Replies to LegCo questions

LCQ17: Implementing recommendations about medical complaints mechanism

Following is a question by the Hon Andrew Cheng and a written reply by the Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food, Dr York Chow, in the Legislative Council today (July 6):

Question :

Will the Administration inform this Council whether the reform proposals regarding the medical complaints mechanism, made by the Medical Council of Hong Kong in 2001, which included:

(i) increasing the number of lay members in the Preliminary Investigation Committee (PIC) from one to three;

(ii) stipulating that no complaint should be rejected at the initial screening stage unless there is unanimous agreement among the PIC chairman, deputy chairman and a lay member;

(iii) setting up a Disciplinary Committee to conduct inquiries; and

(iv) setting up a Complaint Receiving Division

have been implemented; if not, of the reasons for that, and whether there is a timetable for implementing these recommendations?

Reply :

Madam President,

The Administration notes that in 1999, some patient groups expressed concern about the credibility, transparency and user-friendliness of the complaint handling mechanism of the Medical Council. In May 2001, the Medical Council of Hong Kong formed a Working Group on the Reform of the Medical Council to review the Council's structure, composition and functions aiming to strengthen its accountability, transparency and fairness. The Medical Council submitted its recommendations to the then Health and Welfare Bureau in December 2001.

We note that over the past few years, the Medical Council has been making a lot of efforts in addressing the public concern about its complaint handling mechanism. These administrative efforts, together with some prevailing features of the mechanism, in respect of the four areas highlighted in the questions, are set out below : -

(i) On the lay element in the Preliminary Investigation Committee (PIC), the fundamental consideration is that there should be an element of lay participation in the work of the Committee. At present, the arrangement is that the quorum must include one lay member. Such arrangement has worked smoothly.

(ii) On the dismissal of complaints at the initial screening stage, under the current administrative arrangement, consent from a lay member has to be obtained before a complaint can be dismissed by the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman of the PIC of the Medical Council. Layman participation is hence ensured.

(iii) As regards the proposal of setting up a seven-person Disciplinary Committee, the present arrangement of constituting a Panel of at least one lay member has worked well, and there is no imminent need for changes. It should also be noted that inquiries are conducted in public to ensure transparency of the Panel's proceedings.

(iv) The purpose of proposing the establishment of a Complaints Receiving Division was to facilitate members of the public to better understand the channels and procedures of lodging complaints with the Medical Council and the remits of the Council's complaint handling mechanism. Towards this end, a booklet entitled "How the Medical Council deals with the complaints" has been published by the Medical Council to clarify the remit of the Medical Council and to help complainants put together relevant evidence. The booklet is widely distributed to public hospitals, general out-patient clinics, district offices and the Government Publication Centre for public collection. The booklet is also uploaded on the Council's website. In addition, a system is instituted to ensure that for complaints that are rejected, the complainants are given detailed explanation on the reasons for the decision. With enhanced publicity and public education, the need of setting up a Complaints Receiving Division has largely fallen away.

The proposals from the Medical Council as highlighted in the question would require amendments to the Medical Registration Ordinance. Given the Council's complaint handling mechanism has been working well with the introduction of the above-mentioned measures, the Administration does not see an immediate need to take forward the proposals. We will keep in view of the situation and will work closely with the Medical Council to ensure that the mechanism will continue to meet the aspirations of the community.



Ends/Wednesday, July 6, 2005
Issued at HKT 14:11

NNNN