Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)

No I do not. Veterinary practice will be the winner for being better regulated, especially through the veterinary council's structure and role in setting standards and imposing sanctions on its members. The veterinary profession is self-regulating as are many other profession and it is important that those being regulated are well represented. I will refer to concerns I have on that later.

The Bill significantly broadens the make up of the veterinary council but I am mystified as to why a Member of the Oireachtas is precluded under section 29 from membership of the Veterinary Council of Ireland. It also precludes members of local authorities and the European Parliament from membership. Members of these bodies who are employed by the veterinary council are required to resign that employment. No reason is given for this prohibition and I fail to see the rationale for it. I find this section offensive to Members of the Oireachtas and to members of the other bodies mentioned and believe the section should be removed from the legislation. It is not as if there will be a stampede for membership of the veterinary council. Perhaps it was felt a conflict of interest might arise from one's membership of these other bodies. However there appears to be no rational explanation and I submit that the section could be removed without having any adverse effect on the legislation.

The current council has 17 members, including 14 vets and of these 12 are elected by the wider body of vets, one by the National University of Ireland and the Minister appoints the chief veterinary officer from her Department. Only eight of the proposed new council would be vets, of which seven would be elected and the remaining one a ministerial appointee. A registered vet, veterinary nurse or a person entitled to be so registered would be appointed by one of the country's education bodies. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland and Director of Consumer Affairs would each nominate one member. The balance would be made up of users of veterinary services involved in animal welfare and nominated by higher education bodies. The final seat on the veterinary council would be occupied by a registered veterinary nurse.

The veterinary profession, with which consultation appears to have been minimal, is of the opinion the new council does not include a sufficient quota of vets to carry out the designated committee roles effectively. The previous committee had approximately 14 vets and that number has been reduced significantly to eight. I can see why vets are concerned. It is obvious there has been minimal contact with vets, but as the composition of councils is being changed, consultation on the Bill's provisions should have been continually conducted with the existing Veterinary Council of Ireland, the Irish Veterinary Union and Veterinary Ireland. We are at risk of losing the vital insight of vets into the operation of the profession and accordingly the number of vets on the council should be increased to provide for a majority.

The Bill also allows for temporary registration of veterinary surgeons from outside the country for disease outbreaks such as the foot and mouth outbreak some years ago. The Bill also enhances the role of the veterinary nurse. We have seen examples of our vets going abroad and performing useful tasks in England in times of need and it is useful when it happens. The category of limited registration proposed to facilitate this measure would have the support of the veterinary profession, which feels it is a vital measure to protect the heath of the national herd and the economy as a whole. However, it feels the role of such visitor vets should be confined to tackling class A diseases only and would require stricter conditions under training. This would preclude the measures from covering such diseases as TB and brucellosis.

Another provision in the Bill would allow the Minister to make regulations for limited practice of certain defined veterinary procedures by non-registered persons or non-vets. The veterinary profession strongly opposes this. Such procedures include the treatment of an animal in an emergency and administering an anaesthetic. This section would also permit drawing up a regulation to maintain and improve standards of animal health and welfare and to ensure adequate provision of vet services in the state. The Minister's expressed view is that the maintenance of the highest standards within the veterinary profession is a matter of great social and economic importance to this country. The inclusion of this section appears to go beyond what is needed and it should be scrapped.

The Bill's statutory recognition of veterinary nurses is welcome but their deployment should be in conjunction with vets. Veterinary nurses are an extremely important resource and much progress has been made in the development of formalised education and training programmes for them. The development of deployment structures for nurses to work in conjunction with veterinary surgeons appears to be a matter of urgency. The overriding concern must at all times be the health and welfare of animals in the care of the veterinary profession. Matters such as the choice of appropriate medications, possible adverse reactions post-injection and immediate access to a directing veterinary surgeon are all important.

I hope there is no possibility that the draft legislation will cause division between veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses. There is a role for both the vet and the vet practice nurse and legislation should reflect how they complement each other. It would be a pity if any such legislation were to be the cause of division. It would only take a relatively minor adjustment to overcome this potential difficulty and to ensure the present excellent co-operation can be maintained and developed.

Another welcome measure in the Bill is a proposal to introduce the certification of veterinary premises. However, the proposed certification should only be granted to premises that would be operated by registered vets. As currently drafted, the proposed wording might even allow veterinary nurses to operate certified premises, but there should be no ambiguity in this respect. While people might deal with a nurse in a veterinary practice, they may be under the misapprehension that they are receiving advice from a qualified vet, whereas they are not.

Section 55 makes it illegal for anyone to misrepresent themselves as being qualified in veterinary medicine. In view of the close association of the veterinary profession with the farming community, it would be only appropriate that farmers should be represented on the new veterinary council. There is a possibility that farmers could be elected under the Bill's existing provisions. Nevertheless, those elected places should be reserved for farming organisations such as the IFA and the ICMSA. Specific representation should be provided for farmers through these organisations in view of the farmers' position as major consumers of veterinary services. It is essential for farmers to be represented on the veterinary council and their representative bodies should have first call on who represents them on it.

Section 54 sets out for the first time the definition of veterinary medicine. The legal definition is so comprehensive that it would render illegal common practices that have been carried out for generations by farmers and other animal owners. The section should specifically provide that all existing common practices for the care and husbandry of farm livestock by a farmer or his employee, be excluded from the definition of veterinary medicine.

With the exception of the reservations I have expressed, I give a general welcome to the Bill.

See this speech in context