Comments on: SMA’s guidelines withdrawal – patients now have less protection

By: Dr. Huang

Dr. Huang — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:11:40 +0000

Hi all
It’s all very confusing with Khaw Boon Wan stated that he was surprised that the GOF was allegedly found to be in contravention with the anti-competition code and he was quoted as saying that lawyers, accountants also self-regulate etc.
I wonder with the SMA just suddenly decided that they should scrape the GOF or did someone from above shoot an arrow down?
If so, is the Minister out of the loop of communications?
I am really puzzled. ( I am not insinuating that Khaw knew something)

By: theonlinecitizen

theonlinecitizen — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 10:40:44 +0000

Hi all,

What’s worrying is that CASE is totally silent on this. Looks like the ‘elites’ can do whatever they want while ordinary folks just have to accept it in silence.

It’s quite scary if you think about it.

Regards,
theonlinecitizen

By: peasantJUDGE

peasantJUDGE — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 09:13:28 +0000

Of course the gahmen have to quietly nudge the SMA to remove their guideline.

This happening hot on the heels of their announcement to “review” ministers’ pay (it’s a done deal lah) is not a mere coincidence.

No doubt the medical fraternity would have been vehemently fed up with ministers adjusting their own pay at their whim and fancy while putting a cap of sorts on the doctors’ earnings.

This latest lifting of guidelines is just to soften the doctors’ misgivings and outrage.

By: Sam Leong

Sam Leong — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:01:42 +0000

Self-regulators are usually appointed by or encouraged by the authorities to keep its members in line so that there is no profiteering nor exploitation of the public who do not know better. What about CASE? Public Transport Council?

In Singapore it’s PAP. Pay and Pay!