Leong Sze Hian/

I refer to Mdm Choi Lim Siew’s letter to the Health Minister regarding her problem of cancer treatment and drugs that are non-subsidised, which was copied to, and published on April 6 on The Online Citizen.

In this connection,   I would like to refer to the Committee of Supply for the Health Ministry’s debate in Parliament.

The Health Minister said in reply (“No issues making drug list public but…”, Today, Mar 5) to NCMP Sylvia Lim’s question, that he is open to the idea of putting Singapore’s Standard Drug  List – comprising drugs deemed cost-effective and essential to healthcare provision here and thus subsidised – online for greater transparency.

However, he wanted to avoid lobbing by pharmaceutical companies for their drugs to be included, as they have subjected him to lobbying very often, such that every time a top CEO flies through Singapore, they usually don’t talk about other things, other than “please put my new drug onto your list”.

Why “drugs’list” is secret?

I would like to suggest that the list of non-subsidised drugs be published instead, so that patients will know and be able to make more informed decisions.

In this connection, a recent Ministry of Health reply to media queries which is on its web site, said that more patients are now ‘internet savvy’ and come armed with printouts to request for drugs which may be non-subsidised.

“Hospital acquired infection” also non-subsidised?

If a patient acquires an infection whilst in hospital, and the only treatment is non-subsidised drugs, with no subsidised drug alternative, is it fair for the patient to be burdened with the high cost of the required non-subsidised drugs, since it was a “hospital acquired infection”?

Often, doctors and hospitals prescribe in accordance with global treatment guildlines, non-subsidised drugs.

In such circumstances, is it fair for C Class patients like Mdm Choi Lim Siew to pay the much higher cost?

For the above two situations, shouldn’t they be ”drugs deemed essential to healthcare provision here”?

What has drug CEOs lobbying got to do with publishing the drugs’ list?

I also do not understand how publishing the drugs’ list, will impact the drug company  CEOs who try to lobby the Minister.

Because, with or without the list, wouldn’t CEOs know that their drugs are non-subsidised, and thus lobby the Minister anyway?

By the way, how many times in a year is the Minister visited by CEOs, and how many try to lobby him?

Finally, is it not part and parcel of the Minister’s job to expect to be lobbied by CEOs?

Support TOC! Buy Leong Sze Hian’s book here!

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

马国柔佛爆发林火 12公顷植被烧毁

马来西亚柔佛州新山周二(9月17日)发生森林大火,烧毁了12公顷、或约17个足球场大小的植被。 柔佛州消拯局指出,当局于昨早10时30分接获投报,在努沙再也工业区附近发生火灾,而11时左右,20名来自士古来、北干那那和古来新市消拯局的消防员组成小队,展开灭火行动。 当局指出,当局成功于晚上扑灭90巴仙的林火。 柔佛消防和救援部门1区主任莫哈末法祖(Mohamad Faizul Selamat)对《马新社》指出,炎热天气引起林火,而风势则助长林火蔓延。幸运的是,火灾地点追唐位于高速公路附近,但是远离住宅去。 柔佛州新山的干燥天气也引发了另一场蔓延了98公顷土地的林火。 当局耗费了24小时才成功扑灭该发生在依斯甘达公主城的大火,但是大火也导致甘榜柏卡江(Kampung Pekajang)的两所学校关闭。

Chin Swee Road murder: No suspicion that toddler had gone missing for five years by agencies and social workers

Minister for Social and Family Development Desmond Lee revealed that social workers…

不参与《暴力与骚扰公约2019》表决 杨莉明:纳入家暴超出职场范围

虽然我国认同制定反对职场暴力和骚扰的全球性条约,不过人力部长杨莉明解释,考量到《暴力与骚扰公约2019》“超越职场范围”,因此在联合国属下的国际劳工组织(ILO)于今年6月召开的常年会议中,放弃表决权。 她在国会上发言时,提到劳工组织将如何实施后来通过的新公约,其中包括将家庭暴力纳入职场风险评估范围。 “这将把职场安全远远拓展超出职场范围” 。她在回应有关我国就签署《暴力与骚扰公约2019》表决上弃权一事,作出回应。 在劳工组织于6月21日在瑞士日内瓦召开常年会议时,召集成员国的劳资政代表,就相关公约进行表决,而包括我国在内的六个国家都选择投出弃权票。除了我国,其他的五个国家为俄罗斯、萨尔瓦多、马来西亚、巴拉圭以及吉尔吉斯斯坦。 官委议员王丽婷在国会上询问我国代表团是如何做出投票决定时,杨莉明表示新加坡全国雇主联合会(SNEF)严重关切有关的公约内容,并且对有关条约持有反对意见。 代表工人群体的全国职工总会,尽管清楚知道政府将放弃表决,惟仍投下赞成票以展现对公约的精神支持。 杨莉明表示我国严肃看待条约表决义务,并且我国长期以来的政策都是只考虑通过或批准符合我国利益,且条约法律和政策可完全遵循的公约。 “对于有疑问的部分,我们将继续探讨。” “与此同时,如果符合我们的目标,在符合公约精神下,我们将改进政策和措施。” 她也以劳工组织的《职业安全卫生公约》为例,在有关国际协议于6月份批准之前,我国已经采取并加强措施,成功降低职场的死亡率。 持续打击职场暴力骚扰…