\n<\/p>\n
Unauthorised individuals who pose as qualified veterinarians or carry out unlicensed practice can face fines of up to S$50,000 (US$39,200) or 12 months’ jail, up from the current S$10,000 maximum fine under the Animals and Birds Act.<\/p>\n
Complaints will be reviewed by the registrar, who will recommend action to the council.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Appeals go to either the minister or the High Court, depending on the level at which the case is referred to, NParks said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Several Members of Parliament (MPs) raised concerns about the affordability of vet care, though NParks said that pricing and fees fall outside the scope of the Bill.<\/p>\n
It added that AVS will consider separate measures to address these concerns.<\/p>\n
MP Diana Pang (PAP-Marine Parade-Braddell Heights) said that rising costs \u2014 spanning diagnostics, surgery, hospitalisation and follow-up care \u2014 were a significant concern for many pet owners.<\/p>\n
“For some families, this presents a genuine affordability challenge, sometimes forcing them to delay or decline necessary treatment or to struggle financially, even if they wish to do their best for the ‘fur child’,” she said, calling on the government to explore strategies to improve affordability and price transparency.<\/p>\n
MP Melvin Yong (PAP-Radin Mas) highlighted public feedback on the lack of upfront pricing clarity, wide variations in fees and difficulty comparing services across providers.<\/p>\n
Mr Tan said that the Code of Ethics for Veterinarians already requires vets to explain treatment options, costs and risks, obtain owner consent and avoid unnecessary procedures. The authorities are also exploring fee listing to improve price transparency.<\/p>\n
“While we understand that many Singaporeans see pets as a member of their family \u2013 mine included \u2013 and we understand concerns around vet costs, we must also recognise that pet ownership is a personal choice and a long-term commitment that comes with responsibilities,” he added.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n