November 27 - 28, 1999
Ottawa Ontario

Present: Lorraine Breault (chair), Pierre Ritchie, John Service, Janel Gauthier, John MacDonald, Catherine Yarrow, Suzanne Hill (November 27), Luc Granger, Brendan Walsh, Joe Rallo, John Service

Guest: Henry Edwards (November 27 (p.m.), November 28)

Regrets: Alexandra Kinkaide, Gerald Smerdon

NOTE RE: ACRONYMS USED IN THIS REPORT

The report was distributed by L. Breault to CASP, CCDP, CCPPP, and ASPPB. All organizations expressed appreciation for the opportunity to provide feedback on the report. Thus far, no specific feedback has been received. ASPPB has indicated that they will provide feedback at the CPAP meeting in January, 2000.

J. Rallo forwarded the report to APA, and received feedback from Michael Sullivan (APA Practice Directorate) and T. Stigall (CAPP). They indicated appreciation for being kept informed of discussions. T. Stigall and CAPP had questions related to whether the proposed training model would be similar to a Psy.D., or a Master's degree, and J. Rallo informed them that it appears that the discussions currently appear to be in the direction of a model that would likely be "equivalent" to a Psy.D.,. However, nothing more definitive has been determined to date. There were no serious concerns expressed by APA/CAPP about the report. CAPP has also approved renewal of the CAPP grant to CPAP for 2000 in the amount of $20,000 (US).

The report has also been distributed to all of the provincial associations of psychology. To date, no specific feedback has been received.

P. Ritchie provided an overview of the current situation in Canada. There are at least five jurisdictions currently involved in discussions regarding changes to legislation affecting psychology. These include, BC, AB, ON, MB, QUE, and SK.

B. Walsh noted that according to AIT all jurisdictions are obligated to inform other jurisdictions of any proposed changes to regulatory legislation (Annex 708, Part 2). He noted that jurisdictions have varied considerably in doing so to date. In accordance with this, J. Rallo will request that all CPAP member organizations highlight legislative changes or proposed changes when preparing their annual reports to CPAP, as this will also be important in assisting PSWAIT. B. Walsh will request that provincial counterparts (LMCG) also ensure that proposed changes are disseminated to other jurisdictions. CPAP members will also be encouraged to consult with PSWAIT if they have any questions regarding AIT when preparing proposed legislative changes.

**ACTION: J. Rallo to request that CPAP regulators notify PSWAIT (through CPAP) of changes or proposed changes to legislation or regulations pertaining to entry-level or registration requirements for psychology.

Changes and proposed changes were next reviewed for provinces where information was available at the time of this meeting. When possible, this information was provided by a person from the jurisdiction.

British Columbia: Key points on BC proposed legislation are: competency-based registration, removal of exemptions, and reserving the act of diagnosis based on competency assessment (not based on educational degree). BCPA is also pursuing having psychotherapy established as a reserved act.

Alberta: In Alberta, the new Health Professions Act will be proclaimed shortly. Each of the regulated professions is preparing regulations (referred to as schedules) regarding scope of practice, discipline, etc. Psycho-social intervention will be a reserved act. The College of Alberta Psychologists is preparing their schedules. Each college will be required to make submissions to government for access to reserved acts.

Manitoba: Manitoba (PAM) has proposed an Act that creates several classes of registration. Proposed classes of registration are Licensed Doctoral Psychologist, School Psychologist, Institutional Psychologist (transitional stream for master's level currently employed in exempt instititutions), and Psychological Associate. Only Licensed Doctoral Psychologist would require a doctoral degree, and independent practice would be assumed under this title. Other classes require a minimum of a Master's degree, but independent practice is not assumed. Rather, additional years of supervision and training would be required to qualify for access to independent practice. Key points related to AIT are: 1) access to independent practice for psychologists trained at the Master's level; 2) different titles for master's and doctorally trained individuals; 3) creation of a category of School Psychologist with access to independent practice. Development of the proposed Act was influenced significantly by AIT, and granting access to independent practice at the Master's level was largely in response to AIT.

Ontario: Recently initiated RHPA five year review. A "harm clause" defines harm as actions which could result in physical harm if done by an unqualified person. The College is attempting to change the "harm clause" to extend to psychological/emotional harm. There is some support for this by other professions. Also consideration is being given to making psychotherapy a controlled act. Finally, a recent decision by the Health Professions Act Review Board found in a particular circumstance that the College did not have the authority to impose limitations (i.e. restricting access to the controlled act) on a psychological associate's certificate of registration. The decision is being appealed by the College on the basis that the review board did not attend to general provisions which provide the authority to impose "a term, limitations and/or conditions".

OPA will likely continue to endorse a system which maintains a distinction between two classes of providers (psychologist and psychological associate). Access to the controlled act of communication of a diagnosis would normally be restricted to psychologists. OPA is moving towards support of access to prescription privileges for psychologists. In general there is likely to be high congruence between the CPO and OPA submissions.

Quebec: The OPQ unanimously approved a motion to change the admission requirement whereby "a competency-based doctoral degree" was adopted as the new standard. The Quebec system of professional regulation (the professions code) requires that specific degrees be identified as the normative route for admission. The board re-examined the current requirement for training, and determined that it no longer adequately protects the public because of the advancements in the profession of psychology. The board determined that the template would be changed to include more professional supervised experience, more training, and eight identified competencies which would be obtained by specific sequences of training and experience. The new template would be in line with the CPA accreditation criteria for doctoral programmes in that the eight competencies identified in the template are identical to the eight competencies identified in the Psy.D. model supported by CPA. While the new template would be similar to a Psy.D., it would not preclude recognition of Ph.D. programmes which provided graduates with the specified competencies.

The Minister responsible for professions has announced a review of all professions.

Other Provinces: Detailed information was not available at the time of the meeting for Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, PEI, Newfoundland or Northwest Territories. However, it is believed that minor or substantial legislative and/or regulatory changes are being prepared in NB, NS, and NF. In addition, details on the significant changes anticipated in SK were not available, notwithstanding requests for this information.

Dr. Edwards' report, commissioned as an outcome of the September Regulator's meeting, entitled Regulatory Requirements for Registration in Psychology Across Canada: A comparison of Acts, Regulations, By-Laws and Guidelines in view of AIT, was distributed and reviewed. This report will be referred to as the Review for the remainder of these minutes.

A summary and review of level of factors affecting entry to the profession of all provinces/territories was presented in graphic form. Considerable variation among provinces/territories was noted. Some corrections and suggestions for modification to the graph were suggested and will be incorporated in the next version of the graph.

Tables in the report were briefly reviewed, and corrections/modifications noted. A corrected version of the Review will be forwarded to PSWAIT by Dr. Edwards. Following corrections, the Review will be circulated first to Regulators for corrections, then to Associations, CPA, and CRHSPP prior to the January CPAP meeting. Feedback will be requested based upon current legislation and regulations and, in cases where changes to legislation or regulations have occurred or are probable, feedback will also be requested based upon probable new legislation or regulations.

**ACTION: Refer to the proposed Workplan regarding time-lines for correction and distribution of Review.

The Review emphasizes the importance of jurisdictions developing similar competencies, as many are currently in the process of developing competency requirements. There is a need to begin to develop core competencies based upon the Review, which would facilitate the development of a template for professional psychology training requirements that would be acceptable to all regulatory bodies.

At the Regulator's meeting in September it was proposed that a draft framework be developed which summarizes commonalities in competencies required for registration across provinces. To assist with this process, parts of a report prepared by L'Ordre des psychologues du Quebec were translated and presented for discussion. The report identifies proposed competencies, knowledge, and skills required for entry to the profession of psychology in Quebec. Similarities between identified competencies in this report with competencies identified in a number of jurisdictions and those supported by CPA for the accreditation of doctoral training programs were noted. The usefulness of this report for facilitating the development of a Competency Framework was discussed, and acknowledged. The translation of core competencies, knowledge and skills was reviewed. This will be circulated to PSWAIT members for further refinement (see Workplan). Following corrections, the Framework will be circulated first to Regulators for corrections, then to Associations, CPA, and CRHSPP prior to the January CPAP meeting. Feedback would be requested based upon current legislation and regulations and, in cases where changes to legislation are pending or probable, feedback would also be requested based upon probable new legislation or regulations.

**ACTION: Refer to the proposed Workplan regarding time-lines for development and distribution of Competency Framework.

A template for a Mutual Recognition Agreement will be drafted by a sub-group consisting of C. Yarrow, L. Breault, and another regulator to be identified at the January CPAP meeting. B. Walsh has agreed to provide input to this process. The Draft Template for an agreement will be prepared for the March, 2000 Regulators Meeting.

---