and more appropriate response than the removal for example of someone who might have studied for 12 years or 15 years to get where they are and for one small incident they may lose their practising certificate.I think the community also finally would be particularly interested and pleased with the ability of the responsible authority to issue an interim suspension if a health practitioner has engaged in conduct that is being investigated or prosecuted if that authority—and it's quite a high threshold—believes that that conduct poses a risk of serious harm to the public. So this may be an allegation of sexual misconduct for example. We've also changed—under clause 69A there needs to be no prior notice given to the suspension for that practitioner. So they get issued this immediately. However due to the nature of this and natural justice this matter must be heard within 20 working days which provides for natural justice for the practitioner but it also supports the public safety.There's so much more that I want to note about this bill; however I've taken up all my time. I absolutely commend this bill to the House and I thank you.