New ZealandNotifications · Competence

When Your Employer Notifies Your Responsible Authority About Competence

A guide written for the practitioner on the receiving end: what section 34 of the HPCA Act actually requires of employers, what your Council or Board must and may do next, the rights you hold at every step, and how to use the first week to protect your registration and start showing change.

Reviewed October 2026 against the HPCA Act 2003 (version as at 6 June 2026) and guidance from the Medical Council, Nursing Council, Pharmacy Council, Dental Council, Medical Sciences Council, Employment New Zealand and the Privacy Commissioner

Must vs may tablePathway diagramFirst 7 days checklistShort guide for managers

Short answer: In New Zealand an employer must give your responsible authority written reasons if you resign or are dismissed for reasons relating to competence (HPCA Act s 34(3)); at other times a concerned colleague or manager may notify, and the Medical Council, for one, accepts concerns from anyone. The authority must then make inquiries, which usually means sending you the notice and asking for your response, before deciding on no action, education, a competence review or another route. A review can lead to a competence programme, conditions, an assessment or counselling, and it is not a disciplinary process, but what you do in the first days matters.

Key takeaways

Only one employer notification is compulsory under s 34: after a resignation or dismissal for reasons relating to competence. Concerns raised while you are still employed are discretionary, though a separate duty applies to health concerns (s 45).
Resigning does not stop the notice. Section 34(3) covers resignation and dismissal alike, so resigning in a hurry can remove your chance to improve inside a supported plan without avoiding the report.
A notifier who acts in good faith cannot be sued or disciplined for the notice (s 34(4)). Your remedy for an inaccurate notice is a careful, evidenced response to the authority.
If your failure to respond adequately stops the authority completing a review, the Act treats that as reason to believe you fall below the required standard (s 38(2)). Get advice, then respond on time.
You have statutory rights during a review (s 37), before interim action (s 39) and before any change after an unfinished programme (s 43), and what you say during a review or programme cannot be used against you in court (s 44(4)).
The strongest position is early, specific, evidenced change: targeted learning, supervision, an audit of your own practice and honest reflection on what went wrong.

What an employer notification is, and what it is not

Our fitness to practise overview maps the whole system: HDC, responsible authorities, Professional Conduct Committees and the Tribunal. This guide zooms in on one entry point that the general guides rush past, the notice an employer sends your Council or Board about your competence, and looks at it from your side of the desk.

Section 34 of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 is headed "Notification that practice below required standard of competence". It creates three routes into the competence system:

Any health practitioner who has reason to believe another practitioner may pose a risk of harm to the public by practising below the required standard of competence may give that practitioner's Registrar written notice of the reasons (s 34(1)). A clinical director, charge nurse manager, pharmacist manager or practice owner who is also registered fits here.
The Health and Disability Commissioner and the Director of Proceedings must promptly notify the Registrar when they hold that belief (s 34(2)). That is how many HDC investigations end up with your authority; our guides to responding to an HDC complaint and the Director of Proceedings cover that side.
Your employer must promptly give the Registrar written notice of the reasons when you, as an employed practitioner, resign or are dismissed for reasons relating to competence (s 34(3)).

"Required standard of competence" is defined in s 5 as the standard reasonably to be expected of a health practitioner practising within your scope of practice. That matters: the test is measured against your own scope, not against the most expert person in your service. If you are unsure where your scope ends, our explainer on scopes of practice under the HPCA Act sets out how they are defined.

Not the same as a patient complaint

A complaint alleging that your practice or conduct affected a health consumer goes to HDC first, and the authority generally waits for HDC. An employer notification about competence does not have to pass through HDC. It goes straight to the Registrar, which is why it can move faster and feel more abrupt. If a patient complaint is also involved, see our profession guides for the Nursing Council, Medical Council and Pharmacy Council.

Must or may: when an employer notifies

Many practitioners assume their employer "had to" report them, and many managers assume they must report every performance problem. Neither is quite right. The Act draws a firm line between duties and discretion:

Summary of the HPCA Act 2003 (version as at 6 June 2026) and Nursing Council and Medical Council guidance for employers.
Situation	Duty	Law	What reaches the authority
You resign for reasons relating to competence	Must notify, promptly	HPCA Act s 34(3)	Written notice of the reasons for the resignation
You are dismissed for reasons relating to competence	Must notify, promptly	HPCA Act s 34(3)	Written notice of the reasons for the dismissal
You are still employed and a registered colleague or manager believes you may pose a risk of harm through practice below the standard	May notify	HPCA Act s 34(1); the Medical Council also accepts concerns from anyone	Written reasons for the belief
Your employer believes a mental or physical condition may stop you performing your functions	Must notify, promptly	HPCA Act s 45 (health, not competence)	Written notice of all the circumstances
A patient complains that your care affected them	Complaint goes to HDC first	HPCA Act s 64; HDC Act 1994	HDC decides whether to refer it
You are convicted of a relevant offence	Courts notify the authority	HPCA Act s 67	Notice of the conviction

Regulator guidance mirrors this. The Medical Council tells employers they must inform it when a doctor or physician associate resigns or is dismissed over competence. The Nursing Council's "What must employers do?" page lists competence-related dismissals and resignations, and health concerns, as the points where an employer must contact it. The Medical Sciences Council's employer page describes the same competence duty and also offers informal phone advice before a formal notification.

Two points follow for you. First, if your employer notifies while you are still in the job, that is a judgement call by a registered colleague or manager, not a box-ticking duty, so it signals a real concern about patient safety that needs a real answer. Second, "for reasons relating to competence" is not defined in the Act. Whether a resignation or dismissal crosses that line is a question about why it happened, and you should not assume an exit labelled "personal reasons" or "restructuring" will escape it if competence concerns were part of the story.

Resigning does not stop the notice

This is the single most expensive misunderstanding in this area. Section 34(3) applies when an employed practitioner "resigns or is dismissed" for reasons relating to competence. Resignation and dismissal are treated the same. If you resign in the middle of a performance process because competence concerns have been raised, your employer must still give the Registrar written reasons.

The New Zealand Nurses Organisation's own competence review guidance makes the same point: it encourages members to complete the process and not resign if possible, because the employer is obliged to report a competence-related resignation to the Nursing or Midwifery Council anyway.

If you stay

You keep the chance to show change

A supported performance plan, with supervision and clear goals, lets you build evidence of competent practice in the same setting. If a notification still follows, you arrive at the authority with a track record, not just a promise.

If you resign in haste

The notice still goes, without your evidence

The authority receives your employer's reasons, and you start the process out of work, with no recent supervised practice to point to and less leverage over what is written.

There are times when leaving is the right choice, for your health, your safety or because the relationship has broken down. Make that decision with your union or lawyer, after asking your employer how it intends to describe the reasons, and with a plan to keep practising safely somewhere supportive. NZNO's guidance suggests that members who do leave find work where they can rebuild a record of competent practice, are open with the new employer about the notification and gather practice references.

A related trap is letting your practising certificate lapse in the hope the matter goes away. The authority's duty to inquire under s 36(1) is framed around practitioners who hold a current practising certificate, so stepping away changes how the authority deals with the notice. It does not erase it. Take advice before deciding.

What the notification contains and what you will see

The Act asks only for "written notice of the reasons". There is no prescribed form under s 34, although several authorities provide online forms. In practice a competence notification from an employer usually sets out:

who you are, your role, your scope and your employment dates;
the specific incidents or patterns of concern, with dates;
what the employer did about them, such as supervision, a performance plan, education or restricted duties;
the reason for the resignation or dismissal, where s 34(3) applies;
supporting documents, which may include incident reports, investigation findings or performance plan records.

The Pharmacy Council's guidance for colleagues and employers suggests gathering specific incidents, the particular concerns and suggested steps the pharmacist could take. Expect your own notification to look similar, and expect to see it. The Medical Council says the referral, including the referrer's name, is given to the doctor so they can respond, citing natural justice and the Privacy Act 2020. Its statement on concerns about another doctor (April 2022) also says the notifier's name will normally be shared.

You can also ask your employer for the personal information it holds about you, including the notice and the material behind it. Under information privacy principle 6 of the Privacy Act 2020, the Privacy Commissioner says agencies must respond within 20 working days. Any patient information in that bundle is health information, so expect it to be handled under the Health Information Privacy Code.

Why you usually cannot sue over the notice

Section 34(4) says no civil or disciplinary proceedings lie against any person for a notice under s 34 unless they acted in bad faith. A notice you think is unfair, incomplete or one-sided is answered by putting your evidence to the authority, not by threatening the notifier. Threats can look like a lack of insight. If you believe there was genuine bad faith, raise that with a lawyer, separately and calmly.

What the authority can do: the pathway

After a notice arrives, s 36(1) says the authority must promptly make inquiries into, and may review, your competence. It does not have to inquire if it has reason to believe that a notice from a health practitioner is frivolous or vexatious (s 36(3)), and it must tell a notifier under s 34(1) or (2) whether it has decided to review your competence (s 36(3A)). Separately, s 36(4) lets an authority review a practitioner's competence at any time, with or without a notice. The diagram shows the main routes.

From notice to outcome under the HPCA ActThe red box can apply at any point. Before any order under ss 38, 39 or 43 you have a right to make submissions and be heard.

Inside the authority: triage to review

Each responsible authority runs its own process within the same legal frame. Three published examples show what to expect.

Medical Council

The Medical Council asks the doctor to respond, and its Notifications Triage Team (Rōpū Tātari Whakaaturanga) then considers all the information at its next meeting. Its published options include no further action, no further action other than education on a specific issue, referral to the full Council, referral to a Professional Conduct Committee, and a voluntary undertaking with temporary limits on practice where there is a risk to public health and safety.

The Council's information sheet adds a Preliminary Competence Inquiry: an interview with a Council-approved vocationally registered doctor and a random review of patient records. Taking part is voluntary, but declining limits what the triage team or Council can consider, which usually works against you. At Council level the options include a recertification programme designed to be completed within 6 to 12 months and referral to a Performance Assessment Committee, which reviews the doctor's practice. Council usually meets every second month to discuss performance and conduct concerns, and doctors are told of any proposed conditions and given an opportunity to comment on them. Our Medical Council complaint guide covers the conduct side.

Nursing Council

Notifications to the Nursing Council must be in writing to the Registrar, usually on its "Concerns about a nurse" form. The Council considers competence, health and conduct and decides what action to take. A competence review can lead to the orders in s 38, and the Council's competence review guide gives examples of conditions such as employer approval or reports, direct or indirect supervision, administering medicines only under supervision, or not being the sole registered nurse on duty. Midwives facing review have their own process, explained in our Midwifery Council competence review guide.

Pharmacy Council

The Pharmacy Council publishes the factors it usually weighs when deciding whether a competence review is needed. Read them as a checklist for your own response, because they tell you what the decision maker is looking for:

whether a pattern of conduct suggests wider competence issues;
whether a particular incident was a serious departure from accepted standards;
whether you have since put systems in place or completed education to prevent a recurrence;
whether distracting influences, such as health, financial or personal stress, were present at the time.

Its guidance also lists situations where notifying a risk of harm is appropriate, including recognised poor performance where local intervention has not worked. That is worth knowing: if your employer has already tried supervision or a plan, the authority will want to know why it did not succeed and what is different now.

Risk of harm notices and interim action

Two phrases in the Act cause most of the anxiety: "risk of harm" and "risk of serious harm". They trigger different things.

Risk of harm · s 35

Other agencies are told

If the authority has reason to believe your practice may pose a risk of harm to the public, it must promptly give written notice to ACC, the Director-General of Health, HDC and your known employer, and may tell people you work with in partnership or association. You get a copy, and if it later decides there was or is no risk, it must promptly tell everyone it notified.

Risk of serious harm · s 39

Your practice can be paused or limited

Where you are being, or are to be, reviewed and there are reasonable grounds to believe you pose a risk of serious harm, the authority may suspend your practising certificate or add conditions to your scope. It must first tell you why and give you a reasonable opportunity to make written submissions and be heard. The order ends when the review is complete or you pass a specified assessment, whichever is later.

Separate interim powers exist where conduct, not competence, is in question: s 69 (conditions or interim suspension while a prosecution or investigation is pending, if the appropriateness of your conduct is in doubt) and s 69A (interim suspension, again while a prosecution or investigation is pending, where the authority believes on reasonable grounds that your conduct poses a serious risk to the public; it can be ordered without notice, with your submissions heard within 20 working days). These are rare in a pure competence matter, and our Professional Conduct Committee guide covers them in context.

The Dental Council's risk of harm policy, updated in April 2026, is a useful plain-language statement of intent: the purpose of notifications and interim orders is not to punish the practitioner but to minimise any risk of harm to the public. It lists indicators of risk such as more than one complaint or notification over time, a single significant departure from standards, skill deficits affecting patient safety, a series of errors and lacking insight. Indicators of serious harm include a patient who has been or may be seriously harmed, or a threat to more than one patient.

Your rights at each stage

A competence process is not a disciplinary hearing, but it is a statutory process with real procedural protections. Know them, and use them.

HPCA Act 2003, version as at 6 June 2026, and the Nursing Council's competence review process guide.
Stage	Your right	Law
During a competence review	Written notice with enough particulars to understand the grounds; the relevant information the authority holds; a reasonable opportunity to make written submissions and be heard in person or through a representative; a support person of your choice if heard in person	s 37
Before interim suspension or conditions	To be told why the order is being considered and to make written submissions and be heard	s 39(3)
If a programme is not completed	Notice of the reasons, a copy of the relevant information and a reasonable opportunity to be heard before any scope change or suspension	s 43(2)
What you say	Statements and admissions made during a review or programme are not admissible against you in any court or before any person acting judicially	s 44(4)
Your patients' records	Anyone examining clinical records for a review or programme may not disclose identifying information except as the Act allows; breach is an offence	s 44(1) and (3)
After orders are made	A decision to suspend you, or to include or vary conditions on your scope, can be appealed to the District Court within 20 working days after notice of the decision; the order stays in force pending appeal unless the court orders otherwise	ss 106 and 108

One provision cuts the other way. Under s 38(2), if the authority cannot conduct or complete a review because you failed to respond adequately to the notice given under s 37, it has reason to believe you fail to meet the required standard. Silence is not neutral. A late, thin or defensive response can produce exactly the orders you were hoping to avoid.

The value of s 44(4) is often missed. Because your statements in a review or programme cannot be used against you in court, the competence process is a safe place to be candid about what went wrong. Use that: explain the gap and show how you are closing it, rather than minimising it.

Your first 7 days after learning of a notification

You may hear about a notification from your manager, in an exit meeting, or only when the authority's letter arrives. Whichever comes first, this sequence keeps your options open.

Day 1: pause before you act
Do not resign, reply to the authority, contact the notifier or post anything online on the day you find out. Read the letter twice and note every deadline. Write down your own account of events while it is fresh, for you and your adviser only.
Day 1 to 2: call for support
Contact your union and your indemnity provider or medical defence organisation. NZNO has a dedicated competence review adviser for nurses and asks members to make contact as soon as the first Council letter arrives; ASMS is the union for senior salaried doctors and dentists. Ask, too, whether your employer's employee assistance programme can offer confidential support while the matter is open.
Day 2 to 3: get the full picture
Ask your employer, in writing, for a copy of the notice and the documents it relied on, and any performance plan or incident records about you. Under the Privacy Act the employer must respond within 20 working days, so ask now. Check the authority's letter for what it already holds; under s 37 you are entitled to the relevant information during a review.
Day 3 to 4: check your practice is safe today
Look honestly at the specific concerns. If any part of your current practice carries the same risk, put interim safeguards in place yourself: extra checking, a second opinion, stepping back from a task until you are supervised. The Pharmacy Council suggests employers use measures such as supervision by a senior peer, and offering this yourself shows insight.
Day 4 to 5: start remediation before anyone orders it
Book supervision or mentoring, start an audit of your own records in the area of concern, and enrol in targeted learning. Evidence that you started early carries weight, because the Pharmacy Council, for one, asks whether you have put systems in place or completed education since.
Day 5 to 6: draft your response with your adviser
Write a factual, respectful draft that answers each concern, accepts what is accurate, corrects what is not with evidence, and explains what you have already changed. NZNO advises members not to send a first response without feedback.
Day 7: diary the long game
Record every deadline, keep a single folder of evidence and correspondence, and decide who will see your drafts. If you are thinking about leaving your job, put that decision on hold until your adviser has looked at the employment and registration consequences together.

Do not alter, add to or "tidy" any clinical records after learning of the concern.
Do not contact patients or the notifier about the notification.
Do not let your practising certificate lapse as a way of avoiding the process without advice.
Do not send the authority a response that attacks the notifier's motives.

Writing your response to the authority

Your first response often decides whether the matter closes at triage, ends with an educational letter, or moves to a review. The skills overlap with an HDC response, which our guide to responding to an HDC complaint covers in depth, but the audience is different: the authority is asking whether your practice meets the required standard now, not whether a patient's rights were breached.

Weak response

Long background about workplace conflict and understaffing. Says the employer "never liked" you. Disputes every incident without records. Says you are an experienced practitioner who has never had a complaint. Promises to "be more careful". No evidence attached.

Strong response

Takes each concern in turn. Accepts the errors that happened and explains what you now understand about why. Gives context, including system factors, without using it as an excuse. Corrects factual errors with documents. Attaches evidence of change: supervision agreement, learning certificates, a self-audit, a reflective account and a referee who has seen your recent practice.

Context is relevant. The Medical Council asks notifiers to consider whether a concern was a one-off or a pattern and whether there was an acceptable explanation, and the Pharmacy Council weighs distracting influences such as health or personal stress. Say what was going on, but keep the focus on what you control.

Related courseRemediation After a ConcernTurns a competence concern into a credible remediation plan: root-cause analysis, testable objectives, supervision and audit, and an organised evidence bundle.3 hours (estimated) · NZ$139 · certificate on completion View course

Showing insight and remediation that convinces

Authorities and committees look for change they can verify. Regret matters, but evidence matters more. The four building blocks below appear across the published processes: a course of instruction (s 40(3)(d)), supervised practice (s 40(3)(f)), examination of your clinical records (s 40(3)(e)) and examinations or assessments (s 40(3)(a)). Doing versions of them voluntarily, before anyone orders them, is the clearest sign of insight you can give.

Targeted learning

Learning matched to the exact gap in the notice, not a generic stack of certificates. Record what you learned and how it changed a specific practice.

Supervision

A written agreement with a supervisor outside your immediate line, regular sessions and short notes of what was reviewed. Our supervision and PDP course covers agreements after a concern.

Self-audit

A small audit of your own records or decisions in the area of concern, repeated after changes, so you can show the before and after.

Illustrative scenario: medication errors on a surgical wardRegistered nurse · employer notification under s 34(1)

The concern: Three medication errors in two months, two involving missed time-critical doses, plus late documentation noted in a performance plan.
Week 1: Union and indemnity contacted. Copy of notice requested. Nurse asks to be double-checked on all IV and time-critical medicines while the matter is open.
Weeks 2 to 6: Supervision agreement with a nurse educator from another ward, fortnightly. Medication safety learning completed. Self-audit of 20 medication charts for timeliness and documentation, with results.
Response: Accepts all three errors, explains the interruptions and workload factors honestly, describes the checking routine now used, attaches the supervision notes, certificates and audit, and offers a reflective account.
Why it works: It answers the questions the authority asks: is there a pattern, what has changed, and is the risk being managed now.

Reflection holds this together. A short, specific reflective account that names the gap, the effect on patients and what you now do differently is far more persuasive than a long one. Our insight course and reflective practice course go deeper, and our professional development plan examples show how to turn remediation goals into a plan. Nurses can browse options on our remediation courses for nurses page.

Related courseMaintaining Clinical CompetenceKeeping knowledge and judgement current, knowing your limits and responding well when your competence is questioned.3 hours (estimated) · NZ$139 · certificate on completion View course

If you are under an order

Practitioners choose learning that fits their own plan and keep the certificate as evidence. If an authority has ordered a specific competence programme, ask the authority or your supervisor whether a particular course fits it before you rely on it.

The employment law side, briefly

A competence notification runs on a separate track from any employment dispute. The authority is not deciding whether your employer treated you fairly, and the Employment Relations Authority does not decide whether you are competent. Keep both tracks in view:

Personal grievance time limits. Employment New Zealand says a personal grievance must be raised with the employer within 90 days of the issue arising or coming to your attention, whichever is later; for a dismissal, the 90 days run from the end of employment. Different rules apply to employees earning $200,000 or more a year and to those on trial periods.
Settlement and exit agreements. Section 34(3) is a statutory duty with no exception for agreed exits. Do not assume a negotiated resignation or confidentiality clause will stop a notification; ask your adviser how the agreement deals with it and what the employer will say.
Performance processes. If a performance plan is under way, ask for clear standards, timeframes and written feedback, and a support person at meetings. That record helps on both tracks.

If you think the notification itself was made in bad faith, or the dismissal was unjustified, get employment advice promptly and in parallel. The protection in s 34(4) covers good-faith notices only.

Related courseWorking Within Your Scope of PracticeUseful when the concern is about role creep or tasks at the edge of your scope: conditions, delegation and growing your practice legitimately.3 hours (estimated) · NZ$139 · certificate on completion View course

For managers and employers: notifying well

If you manage registered staff, a fair notification protects patients and your organisation, and gives the practitioner a real chance to recover. A short checklist drawn from the Act and regulator guidance:

Know which duty applies. A competence-related resignation or dismissal must be notified promptly in writing with the reasons (s 34(3)). A health concern must be notified promptly with all the circumstances (s 45). Other competence concerns are a judgement for a registered practitioner (s 34(1)).
Protect patients first. The Pharmacy Council suggests immediate measures where you are not satisfied someone is practising safely: tell them about the concerns, arrange supervision by a senior peer, or ask them to stop practising while concerns are investigated, and contact the authority for advice.
Talk to the practitioner. Medical Council guidance encourages raising concerns directly where you feel comfortable, following your organisation's procedures and keeping a record. The practitioner will normally see your name and your notice, so write it as if they will read it.
Be specific and factual. Dates, incidents, what you tried and the outcome. Separate facts from opinion and attach the documents you relied on.
Ring first if unsure. The Medical Council and the Medical Sciences Council both invite informal contact before a formal notification.
Expect follow-up. The authority must tell a s 34(1) notifier whether it is reviewing (s 36(3A)), and if it concludes there is a risk of harm, you as the known employer will receive a s 35 notice and may be asked to support conditions such as supervision or reporting.
Keep supporting the person. A notification is not the end of employment. Employee assistance, fair process and a workable supervision plan are good practice, and conditions such as supervision or employer reporting only work in a workplace willing to support them.

Notices given in good faith are protected (s 34(4) for competence, s 45(6) for health). Good faith is easiest to show when the notice is accurate, proportionate and backed by records.

This guide reflects the HPCA Act as it stands. Proposed changes to the Act are covered in our HPCA Amendment Bill explainer, and the professional standards your authority will measure practice against are summarised in our guide to health practitioner codes of conduct.

Frequently asked questions

Does my employer have to tell me before notifying my Council or Board?

The HPCA Act does not require an employer to warn you first. In practice you will usually see the notice: the Medical Council, for example, gives the doctor the referral, including the referrer's name, so they can respond. Good employers raise concerns with you directly first, as Medical Council guidance encourages.

Can my employer notify the authority about competence while I am still working there?

Yes. Section 34(1) lets any health practitioner who believes you may pose a risk of harm by practising below the required standard notify the Registrar in writing, and the Medical Council, for one, says anyone can refer concerns. The compulsory duty under s 34(3) only applies when you resign or are dismissed for reasons relating to competence.

If I resign before a performance process ends, will the notification still happen?

If the resignation is for reasons relating to competence, yes. Section 34(3) applies whether you resign or are dismissed, and the employer must promptly give the Registrar written reasons. Talk to your union or lawyer before resigning.

Is a competence review a disciplinary process?

No. It asks whether your practice meets the required standard and leads, if needed, to orders such as a competence programme, conditions, an assessment or counselling (s 38). Not completing a programme can lead to a scope change or suspension, but it is not, of itself, a ground for disciplinary action (s 43(5)). Conduct concerns are handled separately, through a Professional Conduct Committee.

Can I be suspended straight away after an employer notification?

Under s 39 the authority can suspend your practising certificate or add conditions during a review only where there are reasonable grounds to believe you pose a risk of serious harm, and it must first tell you why and give you a chance to make submissions and be heard. Suspension without prior notice is possible under s 69A, but that power concerns conduct linked to a pending prosecution or investigation.

Can I sue my employer for an unfair notification?

Generally no. Section 34(4) says no civil or disciplinary proceedings lie against anyone for a notice under s 34 unless they acted in bad faith. The usual remedy is to correct the record with evidence in your response to the authority. If you believe there was bad faith, or that a dismissal was unjustified, get employment advice promptly.

Will the people I work with find out?

If the authority has reason to believe your practice may pose a risk of harm, s 35 requires it to notify ACC, the Director-General of Health, HDC and your known employer, and it may notify people you work with in partnership or association. You receive a copy, and if the authority later decides there is no risk, it must tell everyone it notified.

Can what I admit during a competence review be used against me later?

Statements or admissions you make during a competence review or programme are not admissible against you in any court or before any person acting judicially (s 44(4)). That makes the review a safe place to be honest about what went wrong and what you have changed.

Primary sources

13 official documents