Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (7 December) . . Page.. 3917 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

was recognised in lieu of qualifications. Private sector psychologists could have previous experience taken account of. Public sector psychologists, under the government's bill, are now being denied that opportunity.

It is equally appropriate, however, and obvious to all members that if public sector psychologists are to be required to register they be given the same provisions. Why would you discriminate? The amendment that I proposed clearly defines a government psychology employee as a person employed by the ACT or Commonwealth to provide psychology services immediately before the date the part comes into operation. It simply cannot be interpreted to apply to private sector psychologists.

The transitional provisions, importantly, require the Psychologists Board to assess the competency of each government psychology employee prior to registration. They must be assessed by the board. The board still makes the decision; the board is the arbiter. Clearly, the process protects the public against any person being registered whose professional standard is not at an adequate level.

I have another question. What is the implication of passing this bill without my amendment? This comes to the crux of the matter again and puts the lie to some of the claims being made by the minister. From the date the government bill is gazetted it will be illegal for a government employee who is not registered with the Psychologists Board to provide a psychology service within the ACT.

Without this amendment, any employee of the Commonwealth or of the territory who provides a psychology service within the ACT must cease to do so unless they are registered with the board. That is the case regardless of the competence of the individuals or of their existing registration in other jurisdictions. That is the situation we have and this is not what Mr Moore just said.

From the day the bill passes, no school counsellor, for instance, can provide a psychology service irrespective of whether they are registered in another jurisdiction or they have the competencies required. If, for example, you provide a psychology service as a Centrelink, hospital or court employee but have chosen not to be registered in the ACT, the government's bill requires you to stop doing so immediately the legislation is passed. There is no transition either; you go cold turkey.

In the case of school counsellors, 23 employees will have to cease performing the full range of their duties - this is the point that Mr Kaine was interested in - from the date of gazettal of the bill. Of those 23 people, the government believes that 13 are eligible to be registered but require time to do so. There is an impact for you: on the day of gazettal, 23 school counsellors could not fulfil the range of duties they currently perform.

Thirteen of them could be registered if they applied, but they would still require time and they are being denied the time. They are being told by this government that they are to be discriminated against vis - a - vis their private sector colleagues of six years ago. As the minister said, approximately 40 school counsellors have chosen to gain registration from the ACT board. The board permitted this to occur on the basis that school counsellors provide a psychology service.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .