Letters to the Editor, February 9, 2014
I refer to the letter by Samantha Denford, research assistant of the Lion Rock Institute ("Doctors and their patients will benefit", January 27). I do not agree that increasing flexibility for internationally trained doctors and funding Hongkongers to study aboard will benefit citizens overall.

I refer to the letter by Samantha Denford, research assistant of the Lion Rock Institute ("Doctors and their patients will benefit", January 27). I do not agree that increasing flexibility for internationally trained doctors and funding Hongkongers to study aboard will benefit citizens overall.
Currently, doctors who study abroad need to pass three tests and a clinical practice in order to work in Hong Kong. The problem is not the lack of a quota for these doctors to work in Hong Kong, but the pass-rate in the test for these doctors is low, at around 5-10 per cent each year.
The low pass rate is by no means detrimental to these doctors, but rather it guarantees the candidates who work here reach a certain medical standard. This can ensure Hong Kong citizens receive a professional, up-to-standard medical service.
If the number of doctors is increased by accepting some of those who originally fail the test, it will be a disaster for Hong Kong citizens. Who wants to receive a substandard health-care service?
On the other hand, I agree funding for Hong Kong students to study overseas can help to increase the city's competitiveness, but the government should also put more emphasis on improving the competitiveness of local students.
The education system in Hong Kong is often criticised as being too exam-oriented, which often makes students fail to put into practice the skills and knowledge that are truly helpful in real life beyond the textbook.