\n<\/p>\n
Mr Tan said that Assoc Prof Lim had known about the full details of the case when he made his speech, highlighting various exchanges between AVS, the resident and the opposition MP.<\/p>\n
These correspondence included a Sep 11, 2025 reply by the resident to AVS regarding the investigation outcome, which was also sent to Assoc Prof Lim.<\/p>\n
Mr Tan added that the National Parks Board (NParks) had replied to Assoc Prof Lim on Oct 9, 2025, and Feb 25, 2026, as he had appealed to NParks and other government agencies on her behalf. \u00a0<\/p>\n
From the correspondence, Assoc Prof Lim would have known that AVS investigated the incident and found no professional negligence or misconduct, said Mr Tan.<\/p>\n
Additionally, while AVS had found that there were areas for improvement in the vet’s documentation or communication with the resident, this did not affect the outcome of veterinary case management, Mr Tan said.<\/p>\n
Mr Tan then pointed to an email by Assoc Prof Lim to the resident on Oct 28, 2025, in which the WP MP noted that AVS had found \u201cno relevant regulatory violations\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cI also hope that you are willing to accept that the route of appealing to the authorities is effectively closed, unless you are able to provide material new information to prompt them to reopen the case,\u201d Assoc Prof Lim wrote.<\/p>\n
In his speech in April, Assoc Prof Lim said that he was not insinuating that there were any lapses in the resident\u2019s case.<\/p>\n
However, Mr Tan said his speech implied that AVS had not conducted its investigations on his resident\u2019s complaint fairly, effectively and independently because he juxtaposed the resident\u2019s allegations alongside his statement that \u201cpublic trust and confidence in procedure is important\u201d.<\/p>\n
Mr Tan called this a \u201cserious allegation\u201d.<\/p>\n
He also noted that in his speech, Assoc Prof Lim had referred to the experience of \u201cat least one\u201d resident, which implies that there could be more than one case.<\/p>\n
Assoc Prof Lim has since confirmed that he was referring to just one resident, Mr Tan said.<\/p>\n
In his response to Mr Tan\u2019s clarification, Assoc Prof Lim thanked Mr Tan for the update and said he did not dispute the accounting with him. He added that he would convey the information to the resident.<\/p>\n
\u201cStill, I believe, as I did then, and I still do now, that it\u2019s my role to raise the concerns of the lived experience of my residents. Prior to the delivery of that speech, I had checked to see that I was faithfully representing a case, and I believe I did so.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is my job. I’m sure that the (Minister of State) will do the same for his residents,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Mr Tan responded that what is said and omitted in parliament is important.<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd if what was presented to parliament and in fact to the public, leaves an impression that unfairly, that the public officers had not done their job and they undermined the credibility and professionalism of public officers, then we ought to take care of what we say and also take care with what we do not say,\u201d he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n