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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Thursday, 1 July 2004) . . Page.. 3192 ..

I will be moving to a government amendment later. That being said, I thank the government for putting this amendment forward and we are happy to support it.

Amendment agreed to.

MR WOOD (Minister for Disability, Housing and Community Services, Minister for Urban Services, Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Minister for Arts and Heritage, and Acting Minister for Health) (6.08): I move amendment No 2 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 3240].

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 15, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 16 to 21, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 22.

MS TUCKER (6.09): I seek leave to move together amendments Nos 1 and 2 circulated in my name.

Leave granted.

MS TUCKER: I move amendments Nos 1 and 2 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 3242].

My first amendment ensures that, at the very least, no regulations can be made in regard to a health profession without referring the matter to the relevant board or representative group. In the case of midwives, for example, until there is a board, the Australian College of Midwives would seem to be the appropriate group. In regard to pharmacists, the Pharmacists Board, which already exists, would be a part of the process. Similarly in the case of psychologists, who are truly concerned by some of the implications for their wide-ranging profession of being been incorporated into a strict health professionals regime.

My second amendment makes these regulations effectively allowable. That cannot take effect until the Assembly has had an opportunity to disallow them. Of course, the problem with instruments such as these is that the Assembly can more certainly find itself in the firing line. In this case, however, we are dealing with fairly complex issues and any decisions on those regulations have to have ongoing implications, so the extra scrutiny is of real benefit.

The concern that psychologists will all be defined as clinical psychologists through this legislation can be addressed through the regulation-making process. I have no doubt that, if there were to be any outstanding issues when these regulations are made into law, the Assembly would be well informed of the issues.

MS DUNDAS (6.10): I thank Ms Tucker for moving these amendments and I am quite happy to support them. They will make it explicitly clear that regulations and schedules

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