APS Board advocates against its members

The APS Board cannot legally advocate for policies that disadvantage over 50% of their own members? The Corporations Act (2001) states that the Board has to do what’s best for the company and its members?

Has the APS Board forgotten this? It is not the role of the APS Board to be a regulator of the psychology industry. That is AHPRA’s job.

The APS is a member organisation and its Board should be trying to get the best deals for all its members – not advising the government on how to demote half of them!

Not only do this Board’s recommendations demote over half its members to a third tier with material loss of income but they create a material advantage for the majority of the board members and their supporters.

The Corporations Act (2001) clearly states in its Business Judgement rule under Division 1—General duties: (180) Care and diligence that Directors should:

(a)  make the judgment in good faith for a proper purpose; and

(b) do not have a material personal interest in the subject matter of the judgment;

Perhaps we could ask for an investigation of the APS like the College of Physicians has done after years of reported dysfunction.

The Green Paper’s recommendations clearly are designed to disadvantage a majority of APS members by their recommendations for unequal rebates without any supportive evidence.

Their recommendations will

  • Reduce the livelihoods of registered psychologists
  • Increase the livelihoods of endorsed psychologists

Given that the board is made up largely of endorsed psychologists, the legality of their recommendations is highly questionable.

Other restrictions are:

  • They will not be able to able to provide the best evidence based psychological therapies for clients
  • They will never be able to offer Medicare rebates to severe clients
  • They will never get equal rebates for working with clients with moderate issues

These proposed restrictions will destroy the professional standing of thousands of members who have been treating moderate and severe clients throughout their professional lives.

Furthermore these recommendations have no basis in fact. There is no evidence of superior treatment outcomes by any one type of psychologist.

RAPS urges all stakeholders to provide Comment on the Mental Health Reference Group report by 17th May. You can find more information here.