His reported concern is the regulator has become distracted by politics and an ‘‘ideological agenda’’.
What raised his ire was two draft documents the council consulted on earlier this year involving cultural competence and cultural safety, and hauora Māori (Māori health and wellbeing).
As well as conveniently creating his own distraction from the many problems still dogging the country’s health services, it suggests the tone we might expect from the minister during the forthcoming consideration of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act Amendment Bill.
Mr Brown has been at pains to point out the two appointments were ministerial ones and appointments are his prerogative.
He is right, but that is only part of the story.
One of the two appointees was chairwoman Dr Rachelle Love, an ear nose and throat specialist and the first Māori woman to head the organisation. She was first appointed in 2020 and voted in as chair in 2024. The other was her deputy Simon Watt, a lay member on the council.
Both were dumped when they would have been eligible for another term.
As we have seen by various health professionals’ reaction to Mr Brown’s comments, Dr Love is far from alone in having strong views on cultural competency and safety, saying in an interview last year she was surprised these things had become a political issue.
The concept dated back to Hippocrates and fundamentally it was about listening to the patient and centring them in their healthcare, she said.
It also involved understanding their family history and environmental conditions.
Cultural safety was integral to effective clinical care, and evidence showed culturally safe practices led to improved health outcomes, not just for marginalised groups, but all patients, she said.
The lack of enthusiasm for cultural competence displayed by Mr Brown, and National’s coalition partners, ignores the fact the medical council’s involvement with cultural safety is nothing new.
We are not sure why the ideology of the government on this trumps the medical professionals’ view of it.
Last week was not the best one for the minister to be negative about such issues.
The release of reports into the appalling treatment of an 11-year-old autistic Māori girl mistakenly identified as an adult psychiatric patient and forcibly injected with anti-psychotic drugs raised questions about what part lack of cultural competency may have played in the unfortunate events.
University of Otago research associate professor Bernadette Jones, in an opinion piece, said the inquiries found no bad faith; staff acted within what they understood to be normal practice, ‘‘and that is precisely what should worry us’’.
She points out the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance (HPCA) Act requires the bodies that register our nurses and doctors to set standards of both clinical and cultural competence, including the competence to provide services to Māori, and to hold practitioners to them.
‘‘This case shows precisely why the law treats those two competencies as inseparable, because the failure to recognise a Māori child was not something separate from the failure to keep her clinically safe; it was the same failure.’’
The Bill amending the HPCA Act will remove specific reference to Māori with regard to cultural competency.
Some aspects of this Bill may be welcomed and seen as sensible, but others will be controversial, particularly the move to align workforce regulation with government policy.
There are already concerns this will place too much power in the minister’s hands rather than the professional regulatory authorities, and risk watering down the purpose of the existing legislation to protect the health and safety of the public.
A rushed and flawed public consultation last year before the Bill was developed makes it vital the Bill goes through an untruncated select committee process.
This should help the government better understand whether any dangers in what is proposed outweigh any perceived benefits.
Thus far, nuance has not been Mr Brown’s strong suit.
