Scott Lynda: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
Scott Lynda: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8075] 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT (NZ National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is with pleasure that I take another call on Part 1 which has nine clauses and deals with some very important issues. I want to talk about something that Judy Turner brought up—that is the petition concerning Dr Monty Hornbeck. We are talking about scopes of practice and how they were debated in that petition. Dr Monty Hornbeck is an American dermatologist who had great difficulty getting registration in New Zealand and the reasons for that were multiple. One of the major problems is that the college will recognise the qualifications of people who become specialists but it will not recognise their undergraduate qualifications. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: It’s existing law. 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT 
: Yes that is exactly right. Perhaps the member would like to take a bit of time to listen and we will get to the point. The statement was made that this bill will improve the whole situation. But the problem is that— 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Who was the Minister who paid for immigrant doctors to get the training they need? 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT 
: The member over there continually chips away. She does not understand what she is talking about. She knows nothing about health and does not bother to listen. We have to listen to her innocuous laughter all the time but that is the way she is. 
The definition of scopes of practice came up when talking about the petition concerning Dr Monty Hornbeck. I have a friend who is a geriatrician and it was the same for him—his undergraduate qualification was not recognised. This bill is going to correct scopes of practice so that a doctor practises in a very narrow scope and that is exactly what the medical profession is concerned about—that each individual doctor will have to have an individual scope of practice in which he or she can practise. Imagine the bureaucracy! Imagine identifying every area in which each individual can work as opposed to other areas. 
If we were looking at some professional groups in terms of codes of practice there may be one broad scope. If we look at this side of the Chamber we see Dr Paul Hutchison who is an obstetrician and gynaecologist and myself who is a geriatrician. The medical profession is very diverse in its specialties. That has always occurred through qualification and development of one’s professional standards and qualification. 
The medical profession is extremely concerned about scopes of practice. I will read from what Ian Powell who is not much of a pal of the Ministers any more has to say: “Senior doctors are very disappointed that the Government has proceeded with the controversial Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill …”. That was said after the bill had had its second reading. “Associate Health Minister Ruth Dyson incorrectly claimed that the Bill was based on the successful Medical Practitioners Act. This is untrue and she has been badly advised. In some key features especially the untested scopes of practice the Bill is seriously inferior and risks compromising the health and safety of the public.” That person used to be a very good friend of the Minister but that is what he is saying. 
This bill should have been consulted on much more widely and should have been developed far more before this happened. We have a bill that nobody will be happy with. The invisible Minister of Health in the chair never takes a call or gets to her feet. Every time anybody rings her up for a comment the Minister is “not available for comment”. The Minister of Health has not overseen this legislation well. Her very best of friends are now saying that it is an incompetent piece of legislation and that the Minister is incompetent to have allowed it to come back into the House without trying to improve it. This bill should not have been a political bill. It should have been improved upon and it could have been. Had there been more consultation—consultation meaning that people were listened to and that their concerns were listened to—we would not be in the situation tonight where we have the doctors wanting to be totally out of this bill. They do not want a bar of it. 
It will be up to the National Government in 2 years’ time when we are in power to sort out the mess when we do the 3-year review. There will be a 3-year review and there will be an absolute mess to clean up.