Page 986 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 29 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
decision makers who consider the recommendations arising from the reviews undertaken by those committees. This has an adverse effect on the effective and efficient functioning of those committees.
The new provisions in part 5, while minor and uncontroversial, present considerable practical advantages that will greatly simplify these arrangements imposed on these committees and the decision makers, helping ACT Health to meet its obligations to protect the safety of members of the public fully.
In addition to allowing a series of new provisions, this bill aligns the language of the Health Act with the national standard for credentialing and defining the scope of clinical practice. The effect is that this term “clinical privileges” is replaced with the term “scope of clinical practice”. This is necessary to bring the ACT in line with best practice requirements as followed in other Australian jurisdictions.
The first group of new provisions allows the clinical privileges committee to credential doctors and dentists and also define and grant a scope of clinical practice for doctors and dentists. This will provide better opportunities to impose restrictions on clinical practice that were not available before. We need to do this in order to better protect the public while at the same time tailoring the restrictions to best fit the scope of the practice of the clinician.
The second group of provisions allows for interim and emergency recommendations to be made when a serious complaint about the clinical competency of a doctor or dentist is made. They allow for relevant parties to be notified of these and also the final recommendations arising from the full review of the complaint. It is important to be able to prevent certain practices in order to minimise any further damage pending the outcome of a full review of the scope of clinical practice. This is sensible and necessary in order to protect the public whilst at the same time providing an opportunity for the affected party to respond to the complaint and any findings arising from that complaint.
The third group of provisions allows for the sharing of information under certain circumstances between the clinical privileges committee, other clinical privileges committees and quality assurance committees. The sharing of information between these committees is essential if the protection of the public is to be effective and widespread. No longer will people be able to avoid the use by a committee of adverse findings made against them by another committee.
The fourth group of new provisions allows for the anonymity of complainants and de-identification of the original written complaint. These provisions will strengthen and encourage the provision of information regarding harmful practices in a hospital setting. I believe these amendments will enable ACT Health to better meet its obligations to protect the safety of members of the public fully without the need for complex administrative arrangements.
The new provisions in part 5 are minor and uncontroversial but they will provide those practical advantages for the ordinary functioning of those committees and the decision makers who sit on them.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video