On tour with 80 HKDU colleagues and their friends in the last week of September 2004, we have ventured into one of the most beautiful parts of the world. It hit me with great surprise that the scenery in Ziuzhai Valley of our motherland has been preserved so well and so lovely. (Please refer to the special section of Ziuzhai Valley on Pages 11-14 of this Bulletin). Unfortunately, all my sweet memories in Ziuzhai Valley were disturbed completely by the October 2004 policy meeting of the Medical Council of Hong Kong which was held 5 days after my return to Hong Kong.
During that meeting, the issue of CME linkage with the issue of Annual Practising Certificate was brought up once again by a few Council Members and myself. A representative from the Academic Institute deliberated in the meeting on his/her recent findings of the subject in other professionals in Hong Kong and in the Medical Profession in other parts of the world. His/her findings on the list of countries/medical authorities in/under which mandatory CME/or CPD for the purpose of renewing practising certificate of medical practitioners that is or will have been implemented are as follows:-
| (1) | Australia | (5) | United Kingdom |
| (2) | Mainland China | (6) | Singapore |
| (3) | American Board of Specialists | (7) | South Africa |
| (4) | The Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons of Canada |
What was presented during the meeting was just a repetition of part of the research results carried out by HKDU. However, the findings of HKDU as listed in the following tables contradict with that of the particular Council Member.
Medical Profession outside Hong Kong:
Countries in which CME is NOT linked with renewal of annual practising certificate |
Countries in which CME is linked with renewal of annual practising certificate | |||||||
| 1 | Austria | 7 | Greece | 13 | Netherlands | 1 | New Zealand | |
| 2 | Many states in Australia | 8 | Ireland | 14 | Sweden | 2 | Philippines | |
| 3 | Canada | 9 | Japan | 15 | Switzerland | 3 | Singapore (said to start from 2005) | |
| 4 | Denmark | 10 | Korea | 16 | Taiwan | 4 | South Africa | |
| 5 | France | 11 | Mainland China | 17 | State of Indiana, USA | 5 | United Kingdom (said to start from 2005) | |
| 6 | Germany | 12 | Malaysia | 6 | States of Illinois, Florida, Hawaii & Iowa, USA | |||
Other Professions in Hong Kong:
| Professional Continuing Education is NOT linked with annual renewal of licence to practise | Professional Continuing Education is linked with annual renewal of licence to practise | |||
| 1 | Engineers | 1 | Solicitors | |
| 2 | Barristers | 2 | Accountants | |
| 3 | Architects | 3 | Chinese Medicine Practitioners | |
| 4 | Nursing Profession | |||
| 5 | Dental Profession |
However, what that Member told the Council that CME is linked with the issue of licence in
How ridiculous it is for a respectable person in the Academic Institute to present misleading information which is not evidence based to the Council for discussion. Furthermore, how sarcastic it is that that Member was immediately applauded by most of the 4 lay members present in the meeting. I wonder if that Member has contravened our Professional Code and Conduct by providing information to the public which is NOT TRUTHFUL AND NOT FACTUAL AND NOT ACCURATE BUT EXAGGERATED.
In the meeting, I raised the strong objection of the majority of the Profession towards the linkage once again. However, all the lay members demanded CME linking with annual relicensing in our Profession and the reason they gave was that it is the wish of the public that we doctors should show to the public that we are receiving Medical Education life long. Finally two motions were proposed as follows :-
1. The Medical Council of Hong Kong should postpone its target date for implementation of mandatory CME until the whole package for Medical Registration Ordinance reform is ready for the Legislative Council;
2. As an interim measure, the Medical Council of Hong Kong should set up a Register for CME-certified Medical Practitioners not taking CME Program for Specialists.
Since a similar system with a list of “CME Certified” practitioners was in place with effect from 1st October 2004, motion 2 was not pursued.
As expected, Motion 1 was defeated by a majority vote of 9 against, 6 for and 2 abstain. From my own observation, the 6 for votes most likely were from Council Members of HKMA and HKDU while those abstain should be from the two representatives of the Department of Health, while the remaining 9 against votes should most likely represent 4 votes from laymen, 3 votes from Members working in the University, 1 vote from Member who has retired from the University and 1 vote from the Member representing the Academy of Medicine. Therefore, it is a tough war between the genuine profession - from representative associations and union AND the Academic institutes and the "public".
Is the outcry for a change from the "genuine public" so strong? Do you have that experience from your practice? If you view this issue from a different angle, this is understandable as Mr. Tung is trying hard to make Hong Kong a highly intelligent and competitive city in the world. In order to be seen to be fair to everybody, I have asked Mr. Tung last year to pursue such measure into every profession and trade. He never give me an answer. I strongly believe it is his agenda to have our profession succumb first as a leading example for others to follow.
The questions are: Shall we succumb and help Tung to lead the Continuing Education policy of the whole city? Or shall we voice out our concern and fight till the end?
I shall talk to the new Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food on this matter. I have asked our new Legislative Council representative and the new President of the Hong Kong Medical Association for a collaborative action. Our battlefield is now beyond the Medical Council of Hong Kong. This is the job of the coming new HKDU Council and we need your full support again when the time is ripe.
Dr. Yeung Chiu Fat Henry