Patient Groups Back Medical Council Reform as Legislature Reviews Registration Amendment
HK01 · 3 SOURCES1 day ago6 MIN
Summary
The Legislative Council's relevant bills committee is reviewing the Medical Registration (Amendment) Bill 2026, which seeks to overhaul how the Medical Council handles complaints . The council has faced criticism for processing some cases for as long as 16 years . A coalition of patient advocacy groups conducted an online survey from September 12 to October 4, collecting 194 valid responses from patients, caregivers, and members of the public . The results indicate strong support for the reform direction, including measures to increase lay member representation and establish clearer disciplinary frameworks. Nevertheless, concerns remain about whether the proposed changes go far enough in increasing transparency and accountability.
Key Points
- The survey of 194 respondents—comprising 54.1% chronic illness patients, 22.2% caregivers, and 23.7% general public—found 81.5% support the overall amendment package
- About 81.9% backed publishing sentencing guidelines and consistent suspension procedures for doctors convicted of criminal offenses
- Nearly 85.6% supported mandatory continuing education requirements for doctors, while 78.9% approved allowing limited and special registration doctors to participate in volunteer services
- Approximately 20% of respondents deemed the proposed increase in lay members from 25% to 31% too low, with 89.2% of that group advocating for 40% or above
- About 43% of respondents expressed concern that the "specified organization elections" mechanism might undermine patient-centered representation
- The proposed four-tier disciplinary system—ranging from permanent removal to conditional practice—would abolish suspended sentences, which 60.9% supported
- Coalition representative Pang Hung-cheung (彭鴻昌) noted the current suspended sentence system fails to effectively penalize doctors convicted of criminal offenses
Why It Matters
The survey results provide a rare window into patient perspectives on healthcare governance reforms. With over 80% backing the overall direction but reservations about specific provisions, the findings suggest legislators will need to balance competing interests—particularly regarding lay member representation—when deliberating the bill . The proposed reforms aim to address long-standing complaints about the Medical Council's slow and opaque disciplinary processes, which affect both public trust in medical professionals and patient safety outcomes .
The survey results provide a rare window into patient perspectives on healthcare governance reforms. With over 80% backing the overall direction but reservations about specific provisions, the findings suggest legislators will need to balance competing interests—particularly regarding lay member representation—when deliberating the bill . The proposed reforms aim to address long-standing complaints about the Medical Council's slow and opaque disciplinary processes, which affect both public trust in medical professionals and patient safety outcomes .