Health Practitioner Regulation National Law and Other Legislation Amendment Bill
Bill Story
The journey of this bill through Parliament, including debate and recorded votes.
Referred to Health and Environment Committee
▸2 clause votes (all passed)
Vote on clause 100
The clause was kept in the bill.
A vote on whether a specific clause should remain in the bill as written.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (50)
Noes (37)
Vote on clause 20
Vote on whether to retain clause 20 which empowers regulators to issue public statements about health practitioners under investigation who pose serious risk to public safety. LNP and crossbench opposed; government supported.
The clause was kept in the bill.
A vote on whether a specific clause should remain in the bill as written.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (50)
Noes (37)
That the bill, as amended, be now read a third time
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (82)
That the long title of the bill be agreed to
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (84)
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill would have strengthened patient safety by making it harder for health practitioners with serious misconduct to regain their registration, permanently publishing sexual misconduct findings on public registers, and protecting people who report concerns about practitioners. It lapsed when the 57th Parliament ended and did not become law.
Who it affects
Patients would have had better information about practitioners with sexual misconduct histories, and people reporting concerns about health practitioners would have gained stronger legal protections from retaliation.
Key changes
- Disqualified practitioners must obtain a tribunal reinstatement order before applying to a National Board for re-registration
- Sexual misconduct findings by tribunals permanently published on public registers, including the finding, sanctions, and tribunal decision
- New offences for threatening, intimidating, dismissing, or retaliating against people who report concerns about practitioners (up to $60,000 penalty for individuals)
- Non-disclosure agreements cannot prevent people from reporting to health regulators, with any such provisions rendered void
- Employers must ensure NDAs clearly state they do not prevent regulatory complaints, or face up to $10,000 penalty