As a layperson with no knowledge of the procedures, my instinct with this latest news, would be to want a psychiatrist report with relevant fitness to practice recommendations.
My concern would be that the hostility conveyed in the tweets, whether within or without policy, plus the arrogance and lack of contrition shown in the interview, with or without any breach of confidentiality suggests that there could be something fundamentally awry.
I would then be thinking about what ifs. What if Posie Parker or a strong woman of the sort that seems to arouse this hostility were to become his patient. What if there were future issues around diagnosis at the gender clinic he works at, with a young de-transitioner saying that the doctor responsible for the original treatment had been very focussed on transition and perhaps had not given sufficient weight to other options.
Giving an interview at this point is bonkers. It raises red flags. If I were a naturally cautious member of a panel, I would be very worried about the seeming lack of contrition and of common sense about how to conduct yourself when facing serious, career threatening, charges. (Don't forget the two written warnings which seem to have been largely ignored.) I would not want someone like that back without reassurance and without confidence that they intended to change their behaviour. The article suggest that a slap on the wrist might simply give confidence that earlier behaviours were acceptable.