KUALA LUMPUR, August 4 — Cabinet has instructed the Ministry of Health (MOH) to refine its proposal to review private general practitioners’ (GP) consultation fees, despite stagnation for over three decades.
Health Minister Dzulkefly Ahmad told Gopeng MP Tan Kar Hing in a written Dewan Rakyat reply last Thursday that the MOH has tabled a paper on a review of private GP consultation fees to Cabinet.
“However, the MOH was asked to refine the proposal and to continue stakeholder engagement sessions with stakeholders and parties of interest,” said Dzulkefly.
The Medical Practitioners Coalition Association of Malaysia (MPCAM) previously proposed raising GP consultation fees to RM50 to RM80 from the current RM10 to RM35 rate that has been fixed for 33 years.
Dzulkefly’s parliamentary reply did not specify the rate proposed by the MOH in its paper to Cabinet.
In the same parliamentary reply, the health minister defended the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry’s (KPDN) jurisdiction of the MOH’s drug price display policy that is legally enforced under the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 (Act 723).
Tan, a Pakatan Harapan lawmaker, had asked the health minister whether the MOH was considering a more “balanced” approach to medicine price display instead of implementing it under Act 723, as well as a review of GPs’ consultation fees that have been fixed at the same rate since 1992.
The Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025, which came into force on May 1, requires private health care facilities and community pharmacies to display retail medicine prices.
“Medicines are defined as pharmaceutical products under the Sale of Drugs Act 1952 and the Poisons Act 1952, along with their respective regulations. Meanwhile, the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 (Act 723) provides a legitimate and suitable legal framework to ensure price transparency in sales transactions, including the sale of medicines at private health care facilities and community pharmacies,” Dzulkefly told Tan.
“The display of medicine prices only involves the sharing of information on the selling price of medicines and is not a price control mechanism that restricts the professionalism of medical practitioners in making clinical decisions based on patients’ needs.”
Dzulkefly described the medicine price display mandate as a move in line with the government’s aspirations for price transparency, consumer protection, and a fair and competitive market in the health care sector.
The health minister further explained that pharmacy enforcement officers under the MOH have been delegated the authority by KPDN to act as assistant price controllers in enforcing the drug price display order under Act 723.
“Pharmacy enforcement officers from the MOH are professionals with pharmacy qualifications and have experience in conducting inspections of pharmaceutical products and all health care facilities that sell and supply medicines to patients,” said Dzulkefly.
“Enforcement activities on private health care premises and community pharmacies will involve the presence of pharmacy enforcement officers from the MOH and will not be carried out solely by KPDN. This approach will not only enhance the effectiveness of enforcement, but also ensure more comprehensive compliance with the relevant legal requirements.”
Dzulkefly reiterated assertions that the MOH conducted stakeholder engagement sessions prior to implementing its drug price display policy, including meetings on November 2, 2023 and August 13, 2024, with industry representatives, professional associations, and private health care providers.
Public consultations were held via the government’s Unified Public Consultation (UPC) portal from July 15 to August 20, 2024. Another advocacy session for private health care providers, who would be directly involved in medicine price display, was held on February 27 this year.
“The overall results of these engagement sessions showed that the majority of stakeholders, especially consumers, supported the implementation of drug price display, even though private medical practitioners had expressed concern about the enforcement aspect and burden of consultation fees that have not been revised for so long,” said the health minister.
The health minister’s remarks to the Dewan Rakyat on July 31 show a departure from his earlier May 13 statement, when he promised that the MOH would review a proposal by doctors’ groups for the MOH to take jurisdiction of the drug price display mandate by placing it under the Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 1998 (Act 586).
This followed an historic rally in Putrajaya on May 6 by more than 700 doctors against KPDN’s jurisdiction over medicine price display.
The government made another U-turn on the length of the grace period for enforcement of price display, with the MOH and KPDN issuing a statement yesterday that educational enforcement would only continue until September 30, not until the outcome of a judicial review as initially promised by Dzulkefly.
Compounds for repeat offences will be issued from October 1, while full enforcement will begin on January 1 next year, as MOH and KPDN noted that the court has yet to order a stay of enforcement.
Two judicial review applications have been filed at the High Court here to quash the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025: one by eight applicants comprising medical and dental groups and an individual GP, whereas another was by a doctors’ association and a clinic operator.
Case management for the lawsuit by the eight applicants has been set for August 22.
