Popular Democratic Movement (PDM) MP Nico Smit said the Health Professions Bill requires thorough evaluation to ensure that it effectively supports and regulates healthcare professionals without imposing unnecessary barriers and compromising professional standards.

Smit pointed out some of the shortcomings, such as the establishment of the Health Professions Council, which he said does not explicitly state its objectives, the removal of registration responsibilities from professional boards, and the operational efficacy of the council without any representation from professional boards.

Other shortcomings are the obscurity and criteria used for extending member contracts, the powers, functions, and constitution of professional boards, which he said are vague, and the method of appointing board members that undermines professional self-governance.

Smit suggested that to foster a governance model that is democratic and reflective of the professions it serves, members of professional boards should be elected by their peers or nominated through a transparent process involving professional societies or bodies.

"On control over and approval of education and educational institutions, these clauses should mandate the involvement of professional boards in the approval processes for educational programmes and institutions relevant to their fields. This involvement ensures that educational standards meet the specific requirements of each profession, which will also reduce redundancy, accelerate processes, and lessen administrative burdens on educational providers. On the registration and category of public service, the dual requirement for registration and licencing is unnecessarily burdensome and may not clearly contribute to improved professional standards or public safety."

Health Minister Dr. Kalumbi Shangula, however, explained that the purpose of the bill is to ensure public protection and safety and not to protect the interests of health care practitioners.

"Sometimes we feel this coming out that the interests of specific professionals are being advanced at the expense of public safety; that is not the purpose of this bill. We have realised that some representative bodies wanted to advance the interests of their members through this legislation, and that also explains why some of their comments could not be accepted."