Skip to content

Understanding the Impact of the Health Professions and Occupations Act (HPOA)

This survey gives members of the four professional associations regulated by the College of Complementary Health Professionals of BC (CCHPBC) — ATCMA, BCND, BCCA, and RMTBC — an opportunity to identify questions and concerns about how the Health Professions and Occupations Act (HPOA) may affect their practice, regulation, and professional accountability.

The HPOA replaces the Health Professions Act (HPA) and introduces significant changes to governance, discipline, transparency, and regulatory oversight.

Your answers will help inform advocacy, education, and support strategies.

The survey will remain open until 4:00pm on October 31, 2025.
Discipline and Appeals

Unlike under the HPA, in which both the investigation and disciplinary processes were conducted by the regulatory colleges themselves, the HPOA has taken a different approach and has instituted a clearer separation in the two processes. While the investigation stage will remain with the regulatory college, the discipline stage will be handled by an independent discipline body.

An investigation committee appointed by the regulatory college determines whether there are reasonable grounds to conclude that a respondent lacks competence or has committed an act of misconduct, and must give the registrar of the college written notice of its assessment. If the investigation committee finds such grounds exist, the registrar may either dispose of the complaint, for example, by issuing a warning or advice or by making an order for a form of restorative process, or request the director of discipline to issue a citation, or the registrar may dismiss the complaint.

The discipline tribunal, consisting of the director of discipline and the discipline panel members, are established within the superintendent’s office (separate from the regulatory colleges). When requested by the registrar, the discipline panel will make a final decision about whether a respondent has committed an act of misconduct or lacks competence or whether a citation should be dismissed. Under section 449(2)(a) of the HPOA, the director of discipline must ensure the discipline tribunal has for each designated health profession one or more discipline panel members who hold a license to practise the designated health profession. Accordingly, a licensee may encounter a discipline panel where one or two of the three panel members may not have the same professional expertise as that licensee.

After the discipline panel has issued its final decision and notice of the disciplinary order is received, a respondent, regulatory college or complainant has 30 days to apply to the director of discipline for a review of that order. When the director of discipline receives an application for review, it must conduct the review in accordance with its practice directives.

In addition, judicial review is also available with respect to decisions of the health occupations director, director of discipline, a discipline panel, and the Health Professions Review Board.

What questions or concerns do you have about how discipline and appeal rights are structured under the HPOA?
Anti-Discrimination Requirements

The HPOA introduces a duty to take “anti-discrimination measures”. “Anti-discrimination measures” are identified in the legislation, and copied below. Such measures may be expanded by regulation to “meet prescribed objectives” over time.

HPOA 14(2)(c): “In […] performing duties under this Act, a person must act in accordance with the following principles: (c) to take and promote anti-discrimination measures;”

HPOA 15(3): “the objectives of anti-discrimination measures in providing health services include all of the following:

(a) to treat patients respectfully;
(b) to foster meaningful communication between patients and regulated health practitioners, including by promoting respectful, open and effective dialogue that encourages patients to participate in the decisions that affect them;
(c) to meet prescribed objectives.”

What questions or concerns do you have about how you are expected to meet anti-discrimination obligations under the HPOA?
Public Disclosure of Complaints and Citations

Regulators are permitted to publish the fact that a complaint has been received or that a regulatory complaint or citation has been dismissed. And a registrar must publish a copy of each summary protection order, disciplinary order and, if applicable, request for citation, and the reasons for the orders and the request.

In addition, summary protection orders and disciplinary orders that limit, suspend or revoke a respondent’s practice authority must be given to a respondent’s employer.

HPOA s. 255: “(1) A registrar, investigation committee or health occupation director may disclose that a regulatory complaint has been received.
(2) The director of discipline may disclose that a citation has been issued with respect to a regulatory complaint if

(a) a person has requested the disclosure, and
(b) the respondent has been served with the citation.

(3) A registrar, an investigation committee, a health occupation director or the director of discipline may, in response to a request made by any person, disclose that a regulatory complaint or citation has been dismissed.
(4) A registrar, an investigation committee, a health occupation director or the director of discipline

(a) may disclose protected information under this section if, in the opinion of the person making the disclosure, disclosing the information is necessary to protect the public from harm, and
(b) must not disclose the respondent's name unless the respondent's name has already been made public or paragraph (a) applies.”

HPOA s. 256 (1): “A registrar or health occupation director must publish a copy of each summary protection order, disciplinary order and, if applicable, request for citation, and the reasons for the orders and the request”

HPOA 253 (2): “As soon as reasonably practicable after an order referred to in subsection (1) [a summary protection order made against a respondent or a disciplinary order made against a respondent that limits, suspends or revokes the respondent's practice authority] is made, a registrar or health occupation director must give written notice of the order as follows:

(a) to a person who employs the respondent to provide health services, other than on contract or as a volunteer;
(b) if the registrar or director is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to do so, to one or both of the following:

(i) a person who employs the respondent to provide health services on contract or as a volunteer;
(ii) a person who employs or formerly employed the respondent for any purpose.”

What questions or concerns do you have about how public disclosure of regulatory actions might affect your practice, reputation, or employment?
Vaccination Requirements and International Standards

The HPOA requires the regulatory college to make bylaws respecting mandatory vaccinations that are required under another enactment (other than the bylaws) against transmissible illnesses, and permits the board to make bylaws respecting mandatory vaccinations against transmissible illnesses.

In addition, the provincial health officer is authorized in a scope of practice order to adopt regulations, codes, standards or rules enacted in BC or another jurisdiction, including a foreign jurisdiction, and lab-published results. A scope of practice order may be made when the provincial health officer is of the opinion that the order is necessary because of circumstances related to a public health emergency, if the provincial health officer is of the opinion that the actions specified in the order may be taken without undue risk of harm.

HPOA 49 (1): “A board must make bylaws respecting the following: (v) mandatory vaccinations, required under an enactment other than the bylaws, against transmissible illnesses;”

HPOA s. 49(3): “A board may make bylaws respecting the following: (f) mandatory vaccinations, required under the bylaws, against transmissible illnesses.”

HPOA 335 (1): “The provincial health officer may do one or more of the following in a scope of practice order: […]

For the purposes of subsection (1),

(a) the provincial health officer may adopt by reference, in whole or in part and with any changes that, in the opinion of the provincial health officer, are appropriate, a regulation, code, standard or rule

(i) enacted as or under a law of British Columbia or another jurisdiction, including a foreign jurisdiction,
(ii) set by a provincial, national or international body or any other body that may make codes, standards or rules, or
(iii) published by a laboratory within the meaning of the Public Health Act, and

(b) a regulation, code, standard or rule referred to in paragraph (a) may be adopted in whole or in part, with any changes that, in the opinion of the provincial health officer, are appropriate, and as amended from time to time.”

What questions or concerns do you have about how vaccination standards might be created or enforced under the HPOA?
Amalgamation and Representation in the College of Complementary Health Professionals of BC

The HPOA allows multiple professions to be regulated by a single college. The College of Complementary Health Professionals of BC now regulates traditional Chinese medicine, naturopathic medicine, chiropractic, and massage therapy under a single appointed board. There is no guarantee of profession-specific representation on the board; however, the discipline panel in a disciplinary proceeding must include at least one licensee who is licensed to practice the same designated health profession as the respondent.

The superintendent is required to adopt and publish its policies and guidance concerning regulatory college board composition – the intention of the new model is to create a “skills based” board. The superintendent is required to consult with regulatory colleges concerning board composition and may also consult with the public.

HPOA 169(2)(a): “A discipline panel must consist of 3 discipline panel members, including at least one licensee who is licensed to practise the same designated health profession as the respondent”

HPOA s. 346(a)-(c): “The minister

(a) must appoint no fewer than 8 persons and no more than 12 persons to a board,
(b) must ensure, subject to paragraph (c), that a board is composed of equal numbers of the following:

(i) licensees who practise a designated health profession that is governed by the regulatory college;
(ii) representatives of the public,

(c) must, if a board has 9 members or 11 members, appoint as the ninth member or eleventh member a person described in paragraph (b) (i) [i.e. a licensee who practices a designated health profession that is governed by the regulatory college]”

HPOA s. 452(1): “The superintendent must establish or adopt, and publish, policies and guidance respecting
(a) the education, training, experience and other qualifications that are necessary or desirable for board members to have, and
(b) processes and best practices for selecting persons to be appointed as board members, including, subject to the regulations,

(i) factors that must or must not be considered,
(ii) requirements for consultation, and
(iii) objectives to be achieved, including with respect to ensuring that boards will benefit from a diversity of perspectives.”

HPOA s. 453: “In establishing, adopting or reviewing processes and best practices for appointing board members, the superintendent
(a) must consult with regulatory colleges and prescribed persons,
(b) may consult with the public and any other person, and
(c) may, by order, require a regulatory college to provide information and conduct surveys and assessments with respect to one or more of the following:

(i) necessary or desirable education, training, experience and other qualifications;
(ii) the demographic composition of the board;
(iii) the recruitment or retention of board members;
(iv) matters that are relevant to whether the objectives of the appointment processes and best practices are being met;
(v) a matter identified by the minister or superintendent.”

What questions or concerns do you have about how your profession will be represented, respected, or understood within this multi-profession structure?
Financial Transparency and Reporting

The HPOA permits the board of the regulatory college to fix annual and special fees payable by licensees, but does not require the publication of detailed financial statements or a breakdown of how licensee fees are used by the college.

The superintendent may require the regulatory college to pay the superintendent’s office general administration fees, and the superintendent is subject to the general or special directions made by order of the minister. Accordingly, the superintendent and/or minister may exercise authority over college fees.

HPOA s. 392(1)(a): “A board may make bylaws establishing annual and special fees payable by licensees”

HPOA s. 398(1): “A board or health occupation director must make an annual report respecting all of the following:

(a) the exercise of powers and performance of duties under this Act by

(i) the board, registrar, licence committee, permit committee, investigation committee and quality assurance assessors, in the case of a regulatory college, or

(ii) the health occupation director, in the case of a regulatory program;

(b) any matter that, in the opinion of the board or health occupation director, should be included in the report;

(c) other matters as prescribed, as directed by the minister and, in the case of a health occupation director appointed by a board, as directed by the board.


HPOA s. 398(2): “An annual report must be made in the form and manner required by the minister.”

HPOA s 440(1): “Subject to the regulations, the superintendent may, by order,

(a) require regulatory colleges to pay to the superintendent's office general administration fees for superintending the regulatory performance of

(i) regulatory colleges, and
(ii) regulatory programs for which regulatory colleges appoint the health occupation director, and

(b) set the amount of the fees and the date by and manner in which the fees must be paid.”

HPOA s. 441: “The superintendent must comply with any general or special direction made by order of the minister with respect to the superintendent's exercise of powers and performance of duties under this Act.”

What questions or concerns do you have about financial transparency or college spending under the HPOA?
Summary Protection Orders (SPOs)

A summary protection order may be made if the investigation committee has reasonable grounds to believe that a respondent’s practice may present a significant risk of harm to any person or if the respondent is providing false or misleading information to patients or the public and a person who acts on the information is at significant risk of harm or providing the information presents a health hazard.

A summary protection order may be made without giving a respondent notice or an opportunity to be heard, but the person making the order must give written reasons to the respondent concerning the order.

HPOA s. 153: “(1) A registrar may make a summary protection order only on the direction of the investigation committee. […]
(3) A respondent may employ another licensee to manage the respondent's practice while a summary protection order is in effect, if the registrar approves, in writing, the licensee to be employed.”

HPOA 259(2): “A summary protection order may be made only if the investigation committee or health occupation director has reasonable grounds to believe that

(a) a respondent's practice of a designated profession or occupation may present a significant risk of harm to any person, or

(b) a respondent is providing false or misleading information to patients or the public and one of the following applies:

(i) a person who acts on the information is at significant risk of harm;

(ii) providing the information is an activity that is a health hazard within the meaning of the Public Health Act.”

HPOA s. 260: “(1) A summary protection order may be made without giving to the respondent notice or an opportunity to be heard.

(2) A person who makes a summary protection order must give to the respondent, in writing, the reasons for making the order, if written reasons were not already given.”

What questions or concerns do you have about how Summary Protection Orders might be used and how they could affect your ability to practise?
Offences and Penalties

The HPOA introduces new offence provisions and a framework for applying penalties for specific offences.

The penalty for committing the following offences is a fine of not more than $25,000 or imprisonment for a term not to exceed 6 months, or both:

· a person who is not qualified within a class of regulated health practitioners (or whose practice authority is suspended) uses a title that may be used exclusively by a class of regulated health practitioners in association with that person’s work; an

· a person provides false or misleading information to the public concerning whether the person is a regulated health practitioner or governed by or otherwise associated with a regulator.

The penalty for committing the following offences is a fine of not more than $200,000 or imprisonment for a term not to exceed 6 months, or both:

· a person knowingly discloses information in contravention of the HPOA or the Regulations;

· a person knowingly provides false or misleading information to a person exercising a power or performing a duty under the HPOA; and

· a person willfully interferes with or obstructs another person exercising a power or performing a duty under the HPOA, or carrying out an order under the HPOA.

The penalty for committing the following offence is a fine of not more than $200,000 or imprisonment for a term not to exceed 2 years, or both:

· a person performs an aspect of practice of a health profession, performs a restricted activity, receives a fee in compensation for performing an aspect of practice or a restricted activity, or employs a person or has another kind of business relationship to perform an aspect of practice or a restricted activity in contravention of the HPOA.

Moreover, where a corporation commits an offence under the HPOA, the corporation may be liable for a fine of $500,000, and a director or officer of the corporation who authorized, permitted or acquiesced in the offence is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $200,000 or imprisonment for a term of not more than 2 years, or both.

If a person commits multiple offences under the HPOA, a separate penalty may be imposed with respect to the offence for each day the original offence continues.

These offence and penalty provisions apply in addition to any disciplinary actions that may be taken against a licensee by a regulatory college or the director of discipline.

What questions or concerns do you have about how offences and penalties are defined, enforced, or applied under the HPOA?
Other Questions or Concerns

What other questions or concerns would you like to raise about the HPOA that are not captured above?