Disciplinary Cases Involving Doctors

Mdm Speaker, the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) has appointed a Review Committee to review the existing legislative and administrative frameworks for disciplinary proceedings involving doctors and to optimise and strengthen the processes so that disciplinary matters are dealt with in a just and expeditious manner. This Committee comprises senior doctors and lawyers and the review is expected to be completed in about six months' time.

About half the members of the SMC are elected. Voting in the SMC elections is compulsory for all fully registered doctors. About 15% to 20% of doctors cast null votes each year for various reasons.

The disciplinary processes and requirements for doctors are set out in the MRA, and the disciplinary bodies set up, namely the Complaints Committees and the Disciplinary Tribunals, are obliged to comply with those statutory requirements. The disciplinary proceedings and the deliberations of the disciplinary bodies are conducted independently of the SMC, bearing in mind that the objective of the MRA is to protect the health and safety of the public, uphold standards of practice within the medical profession, and maintain public confidence in the medical profession.

The Director of Medical Services, who is also the Registrar of the SMC under the MRA, has written to all doctors in January this year to explain and clarify SMC's disciplinary processes. As mentioned previously, the Review Committee will be looking into strengthening the processes for complaints and discipline.

Page: 9

To build public trust in our healthcare services, our healthcare professionals must play their part to ensure that patients are given the best care possible. Our professional boards and councils have promulgated ethical codes and guidelines that articulate high standards of professional conduct. The respective professional Acts have disciplinary frameworks as a deterrent against errant behaviour with measures in place to ensure a fair hearing. There are checks and balances in the professional Acts and avenues for appeal. We will continually refine and improve our processes, and ensure that public trust in our healthcare services and practitioners is maintained.

Mdm Speaker, I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. Both relate to the balance between the internal processes of the discipline of medicine and the external overview from Government and regulatory bodies. The first is with respect to trust: does the Minister feel that the primary responsibility for the restoration of trust or the increase of trust lies with members of the profession or with the Government? And similarly, with respect to regulation, the medical profession, for a very long time, has had this principle of internal self regulation because of a presumption of the need for professional knowledge and professional competency. Going forward, where does the Minister see the balance between regulation by external bodies – be they legal bodies or Government bodies – as compared to the idea of internal self regulation by the profession?

Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Member for the clarification that he has sought. First, let me explain that we need to strike a balance between self regulation and external oversight. That is why the MRA was amended recently, in 2010, to include external parties, including the senior legal professionals who will also be part of the disciplinary process that is going to be conducted within the SMC. We should allow the Act that had just been amended to be implemented fully. Many of the cases that we see today are, in fact, cases that have started before the amendment of the Act and, therefore, legally they have to come under the previous framework. The new cases will then be taken on under the new framework.

The Committee that has been set up will also take the time, over the next six months, to review the processes and the implementation of the new Act, and see where else we can improve so as to enhance the trust and confidence of both the profession as well as members of the public. I would urge the Member to give us some time to allow the SMC to work at it, to go through the Review Committee's work. In time to come, we hope to be able to continue to strengthen the processes and build the confidence in this profession.

Page: 10