Kanongata'a-Suisuiki AnahilaANAHILA KANONGATA'A-SUISUIKI (Labour): Tēnā koe Madam Assistant Speaker. Kia orana. It's a privilege to stand and speak on the first reading of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill. Can I remind the House—because we've heard a lot of accolades being accorded to the Opposition in terms of this being their idea—that the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act came in in 2003 and according to the Hon Aupito Su'a William Sio I understand that it was a Labour Government that brought in this Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act in 2003.Can I remind the House that the purpose of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act of 2003 is to protect the health and safety of members of the public by providing for mechanisms to ensure that health practitioners are competent and fit to practise their professions." So it's not a mere technicality which some of the people on the other side spoke about as in "It's technical and it's not important." The purpose of this Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill implements the recommendations as has been spoken of of 2009 and 2012. It repeals the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance 2003 as I've spoken about.My conversation tonight is about the changes that this will bring about but before I do that I want to talk about a personal experience I had yesterday in terms of entering the health system. I don't have medical health insurance because I believe that we have one of the best health systems in the world. That's why I don't have medical health insurance.So yesterday—I just want to acknowledge the cervical screening system in New Zealand where women get a notice about when they're due for a cervical screening. So yesterday it was my turn. I got my notice—time to screen—so I took my health as a priority just like it's a priority for this Government to ensure that New Zealand's health is provided for by practitioners that are credible through a system that ensures that those people who say they are practitioners are also credible. So I went into my GP to get my cervical screening done. I'm not sure about the male gender of this House—about how they might feel about the vulnerability one has when you're going into the general practitioner to conduct a smear test. When you are in the presence—I was advised when I first went for the screening actually when I first had a child that you leave your modesty at the front door and you pick it up on your way out. Yeah you pick it up on your way out—when you leave. But what they don't tell you when you do that is what happens—who is the person who is in charge of you?You are so vulnerable. You want to ensure—which is what this amendment brings about. You want to ensure that when you're at your most vulnerable—we have one life and health is important. If we don't have good health actually we can't live as normal human beings.So what we want to know when we're going in to see our doctor is (1) that they know what they're doing (2) that there's an authority that tells us that these people know what they're doing (3) that there's a place that we can complain to when we feel that this practitioner is not providing a service that is a credible service and (4) that there is a place that has authenticated a practitioner to be a credible practitioner—that they actually too have a health check. So I see this amendment the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill as a health check of (1) the practitioner (2) a health check of the system and (3) a health check of those authorities that are charged with ticking that my GP actually meets all the qualifications to have a look at every part of me when I'm leaving the modesty at the front door.So the things that this amendment will do—I think I've spoken enough about my personal experience. And might I say my doctor Dr Soshamma George at the Mt Wellington Family Health Centre did a wonderful job because while I was at it she said "OK while you're here we'll get your annual warrant of fitness check done." So we got my warrant of fitness done—tick tick tick tick tick—and well I think that I trust that every general practitioner does that to everyone. When you're going in to just see one thing she'll see that you haven't done your bloods and everything else and they'll say "Oh while you're here we'll do that as well."So what the recommendations of the 2012 strategic review aimed at providing were (1) tangible evidence of responsible authorities' performance (2) better visibility of decisions about practitioner practice (3) greater recognition of the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and cooperation and (4) better workforce information. I just want to start by talking about tangible evidence of responsible authorities. It talks about the responsibilities of authorities—those who register and certify the competence of those health professionals. Currently there is no way for the public to be assured that these authorities are carrying out their functions as intended by the Act. So the bill will introduce a five-yearly performance review for these responsible authorities. Not only just that but the bill will allow the review to be conducted by independent reviewers who are assessing it against the indicators developed by the Ministry of Health in consultation with the responsible authorities.I reckon the underpinning aim of this bill is that the health profession or the health sector should not work in isolation in terms of providing measures to make sure that those people that those agencies who are to certify the health professions are actually reviewed by independent people that we can trust and rely on their recommendations once they've done the review.The second point is about the better visibility of decisions about practitioner practice. As a registered social worker I have a competency certificate that says that I can practise as a social worker in this country. I went through a whole process to get to that place. So I speak from a place of understanding bringing an insight of what one needs to do to be competent to be clear and that's certified to be a confident practitioner. So what this bill will do is it will ensure better information about disciplinary decisions. At the moment the public has limited information about responsible authority decisions as they relate to complaints about registered health practitioners and the process for making these decisions. The bill will require responsible authorities to release information about decisions they make on practitioner practice to the person who has notified them about the concerns about the practitioner's competence. So basically what that means is that if I make a complaint about my GP I get the information about what's happening with the complaint. So that is about continuing on what the aim of this Government—the direction this Government is going in. It is about transparent government which means a transparent health sector and that's what this amendment intends to do.Ultimately the greater transparency about decision making will improve public confidence in the process of responsible authorities and is consistent with protocols followed by the Health and Disability Commissioner and overseas regulatory authorities. What I also like about the amendments to this bill is that the authorities that had—I'll just get that one through before my time is up because I think it's important. It clarifies that the responsible authorities are responsible for meeting the administrative cost of the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal. So that would mean that the cost in terms of the practitioner will be fair and that actually the responsibility of the cost lies with the health practitioner's authority."