Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses from the VCI. If they will bear with me for a moment, I will quote from its code of professional conduct, prior to its amendment. It is very specific in saying "Any veterinary practice established in commercial premises must be wholly owned by a veterinary practitioner or group of veterinary practitioners who must be fully responsible for the conduct and practice and for the ethical and legal obligations falling upon its veterinary practitioners." It also states "The attention of veterinary practitioners is directed to section 54(2) of the Veterinary Practice Act 2005 which prohibits the practice of veterinary surgery or medicine by corporate bodies." That was then. Perhaps we can have some discussion on this. I want to question the witnesses initially about the position then before moving on to the present. That was the VCI's code of practice and its interpretation of the Act. How did it police that at the time? What would it have done if a corporate had appeared at that time or if the VCI had seen corporate ownership? The VCI has said here today that it has no control over ownership but in that code of practice, it specifically said that it was responsible for ownership. It was telling the veterinary, agricultural and corporate worlds who could own a practice and who could not. If a matter is included in the VCI's code of professional practice, it has responsibility for it. It has to do what it says on the tin. How did the VCI police that issue then? What interactions did it have with veterinary practice owners? At that time, when the VCI admitted this was part of its role, how did it know who owned veterinary practices? The witnesses know the point I am trying to make. I will move onto the situation post the amendments in a second.