Turner Judy: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill Health and Disability Commissioner Amendment Bill Medicines Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Turner Judy: Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill Health and Disability Commissioner Amendment Bill Medicines Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:611;Page:8623] 
JUDY TURNER (United Future) 
: 
 This legislation has had a long and varied journey—that is a petition in 1999 a member’s bill in 2001 and the Cull report all of which have set the stage for what we support in the House today. This has been an adventurous legislative project. To create legislation that would provide an effective regulatory regime to protect the public from harm and that would endure well into the future is no mean feat. One of the strengths of what we now have is that it establishes a framework for practitioners who are currently not covered by law to meet a raft of regulatory standards and to gain professional credibility. Among those now waiting in the wings to be included are psychotherapists acupuncturists and a number of natural health-care practitioners. 
One of the most welcome aspects of this legislation is the new one-stop complaints structure. The old system involved multiple agencies undertaking separate investigations into the same incident with huge time delays difficult access for patients to the complaints process no centralised database to detect repeat poor practice and no powers to suspend practitioners when the public is at risk. This legislation addresses all those concerns and is consistent with the recommendations of the Cull report. 
The power-base of this legislation has been of concern to some submitters. There was of course a difference in those concerns depending on whether the submitter was a professional or a consumer. What we have ended up with is a series of provisions that empowers professional authorities and a balancing set of provisions that involves consumers and central government. After passing this legislative framework the Minister will after appropriate consultation and through Order in Council allow new professions to be added to the list of those covered by the legislation and will determine which activities should be restricted to certain practitioners. Professions will be able to appoint the members for each registration body but there is provision for elected members. 
That option is important as different professions requested different outcomes from that provision. Some did not want to have elections and others did. The either/or nature of this aspect of the legislation is a good compromise. The Minister can instigate an audit of an authority’s policies and procedures if it is concerned about its processes and the Minister can give directions to resolve disputes between professions regarding overlapping scopes of practice. It is hoped however that where overlapping scopes of practice exist the professions involved will work maturely through any issues themselves. 
Central controls on registration authorities are that each authority must have two lay members and that each authority must be separate from the association that represents a particular profession. It is interesting to note at this stage that while the doctors association had concerns about the legislation the doctors’ regulatory body the Medical Council did not and has supported it. 
The powers and responsibilities of registration authorities include setting the scopes of practice that everybody is so worried about; the power to set those is with the regulatory bodies and the professions themselves. Determining competencies and qualifications is their responsibility as is certifying individual practitioners and setting standards of clinical competence cultural competence and ethical conduct. 
There has even been some mocking of the inclusion of cultural competence as if this is some sort of new imposition on health practitioners. Hospitals have respected cultural considerations for years and no health professional wants to alienate patients through unintentional insensitive practice that leaves them feeling vulnerable or worse violated. Of course the registration authorities also ensure that professionals maintain their competence. 
United Future is pleased to support the third reading of this legislation and is pleased that there is a review clause ensuring that any tidying up that may be needed will be given due consideration. At the end of the day the best gauge we have as to the appropriateness of this legislation is feedback from some of those who are most affected by its implementation. During the Committee stage of this legislation I referred to recent communications received from many of the health professionals who immediately come under this legislation: the Dental Council the Nursing Council the Occupational Therapy Board the Dietitians Board the Psychologists Board the Opticians Board the Medical Radiation Technologists Board the Medical Laboratory Technologists Board etc. They have all supported the intention of the legislation. 
United Future is also pleased to hear of the hard work that is already well under way by professionals immediately affected by this legislation and looks forward to seeing the ongoing development of health practices not yet covered by it.