John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)

I thank Deputies who have contributed on Second Stage. The discussion has been informative, comprehensive and generally positive. The Veterinary Practice Bill 2004 is important legislation. We have endeavoured to ensure it is well balanced and will provide a legislative basis on which to regulate the veterinary profession as a whole to the highest standards. It meets current and prospective requirements for openness and fairness, as well as the further development of the profession.

I thank Deputies Naughten, Upton, Sargent, Connolly and Carty for their input into the Bill during the debate. I am sure that on Committee Stage the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Coughlan, will heed some of their views and suggestions. In the Seanad, where 78 amendments were tabled, she was amenable to a number of Opposition amendments. We will be able to tease out the legislation more on Committee Stage in line with the suggestions that have been made by Deputies on Second Stage.

I have listened carefully to the views of Deputies on specific provisions of the Bill and will reflect further on these before we deal with the subsequent Stages. We must be careful, however, not to disturb the balance included in the Bill. In addition, we must retain essential elements, such as transparency in the regulation of the profession and fairness as regards individual veterinary practitioners. We must also ensure that we legislate for current realities as well as those that will evolve over the coming decades.

Deputy Connolly mentioned that Members of the Oireachtas and MEPs are not allowed to participate as members of the Veterinary Council of Ireland, but that was the case with the old legislation, so there is nothing new in that area.

There has been a general welcome for the overall thrust of the Bill as it has been amended in its passage through the Seanad. Most Deputies accept the need to modernise the legislation and to broaden the membership of the veterinary council. Deputies also accept the widening of registration possibilities, the reformulation of the disciplinary procedure and the roles being given to the council concerning the standards of premises, ongoing education, training and investigations.

There has also been a welcome for the inclusion of a definition of veterinary medicine and for the recognition of veterinary nurses. Deputies on both sides of the House welcomed the latter provision in particular.

I wish to comment on some specific issues that were raised by Deputies Naughten, Upton and others. With regard to the composition of the veterinary council, we have achieved a reasonable balance in its membership. We have also met the concerns expressed when we increased by two the number of vets to be elected to the council. This should enable the veterinary council to carry out its statutory functions effectively in a way that will continue to enjoy public confidence.

The rationale underpinning the provision for limited registration is to provide for disease emergencies and for certain gaps in the educational institutions. The provision may be activated by the council only where it is satisfied that it is necessary. I would emphasise the restrictions that the council is enabled to place on practitioners with limited registration. It would not be appropriate to restrict it to class A diseases and I consider the provisions covering educational aspects appropriate.

We have struck the correct balance with regard to veterinary nurses, as that profession is being recognised for the first time in law. The Bill does not prescribe the particular qualifications or courses that will be recognised. Graduates from institutes such as Athlone can be accepted for registration if the courses are deemed to be up to the required standard. Deputy Naughten raised this issue earlier in the debate.

See this speech in context