It seemed something of an opening salvo. Coming just as our deadline was upon us, the Council of Medical Colleges released a manifesto. It invited people and organisations – namely politicians, who came first on the list – to focus on “building a sustainable, culturally safe, future-ready workforce that delivers equitable outcomes for all people of Aotearoa”.
One of the manifesto’s five priorities is growing and retaining a representative and culturally safe workforce.
Coming in the wake of government attacks on cultural safety as woke “ideology”, interference in the Medical Council and, seemingly, the Nursing Council and Pharmacy Council, and the greater ministerial powers looming in the proposed Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill, it could be read as a public and official stance against the health minister and his charge that woke politics is getting in the way of patient outcomes.
The outrage and opposition to the Medical Council board changes were loud – labelled “an unprecedented hit job”, “authoritarian” and dangerous, with a petition signed by 1200 doctors delivered to Parliament last month.
But the ministerial move may just be the appetiser, an amuse-bouche before the main course. Next on the menu: the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill.
When the bill was introduced to Parliament in May, health minister Simeon Brown posted on Facebook that “some regulatory bodies have drifted away from their core purpose, imposing rules that prioritise cultural or ideological considerations ahead of clinical safety and clear scopes of practice”. The amendment bill would give the health minister powers to “set clear direction and require regulators to focus on what New Zealanders actually care about”, creating a healthcare system “focused on patients rather than one stuck in process and ideology”.
The bill would amend the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003, which underpins health workforce regulation, ostensibly to put “patients first”.
Driven by Mr Brown, it’s based on the much-criticised Putting Patients First: Modernising Health Workforce Regulation consultation document issued in March last year. It would enable the health minister “to direct authorities to give effect to a government policy”.
It’s not the first time the Government has made such changes. The Education and Training (System Reform) Amendment Act 2026, passed in June, directs the Teaching Council to “give effect to government policy decisions”, allows the minister to appoint all members to the council and, critics say, strips the council of its independence, putting it under “total ministerial control”.
Mr Brown, it appears, is attempting the same takeover of the health regulatory authority – a move that is particularly dangerous in health. Allowing a minister to direct professional regulators to implement government policy on matters including scopes of practice and registration processes risks regulatory settings chopping and changing every three years. It opens the door for real ideologically driven policies to be imposed on health professionals.
The minister’s May Facebook post also framed the current system as working for some and not others – something many agree with, but likely for reasons that are the inverse of those of the minister. The current system benefits the majority Pākehā population, not Māori or Pasifika, despite what some politicians would have you believe.
This inversion of meaning is seen throughout this discourse: framing cultural safety as ideological, despite decades of evidence, while claiming your stance against it is politically neutral and devoid of ideology. Common sense. Working for all New Zealanders. Treating everyone the same.
As Belinda Loring says: “The real ideology here is [from] the Government.”
The evidence for cultural safety is well established, uncontroversial and the basis for good clinical practice. If the minister truly wants good outcomes for all, then equitable, safe, culturally responsive care is a prerequisite.
Instead of “putting patients first”, opening up regulators to political whims puts patients at risk and has the potential to diminish public trust in the health system – something that is already an issue for minority populations, some communities and people who have previously had negative experiences of healthcare.
The Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Amendment Bill has flown somewhat under the radar so far. But if it passes, regulators will lose a significant measure of their independence – scopes of practice, registration processes and some regulatory decisions could fall under ministerial influence or control.
It’s time to make a fuss.
Note: Catch the Auckland team at GP26 – feel free to come up and say hello, pitch a story or share the goss. Usual service resumes next month on Barbara’s return