Scope of Practice Review (the Cormack review)
An independent review made 18 recommendations to let primary-care professions work to their full scope. The federal government is now offering states $60m to remove barriers.
Professional self-interest
Everything tagged with this theme. The country and profession filters at the top still apply.
Reforms
British Columbia: regulators merged and an independent Superintendent
Following Harry Cayton's inquiry, BC cut its health regulators from 20 to 6 and created an independent oversight office. The new Act came into force on 1 April 2026.
Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill
New Zealand's bill would let the Health Minister direct the health regulators on policy and let a ministerial committee overturn registration refusals. Parliament has since been dissolved for the November 2026 election.
No reforms for these filters.
Explainers & analysis
The case for top-of-scope reform
The strongest version of the argument for letting nurses, pharmacists and others do more, written from the reformers' own sources.
Nothing written for these filters.
Library
An inquiry into the performance of the College of Dental Surgeons of British Columbia and the Health Professions Act
Harry Cayton, who developed right-touch regulation as chief executive of the UK's Professional Standards Authority, found the college met 17 of the 28 Standards of Good Regulation, and that many but not all of BC's health colleges showed 'a lack of relentless focus on the safety of patients'. He recommended fewer colleges, appointed boards and independent oversight.
Why it matters: Right-touch used to make regulators more accountable to the public, not to deregulate. It set off the reforms that led to BC's 2026 Act.
Policy approval for amendments to the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act
The New Zealand government's case for reform. It criticises 'unnecessarily high standards', long training and strict supervision, 'patch protection' and siloed regulators, and names associate psychologists among new professions it says regulators have been slow to adapt to, citing 'professional resistance or lack of direction from government'.
Why it matters: A strikingly direct statement of what the government believes is wrong with professional regulation. It mentions psychology once, naming associate psychologists as a new profession.
Unleashing the Potential of our Health Workforce: Scope of Practice Review
Professor Mark Cormack's review found almost all primary-care professions face barriers to full scope that are unrelated to their education and competence, and made 18 recommendations to remove them.
Why it matters: A central document in Australia's 'top of scope' agenda, now backed by a $60m incentive for states.
No library items for these filters.