I think Pang's position is much less alarmist than other commentary. It's pretty close to my personal view. I hope you can see there's some differences with how he's framed it? Particularly about it being a step in the right direction. That is, it's not a perfect proposition but it's not closing any doors or restricting anything - not directly at least. It's important to note that (should the proposal be accepted) it would only 'restrict' other therapies insofar as the Lidcombe program would be more financially attractive. Which is a legitimate point of contention. But people would be no worse off than they are currently. Also important to note that medicare rebates apply only to the private sector, where fees are charged. People receiving SLP services through the public system pay nothing out of pocket regardless of which specific treatment the therapist employs, and this would continue. I think SPA's proposal is reasonable but not ideal. But an ideal proposal would be way less likely to be accepted. So it's a matter of strategy really. If this proposal is not accepted then a bigger proposal that incorporated the Lidcombe approach plus other approaches would also not be accepted. It's a case or SPA picking this as their one battle this time (rightly or wrongly). If they 'go big or go home' they would almost certainly 'go home'. I hope I'm making sense. I'm on mobile and it's currently 3:30am so who knows!