Complaints About Veterinarians and Proposal to Form Professional Body for Self-regulation

4 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for National Development (a) for each year over the last three years, how many complaints pertaining to veterinarians have been received by the Animal Veterinary Service; (b) of which, how many have resulted in (i) warnings, (ii) fines and (iii) suspension or revocation of licences; and (c) what is the average duration between the filing of a complaint and conclusion of the investigation.

5 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for National Development (a) how are members of the current veterinary Complaint Evaluation Committee selected; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider the formation of a professional board, similar to the Singapore Medical Council, to regulate veterinary practice.

The Minister of State for National Development (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, can I take Question Nos 4 and 5 together, please?

Mr Speaker: Yes, please.

Mr Tan Kiat How: Mr Speaker, veterinarians are licensed and regulated by the Animal and Veterinary Service, or AVS, for short. As part of the licensing conditions, veterinarians are required to comply with the Code of Ethics for Veterinarians, which sets out the expected professional standards of conduct. Veterinarians who fail to adhere to the rules of conduct may be subject to professional discipline, including written warnings, composition fines and even suspension or revocation of their licences.

Over the last three years, AVS received a total of 65 veterinary complaints, comprising 15 cases in 2019, 25 cases in 2020 and 25 cases in 2021. Of these cases, 10 veterinarians were issued warnings and one was issued a compound fine. None was suspended or had his/her licence revoked.

AVS investigates complaints on professional misconduct or negligence. Investigations can take up to 12 months or longer, as AVS needs time to gather the evidence, including detailed medical records and accounts from all parties, to make a thorough assessment. In complex cases, AVS will seek inputs from veterinary practitioners with the relevant experience and expertise. Such veterinary complaints may be presented to the Complaint Evaluation Committee, or CEC, for short, for further assessment. The Committee appointed by AVS comprises AVS veterinarians, practising veterinarians and non-affiliated legal professionals to ensure that the complaints are evaluated robustly.

AVS is working with the Singapore Veterinary Association to raise professional standards of the veterinary sector. We are exploring a number of ideas to advance the standards and practices of the sector, including the possible establishment of a professional entity. We are consulting veterinarians, vet para-professionals and vet service users to seek their views and will share more details when ready.

Mr Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.

Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): I thank the Minister of State for his answer. Just two supplementary questions.

The first is on the timeframe. Currently, the investigations can take a year or more. I think, recently, the regime for handling disciplinary issues for doctors for human beings was also revamped and overhauled, partly with the view to reducing the time that issue is hanging over the head of the veterinarian. So, is the Ministry considering ways to reduce that time taken for the investigation?

Secondly, in terms of what the Minister of State said on reviewing the structure of regulation and considering a professional or elected body, that is good news. Is there a timeframe when this review is targeted to be completed, roughly?

Mr Tan Kiat How: I thank the Member for the two supplementary questions. On the first question about timeframe, indeed, this is something that we are very mindful of for any investigation where the complainant and the accused are being looked into. As I have mentioned earlier, NParks – or AVS in specifics, a part of NParks – looks into the investigations for a thorough evaluation. We have to interview all the parties concerned; we have to look at thorough medical records.

And for animals, which, in a way, perhaps unlike for human beings, we need to bring in the relevant veterinary practitioners with expertise. For example, if the animal is a frog, rabbit, hamster, dog or cat, we may require different expertise to join the panel – the Complaint Evaluation Committee – to look into this matter. And this is something that we are mindful of, in making sure that the process is robust, objective and thorough.

I take Mr Leon Perera's point about whether we could look into shortening the process. This is something that we have to discuss with our stakeholders in the veterinary sector, as well as the different users of the vet services. And we certainly look at this as part of the overall review that we are doing.

On the second question around the setting up of the professional body or entity that was mentioned in my reply, allow me to contextualise it to the Member. This is part of the overall broader pet sector review, which I spoke about also in response to the Member's question yesterday. We are looking at raising standards of professionalism across the entire pet sector, from boarders, breeders, to animal welfare groups, veterinarians, trainers, to individual users; and we are doing so collectively. The intent is to bring different stakeholders together to understand the issues and one another's perspectives and come to a common consensus on how we are to move together, with the welfare of the pet at the centre of what we do.

As part of this pet sector review, we are also engaging the veterinary sector and this is something we are looking at in terms of the various parts of the standards. Indeed, this is something that is ongoing and we hope to share more details when ready.