Mr. Gerry Neary:

With regard to the Veterinary Council of Ireland, has it improved or in any way mellowed? "No" would be the answer. We got original legal opinion that it acted outside its powers, that the Veterinary Practice Act was silent on ownership and that the council acted outside of its powers. I refer the Senator back to former Deputy Penrose when he questioned the council representatives. He pointed out to them that if there were any changes to be made in the ownership of practice or declarations, it was a function of the Oireachtas to so do. Since then the Veterinary Council of Ireland has held a series of reviews and put the four codes of conduct under review, which means they remain active. It does not mean the codes are cancelled until the review is held. They remain active. The council then had a review that revealed the public, veterinary surgeons, and every organisation it asked was against the move. Then the council went back and reinforced the exact position it took in December 2017, probably even more blatantly, stating that as long as acts of veterinary medicine were carried out by vets, then the rest was okay. The council has strengthened on this position, even though it has been pointed out that it has gone in the wrong direction and is acting outside of its powers.

On the certificate of suitability, COS, in the present scenario, where lay people own practices, be it corporate or private, a private person can get a practice certificate of suitability. In the current corporate structure that person is to govern the following: the medicines, the services, what is and is not done, what drugs he or she can and cannot use, how he or she uses the medicines and what temperatures they are stored at, the radiation protection for employees, disposal of remains, disposal of bottles and so on. A certificate of suitability holder in those practices is certifying he or she will run the practice and, under the certificate of suitability, is also certifying he or she will provide 24-hour service. He or she has no control over that practice and may not even be the practice manager. The clinical director and the certificate of suitability holder is not the practice manager. The practice manager in all of the practices we are aware of is a layperson. The certificate of suitability holder has no control over those matters.

Veterinary Ireland would always have advised its members that they are hanging themselves out to dry from a certification point of view if they become certificate of suitability holder. They are however, caught between a rock and a hard place because they are getting a large amount of money for the practice and are being maintained as clinical director for maybe one, four or five years, or whatever. They sign the certificate but they are signing what they cannot honour because they do not own the practice. This is why we were adamant in our contribution to the new Bill that the certificate of suitability holder must have some ownership of the practice. He or she cannot be an employee of somebody who directs him or her what to do. In that case, a layperson is dictating what the certificate of suitability holder does rather than the certificate of suitability holder doing it.

This is a long answer to the Deputy's question. We would always have contended that the certificate of suitability is signed by somebody who does not have any control of the practice and this is not a situation we should ever have got into. I do not know how it is going to be solved. I still believe the council is operating outside the law. Its level of involvement in the practice of veterinary medicine, in the offering of service, and in the distribution of drugs is one of the main areas in which we are hung up at the moment. There is one health system where vets and doctors restrict drugs. We have situation at the moment where laypeople can buy drugs, which is illegal. You cannot buy drugs. Only a pharmacist, a certificate of suitability holder or a wholesaler can receive drugs from a manufacturer. Only a vet can prescribe them and only he or she can fill the prescription from his or her stock of drugs, or a pharmacist can fill it. This is not what is happening. Whatever about the giving out of drugs, the layperson should not be able to buy drugs. In a situation where the drugs are bought in a COS holder's name and paid for by the company, the legal question is who owns those drugs. Is it the person who ordered them in his or her name or is it the person who paid for them? We would contend that the person who paid for them is the person who owns the drugs. To us, this whole scenario is illegal.

What are you to do, however, with the certificate of suitability holders who are there and the ownership issue? I do not believe the ownership structure that persists, where it is 100% owned by laypeople, should come in, but it is nothing to do with this legislation, which is the point I am making. The Veterinary Council of Ireland and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine have sat on their hands and allowed this to happen. This could have been stopped after two practices. We tried to co-operate with them and we had no effort at co-operation back. The committee itself has seen how the council came in here said there was no need for the legislation to be changed.