Zimbabwe's proposed medical aid reforms, framed under statutory instrument 330, have opened a debate about whether they repair healthcare financing or expose patients and services to new risks. The sharpest question put to government is a basic one: what specific problem is the reform meant to fix? Regulating the sector may well be necessary, critics concede, but changing who can own and operate healthcare facilities without a clear diagnosis is another matter. The proposed shift would touch patients' access to care as well as the jobs of people working in the sector. Sceptics warn that altering ownership rules while medical aid schemes already struggle with delayed claims could make things worse. Supporters argue the status quo is failing patients anyway and cannot simply be left alone. Consumer and worker groups want the authorities to publish evidence of the problem's scale before any rewrite. Until that happens, the argument over SI 330 looks set to run.