New COVID-19 management laws in the ACT should have greater parliamentary oversight, a Legislative Assembly inquiry has found.
But the committee inquiry found the bill presented a "significant improvement on current approaches".
The bill should also include the right to a review of vaccine mandates, and the government should consult with industry sectors and community groups affected by health directions, the inquiry recommended.
Health Minister Rachel Stephen-Smith introduced the bill to the Assembly late last year, which will give ministers more power to make decisions over health directions, and allow the ACT to step down from a public health emergency.
The bill seeks to allow the government and health authorities to make public health directions related to COVID-19 outside of a public health emergency, with some responsibility shifting from the chief health officer to the health minister.
The three-member standing committee on health and community wellbeing has recommended the laws pass subject to its 10 recommendations.
The Legislative Assembly is expected to pass the bill later this month, which would allow the ACT to end its public health emergency.
The committee recommended the COVID-19 declaration and other notifiable directions be made into disallowable instruments under the bill, which would give the Legislative Assembly an opportunity to scrutinise decisions.
"The committee recognises the time-critical nature of public health directions in a pandemic situation. However, making a notifiable direction a disallowable instrument would not hold up public health measures, but would give the Assembly the opportunity to scrutinise it when it next sits," the committee said.
The committee was concerned by the use of notifiable instruments - which have no oversight - that could impinge on protected human rights.
The committee also recommended the period of a COVID-19 declaration be cut from six months to four weeks, arguing this would provide more opportunity for oversight and scrutiny.
Health directions should also only be made to cover all people or classes of people, rather than individuals, the committee said.
"Directions should not be applicable to individuals because of privacy, discrimination, and human rights implications. Directions to categories of people should be sufficient to achieve the desired public health outcomes," its report said.
Review rights should also be included for people subject to vaccine directions, the committee said, "to allow for the use of discretion on a case-by-case basis where unintended consequences may be impacting an affected person's wellbeing".
The ACT Human Rights Commission had expressed concern about review rights contained in the bill.
The committee also said the government should consult with industry sectors and community groups most affected by new health directives, and report the outcomes on those groups.
The recommendation was prompted by evidence from the Australian Hotels Association, which said certain business sectors were more heavily affected by public health measures in the COVID-19 pandemic.
The association's ACT general manager, Anthony Brierley, told the inquiry that the organisation did not see the point of the bill's powers outside of a COVID-19 emergency declaration.
Mr Brierley said the hospitality and hotels industry had been the most adversely affected during the pandemic and he said continued regulations would be damaging.
He argued that the powers retained in the amendments were "exceptionally broad".
The committee's report noted the majority of submissions to its inquiry were opposed to the bill, on the grounds the bill's powers were excessive in a highly vaccinated community.
The new bill would give government ministers the power to impose certain restrictions, the power to create vaccine mandates and the chief health officer would retain control of test, trace, isolate and quarantine measures.
The health minister, in consultation with the chief minister, would be able to regulate business activity and impose restrictions on gathering numbers, household visitors and density limits in hospitality and retail venues.
But in order to impose the restrictions advice would have to be sought from the chief health officer and there must be consultation with the human rights commissioner.
Two ministers could make a decision to impose a vaccination mandate but only when this has been explicitly recommended by the chief health officer to the ACT's cabinet.
