In a ST report today (7 Oct), the Health Ministry (MOH) said that only a small proportion of public hospitals’ patients are foreigners brought in via contracted overseas agents.

MOH added that the proportion of foreigners among all inpatient and day surgery patients was 1.5 per cent last year. The figure was 2.4 per cent in 2008.

The issue of public hospitals using overseas agents to look for foreign patients came into light when news emerged last week that MOH has instructed all public hospitals to terminate their contracts with the foreign agencies.

MOH said that the priority of public healthcare institutions is to serve Singaporeans’ healthcare needs. They “are not allowed to actively market themselves to foreign patients”.

Some of the public hospitals which were named in the news to have used such foreign agencies include Changi General Hospital (CGH), Singapore General Hospital (SGH) and National University Hospital (NUH).

Khaw said public hospitals “do not engage in overseas marketing”

However, this latest instruction from MOH to the public hospitals not to “actively market themselves to foreign patients” appears to be different from what then health minister Khaw Boon Wan told the public in 2010. At the time, Khaw assured the public that public hospitals “do not engage in overseas marketing”.

In reply to an MP’s question in Feb 2010, Khaw said in Parliament:

The public hospitals do not engage in overseas marketing. Their mission and priority are towards local residents, and especially those in the lower income group.

Public hospitals do treat foreign patients, as there is no reason to reject them. Given our high standard of care and competitive prices, we attract a significant number of foreign patients who come here deliberately for treatment. But they form less than 3% of our total patient load.

Singapore does strive to preserve its role as a regional medical hub, an initiative which we code-named “SingaporeMedicine”, and it is spearheaded by the Singapore Tourism Board (STB). As a major provider of tertiary healthcare services, Ministry of Health lends its support to the promotion of SingaporeMedicine. This is because increasingly foreign patients come here for sophisticated treatment in such tertiary care disciplines. This is an area which Singapore, despite our higher cost, has an edge over our regional competitors. While we have many competent specialists in the private sector, many are in the public sector.

Khaw was saying that the public hospitals did not “engage in overseas marketing” directly.

However, he failed to disclose that in fact, some of these public hospitals have already been engaging in overseas marketing indirectly through the appointment of foreign agents.

One good example is Jakarta-based agency PT HCM Medika, which has been referring Indonesian patients to Singapore hospitals in the past 11 years. On its website, it said that HCM Medika is an official representative of the following hospitals in Singapore, including the public ones:

It also said that the agency was established in 2007 to “help Indonesians to get great quality medical care from government hospital in Singapore”. In other words, HCM Medika started its business as an agent to Singapore’s public hospitals 11 years ago. Their services are provided free-of-charge to the Indonesian patients as they get their fees from the hospitals.

So, from information gathered from HCM Medika’s website, it can be seen that when Khaw was assuring the public in 2010 that public hospitals did not engage in overseas marketing, some were in fact already engaging HCM Medika to look for Indonesian patients.

The public hospitals may not necessary have participated in overseas marketing directly but certainly their foreign agencies like HCM Medika do.

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

Are TRE's transgressions lawsuit worthy?

~by: Ghui~ Freedom of press and freedom of speech are the hallmarks…

To President S R Nathan: I plead with you to show mercy and grant Yong a reprieve

To: President SR Nathan Orchard Road, Singapore 238823 Istana Your Excellency, I…

诬陷撞狗逃致使司机遭网络霸凌 爱狗人士被判罚款1400元

因为不忍收容所狗只被撞,爱狗人士未查明肇祸司机身份时,便发视频呼吁网民找出涉事者背景和“公审”,却导致无辜司机莫名被攻击和网络骚扰,涉嫌抵触《防止骚扰法令》,被判罚款1400元。 该名被告为27岁林有成(译音)昨日(7日)被控涉嫌两项《防止骚扰法令》,导致41岁的女司机倍受其扰。他向其中一项控状认罪,而另一项控状则交由法官下判时一并考虑,最终被判处1400元。 2016年10月23日早上10点30分左右,巴西立第三农道的动物爱好者联盟(Animal Lovers League)收容所外发生轿车撞狗车祸,当时黑色轿车在撞到收容所的狗后还将狗碾压过去,期间该名肇祸司机没有下车查看,反而是车轮胎的档污牌多次打到狗的身体上,让它在车底下挣扎。 被告是该动保团体的联合创始人兼执行董事,同时身兼志愿者。 当时收容所的义工目睹了案发经过,便向司机挥手停下,但司机却只抛下一句,“只不过是一条狗而已”,还骂了脏话便离去。 义工愤愤不平,发视频到网络 义工对意外发生愤愤不平,将视频放到网络上扬言要找出女司机,并在帖文下写到,“请帮我们找出肇祸女司机,社会是不能容忍这种残忍的行为。” 最后帖文被大量转载,还上了《The Independent 》,以及《…

鄞义林的怒吼:有太多人的人生已经被毁掉

本文译自鄞义林脸书贴文 在国大偷拍事件中,新加坡警方如是捍卫有关涉事者:“可能被判监禁的起诉,等同于毁掉他的人生。” 那么当李总理起诉我时,政府何曾想过,会不会“毁掉我的人生”? 当我工作的医院迫于政治压力解雇我时,又有没有为我想过,何会不会“毁掉我的人生?” 当本地时评人梁实轩只因为转发一则文章,被总理告诽谤,有没有想过会“毁掉他的人生”? 当本地人权工作者范国翰,被控违反《公共秩序法》,面临牢狱之灾,政府何曾想过会“毁掉他的人生”? 当本地艺术家施兰(Seelan Palay)因被控参与无证游行,违反《公共秩序法》而面临牢狱之灾,政府何曾想过会“毁掉他的人生”? 当人权律师张素兰与社会工作者钟金全(Vincent Cheng),因被控參與“馬克思主義陰謀”而被政治拘留,政府何曾想过会“毁掉他们的人生”? 当民主党秘书长徐顺全当年被起诉和监禁时,政府何曾想过会“毁掉他们的人生”? 我能够提的例子不胜枚举。…