COAG must get it right on National Registration of Health Professionals - AMA

AMA President, Dr Mukesh Haikerwal, previously wrote to the State and Territory leaders last month upon the announcement by the Prime Minister that the Federal Government would back a system that protects and preserves the independence of each of the health professions and which allows self-regulation.

"The Federal Government has made it clear that it is committed to quality patient care and the independence of the health professions," Dr Haikerwal said.

"It is now time for the States and Territories to spell out their plans for their health workforce ahead of the COAG meeting later this month. We know they all agree on the concept of national registration, but do they want a system that promotes quality accessible health care or one that works against it?

"The States and Territories must do the right thing by patients and support a system that is motivated by public safety, not workforce reform.

"The Australian public does not want generic health workers, but some States have openly pursued this objective. They are pushing an agenda that was prepared by bureaucrats for bureaucrats, which is all about the bureaucracy.

"COAG must ditch the national registration model it has been working on and implement a system that provides the best possible quality of health care for all Australians, while preserving the individual expertise and professionalism of each of the nine health professions."

Dr Haikerwal said that eight of the nine health professions are agreed that the current COAG proposal is not in the best interests of patients, the professions, or the community.

In his letter to the State and Territory leaders, Dr Haikerwal sets out the AMA priorities for a workable system for national registration and national accreditation of training for health professionals:

The solution is separate national professional boards with responsibility for standards for each of the nine health professional groups. Each board would operate under a national legislative template and would have reasonable consumer input.

There would be portability of qualifications and registration, which would allow greater workforce mobility. Conditions on practice could be imposed in a uniform way and be applied simultaneously across the country.

The medical profession does not support an Agency Management Board. The national professional boards should have power over fees and resources to support the boards.

The AMA letter to Premiers and Chief Ministers:

29 March 2007

Dear Premier

COAG proposals for national registration and national accreditation of training

The AMA is seeking clarification from all governments of the position on national registration and national accreditation of training for health professionals each will take to the April meeting of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG).

I wrote to you on 15 February 2007 outlining the medical profession's concerns about the current COAG proposal and urging your government to adopt a more patient-friendly focus before the April meeting.

Since that time, the Prime Minister has said publicly that the Commonwealth wants a system that is motivated by public safety, not workforce reform. Although States and Territories agree on the concept of national registration, they each appear to have totally different models in mind.

The Commonwealth model would encompass public safety, consistency of regulation processes, and consistent profession-specific registration and accreditation standards across the country, which meet the needs of the medical profession.

This model is built on a commitment to providing the best possible quality of health care for all Australians, while preserving the individual expertise and professionalism of each of the nine health professions. The current COAG proposal, supported by most States and Territories, puts patient care as a very low priority. Of the nine health professions, eight are agreed that the current COAG proposal is not in the best interests of patients, the professions, or the community.

Each of these eight professional groups recognises the others' very different training, skill sets, scopes of practice, and competencies that are unique to each profession - not dispensable and not substitutable. The Australian public does not want generic health workers.

The solution is separate national professional boards with responsibility for standards for each of the nine health professional groups. Each board would operate under a national legislative template and would have reasonable consumer input.

There would be portability of qualifications and registration, which would allow greater workforce mobility. Conditions on practice could be imposed in a uniform way and be applied simultaneously across the country.

The medical profession does not support an Agency Management Board. The national professional boards should have power over fees and resources to support the boards.

COAG has embarked on an ambitious reform agenda that needs the support of all the professional groups to make it happen. COAG also needs the support of the Australian public.

The Australian people will not support the COAG proposal as it stands because it advocates a system of lower quality medical and health care than is currently available.

The AMA and the majority of the health professions urge you to reconsider your position on national registration and accreditation and put patients first before the COAG April meeting.

I would be happy to meet with you or your representative to discuss a mutually agreeable outcome on this vital issue before it is too late.

Yours sincerely

Dr Mukesh Haikerwal
Federal President