MEDICINES (ADVERTISEMENT AND SALE) (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

3.40 p.m.

The Acting Minister for Health (Mr Lim Kim San): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

This Bill makes a number of significant amendments to the Medicines (Advertisement and Sale) Ordinance, 1955.

In the past few years there have been numerous complaints of undesirable advertisements appearing chiefly in the Chinese newspapers concerning medicines or unqualified persons claiming cures for a wide range of conditions such as sexual weakness, infertility, delayed menstruation, etc. Such advertisements are generally deceitful, misleading, and constitute a danger to the public. Prosecutions under the two Ordinances which may control such advertisements, namely, the Medicines (Advertisement and Sale) Ordinance, 1955, and the Indecent Advertisement Ordinance (Cap. 142), have been difficult and unsuccessful as advertisers have got round the restrictions by using homonyms and synonyms or by claiming medical skills.

Careful consideration has been given to this problem before it has reached the present stage of presenting an amendment Bill to Parliament. As far back as 1962, a Committee was appointed by the former Minister under the chairmanship of Dr Gwee Ah Leng, one of Singapore's prominent physicians, to examine the problem and to suggest measures of control with the following terms of reference: -

"to study the current undesirable and unethical cures' and advertisement of cures', and to suggest measures of control."

This Committee made certain recommendations for amendments to the Medicines (Advertisement and Sale) Ordinance to prohibit advertisements of medicines for various ailments and advertisements claiming specific personal medical skills.

Subsequently, in the second half of 1966, the Committee was resuscitated under the same chairmanship but with wider terms of reference. I quote the terms of reference, Mr Speaker: -

"to study the current unethical, dishonest and undesirable advertisements pertaining to treatment, cures, and to the medical skills of unqualified persons and to suggest measures of effective control."

The unanimous conclusions of this Committee extended the recommendations of the previous Committee by reviewing and adding to the list of diseases prohibited for general advertising and by recommending a ban on all advertisements pertaining to medical skills.

The Committee also made certain recommendations for the effective control of labelling and importation of drugs. However, these proposals are being dealt with separately by the Controller of Imports and Exports as they relate to his control measures.

I would like now to elaborate on the Bill clause by clause.

Clause 1 sets out the Short Title and commencement.

Clause 2 amends section 4 of the Ordinance by substituting a Schedule in place of the list of conditions and diseases mentioned in respect of which advertisements are prohibited. The Schedule may be amended by notification in the Gazette. This arrangement is obviously less cumbersome than having to amend the Ordinance whenever circumstances make it necessary to amend the list.

Clause 3 creates a new section aimed at prohibiting advertisements relating to medical skill or service. Medical practitioners of the Western school are forbidden to advertise by their ethics and this is controlled by a disciplinary body of the profession itself, namely, the Singapore Medical Council. The Chinese Physicians' Association have also officially declared its stand in public against advertisements by medical practitioners of the Chinese school. However, in their case, they are handicapped by the lack of a disciplinary board. The amendment in this section will, therefore, reinforce the hand of the medical practitioners of the Chinese school who will now be able to see their stand reinforced by law. This prohibition will financially affect a number of publications in the Chinese medium, but public interest must supersede private interest, however much we may regret the loss of income to these establishments.

Clause 4 amends section 5 of the Ordinance so that the prohibition of advertisements on articles relating to abortion is extended to prohibit advertisements referring to medical skill or service relating to abortion.

Clause 5, which amends section 6 of the Ordinance, is consequential on the preceding sections. It tidies up the references made to the various prohibitions so that these are correctly referred to. As part of the tidying-up process, a new subsection is added to provide for reference to the new prohibition of advertisements referring to medical skill or service within this section which sets out provisions as to offences under the preceding sections.

Clause 6 amends section 7 of the Ordinance so as to clarify that where the required disclosure of composition of a medicine is written in a language other than the English language, such disclosure must be made in the English language as well as in any other language that may be used in addition to the English language.

Clause 7 creates a Schedule of diseases and conditions in respect of which advertisements are to be controlled. This Schedule reviews the list of the various diseases and conditions mentioned in section 4 of the Ordinance. The list is now extended to include insanity, menstrual disorders, sexual function, infertility, impotency and frigidity. The study by the two Committees under Dr Gwee Ah Leng has indicated that the diseases and conditions mentioned in the Schedule constitute the happy hunting-ground of those unscrupulous advertisers who seek to "get rich quickly" by preying on the anxiety and desperation of the unfortunate victims of these diseases and conditions.

There are a number of parties likely to be interested in the proposals contained in this Bill, such as doctors, physicians, pharmacists, dentists, importers of Chinese drugs and advertising agencies. It has therefore been decided that this Bill be referred to a Select Committee, if the Second Reading is approved, so that wider consideration might be given to the suggested amendments.

Finally, may I say that we owe a duty to the people of Singapore to protect them from further ruthless exploitation of this kind which makes money out of the sufferings and despair of those unable to judge wisely. These amendments will translate an universally accepted principle in the medical code of ethics into a provision in the law of the land. I am confident that the hon. Members of this House will give me their support for the enactment of this proposed legislation.

Question proposed.

3.49 p.m.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I fully support the amendment Bill now before us. This is because the introduction of this Bill aims at controlling undesirable and immoral medical advertisements and stopping quack doctors from profiteering and deceiving those people who are suffering from various diseases. This will, of course, give an impetus to those fully qualified doctors and other persons who are professionally qualified to serve our sick people and to promote public health.

Mr Speaker, if you turn to the Chinese newspapers, every day you will see from the advertisements that there are so many undesirable advertisements relating to various diseases. There have been a lot of quack doctors blowing their own trumpets in the advertisements to show how efficient they are and that they can turn a sick man into a healthy, robust person. There are gullible people who fall for these advertisements. They not only lose their money, but some of them even lose their lives. So we can see the extent of the harm done by these undesirable advertisements.

As a matter of fact, Mr Speaker, we are quite satisfied with the code of ethics of our medical profession and we must also take legal steps to ensure that this code of ethics is observed so that the interest of the public together with that of the medical profession is upheld to the exclusion of those undesirable and unscrupulous quack doctors who poison our people with all sorts of drugs. In this way, Mr Speaker, we can see to it that the good reputation of the medical profession is not damaged, and the health of the public is not jeopardised.

Mr Speaker, in point of fact, the rise of these medical advertisements can be attributed partly to the newspapers themselves. They should have some moral responsibility towards their readers. They must know what is right and what is wrong, and cannot do things merely with a view to profiting at the expense of their readers who constitute the public.

In my own humble opinion, this amendment Bill will certainly receive the support of the doctors and the professional bodies in the medical field. It will certainly promote the medical profession in our Republic so that the services and medicines prescribed by qualified doctors will be given attention to, without the quack doctors fishing in troubled waters. In this way, we will certainly become a country in South-east Asia with the highest standard in the medical profession. Mr Speaker, I fully support this Bill.

3.55 p.m.

Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I do not propose to talk too long on this matter. As we all agree, this Bill has been introduced to safeguard the interest of the public and it also indicates that the Government is now paying great attention to this matter. With this amendment Bill I am quite sure that the people of Singapore will have greater protection medically, and they will have one more safeguard against the quack doctors.

Another aspect of this Bill is that those who are really interested in the medical profession in Singapore will not have their business affected or jeopardised by the unscrupulous advertising of quacks in Singapore. In this way professionally qualified people will be able to serve the people better and will be able to improve themselves to serve the people.

Mr Speaker, I wish to raise one point. The Minister has reiterated just now that the Bill will be enforced against that sector of the Chinese physicians who have resorted to medical advertisements. What I wish to point out is that this should not only be enforced against these Chinese physicians. There are also cases of Western-trained doctors who are guilty of some advertising. I think the enforcement should not be discriminatory.

It is my hope also that the Bill will be referred to a Select Committee which will then hear views and representations from the Chinese physicians regarding the causes affecting their profession.

Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng (Joo Chiat): On a point of order, Mr Speaker, Sir. The Western-trained doctors do not advertise. According to the hon. Member for Delta, they have been advertising. No cases have been reported to the Medical Council about Western-trained doctors advertising. I wish the hon. Member will withdraw the remark.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I did not refer to the doctors themselves as individuals. I referred to the pharmacists and the druggists who advertise extensively in the newspapers about the efficacy of their medicine. I think this should also be controlled. I did not refer to the medical profession as such.

Mr Speaker: The hon. Member was perhaps referring to advertisements in the English Press rather than advertisements by doctors trained in the Western system of medicine.

Dr Chew Chin Han (Tampines): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I personally feel that the Bill should have been introduced a few years back. But it is not too late however. A few moments ago the Member for Delta said that there were extensive advertisements both in the Chinese medical profession and the Western-trained medical profession. As pointed out by Professor Yeoh, Western-trained doctors are not allowed to advertise and the position has been clarified.

The main aim of this Bill is to protect the interest of the public, not to protect Western-trained doctors or Chinese doctors or Indian doctors for that matter. We admit that there are drugs advertised in the newspapers manufactured in the Western world. But I wish to stress that in so far as drugs manufactured in the West are concerned, after clinical experiments on them have been carried out and they are approved for use, they are not allowed to be advertised. So this is quite different from the drugs manufactured by the Chinese physicians. Of course, we do not deny the efficacy of some Chinese drugs. But there are cases in which quack doctors or businessmen who call themselves doctors or physicians have advertised in the papers for their own personal gain.

The Member for Sembawang has also said that the rise of the medical advertisements should also be attributed partly to the newspapers. But in my own view, the position is not so had as he thinks. I know of one case where one paper was losing business to the extent of some $3,000 a month, and it was proposed by a quack doctor that advertisement to the amount of $3,000 would be given provided the newspaper accepted him as its medical adviser; but this was turned down by the newspaper. So it shows that the position is not so bad as the Member would think.

Mr Speaker, as other Members have already pointed out, this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee for further consideration, because even at a random reading now, I can see that there are many loopholes in the present Bill, because some of these quack doctors may not advertise directly but may advertise indirectly. For example, one may say that he has been abroad to give lectures and has been given some award, so that when he comes back, he will be able to serve our sick people better. This is another aspect of advertising and should be given attention.

4.01 p.m.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: (In Tamil): Sir, I wish to say a few words on this amendment Bill. Few people have supported it. If we are going to bring in a law on advertisements of medicines, it is not going to affect one group, whether they are Indians, Westerners or Chinese. If there is a law, it is going to affect everybody. The Member for Tampines and others have said that Westerners do not advertise like this. But the law is not like that. Maybe they do not do it today, but they may do it tomorrow. Whether they are Chinese or Indians, they have to obey the law. It is a law for everybody. They may not do it today but they may do it tomorrow. So we have to bring in a law to protect even for the future. It should benefit everybody. If we look into this, the people are cheated in many ways. They have spoilt themselves by taking many kinds of medicine. If we go through the list of diseases listed here, many people may be in favour of taking these medicines. Take, for example, diabetes. It is found in many people who are over 45 years of age. They are anxious to cure the disease and they are prepared to take any medicine, whether it is advertised in the papers or whether they hear of it from friends. I am also affected. That is why I am saying this. I am not taking medicines which are recommended in advertisements but I am taking medicines prescribed by doctors. Many people may be cheated by advertisements. So I appreciate the action of the Government in bringing forward this amendment Bill. It will stop many people from getting themselves spoilt. Even old people, including me, may want to feel younger as they grow older So I may look for a medicine to achieve this. But some people take the wrong medicine and get spoilt.

This is an important law but it should not affect one particular group or race. It should be common to all the races.

Mr Speaker: I am glad we do not have a Standing Order that prohibits advertisement of one's own ailments!

4.05 p.m.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the consensus of opinion is that this Bill has great merits, and if at all there is any criticism, it is that it has taken such a long time to come to fruition. We hope that when it is in Select Committee, the Committee will work fast so that everyone will be satisfied.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Resolved, "That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and the following Members:

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin

Mr Chor Yeok Eng

Mr Fong Sip Chee

Madam Chan Choy Siong

Dr Chew Chin Han

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi, and

Mr S. Rajoo." -[Mr Lim Kim San].