John Carty (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome in particular that the Bill makes it an offence for a person other than a veterinary practitioner to practise veterinary medicine. Stringent penalties, which can range up to €130,000 and-or five years imprisonment, are provided in the case of a first offence or €320,000 and-or ten years imprisonment in the case of a second or subsequent offence.

I welcome also that the Minister recognises the reality of situations that can sometimes occur on a farm when a veterinary practitioner might not be available to attend to an animal. Provision will be made for treatment of animals in an emergency by non-qualified persons and farmers will be enabled to continue to carry out treatments or procedures that were possible under the existing legislation.

There are a number of outstanding issues that need to be dealt with if this Bill is to be best formulated for the future of veterinary practice in the years ahead. The Bill recognises the need for the public interest to be represented on the council. An effect of that, however, is that the proposed composition of the new council might not include a sufficient number of veterinary surgeons to carry out effectively their designated roles in various committees. Veterinary surgeons have specialised knowledge and can provide important insights into the operation of the profession and care should be taken not to lose sight of that. This Bill is about the veterinary profession and their expertise is needed if the council is to function properly.

The section providing for a ministerial appointment to the council specifically excludes that person from being a veterinary surgeon but at the same time he or she should be involved with animal welfare related activities. Given that the veterinary profession is all about animal welfare, this exclusion is very strange. Removing the exclusion would not only deal with the obvious anomaly but could also be used to ensure that more veterinary expertise would be available to the new council.

With regard to limited registration as proposed in the Bill, it is important that professional standards would always be maintained. Concerns have been expressed that this provision could be used as a back door to register unqualified persons and that this in turn would undermine the veterinary profession. The real concerns arising from this provision should and could be addressed by specifying that the provision for limited registration be designed to deal with the outbreak of a class A disease or such similar disease which poses a significant threat to the national herd. The importance of maintaining professional standards and the consequences of any deviation from this could have a catastrophic effect on our food exports.

On the section dealing with authorised officers appointed by the veterinary council entering veterinary premises, all requests to enter or search premises should be accompanied by a warrant from a judge of the District Court. To do otherwise would be to go a step too far in the interests of equity and fairness. I know the Minister is seeking clarification on this from the Attorney General. The Veterinary Practice Bill is comprehensive and well balanced legislation and takes account of the needs of the profession as well as the public interest. It will also underpin confidence in the Irish agriculture and food industry both here and with our international customers in the years ahead.

I thank the Minister for bringing the Bill before the House and thank her and the Ministers of State for the many amendments and changes they have implemented to make the Bill workable. I fully support this legislation.

Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill which, by the words in its title, veterinary practice, gives recognition to the expanding role of the veterinary profession whose contribution to animal welfare and food quality through the years has been quite considerable. The record of veterinary surgeons in caring for animals is second to none and this is evidenced by the fact that they operate a 24-hour seven-day service, 365 days a years, akin to the medical and surgical on-call service we would like to have in Monaghan General Hospital.

Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is better care for the animals.

Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are well cared for in Monaghan and I would welcome the extension of surgical services there too.

The Bill updates and replaces the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1931 and two subsequent Acts from 1952 and 1960. Considerable time has elapsed since then which accentuates the need for reform and change and makes this legislation all the more welcome.

EU membership has been largely responsible for the dramatic change in the environment in which veterinary surgeons and personnel operate in this country. Advances in technology together with increased attention to food safety and animal welfare have transformed the situation for the veterinary profession. As food consumers we have a vested interest in the work of the veterinary profession and have become more discerning and questioning than ever before. Veterinary surgeons do a commendable job in all types of weathers while ensuring the integrity of the food chain. This integrity even extends to tourists' natural concerns about the dangers of BSE and its human form, vCJD, and we are all aware of the presence held at Dublin Airport and Border areas.

A television commercial features a female vet and two well known actors from my own county and constituency, Tommy and John McArdle, better known as the twin McArdles. It vividly illustrates the privations of veterinary surgeons called out in the middle of the night. It also illustrates the difficulty people have with remembering names when one of them takes off his hat and confuses the vet.

Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does Deputy Connolly know the difference between them?

Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

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.

John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

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.

Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It has HETAC approval, so it already has the required standards.

John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I expect that not only Athlone, but also Waterford and other such educational institutions throughout the country, including UCD, will continue to be the leaders in this area.

No specific organisation represents nurses at present. The Department did meet a veterinary nurse as part of a delegation for discussions on the Bill, although neither she nor the Department would claim that she was representing the profession as a whole. There was a discussion with a veterinary nurse, however, and many of the ideas and suggestions came from that quarter.

Section 55 allows non-vets to treat animals in emergency situations from time to time. This section also allows farmers and others to carry out various treatments to their animals, which are incidental to their usual care and management. Treatments such as hoof paring and assisting with lambing are not classified in the Bill as being reserved functions of vets or veterinary nurses.

Part 9 deals with veterinary premises and their approval. Deputy Naughten raised the issue of grant aid but we contend that it will be a matter for the owners of the premises to bear the costs of meeting standards set by the veterinary council.

The exclusion of State premises from the provisions of this Part of this Bill is appropriate. This provision has nothing to do with TB tests or other animal health legislation.

The question of powers of entry by officers of the veterinary council into veterinary and non-veterinary premises was also raised by Deputies Upton and Naughten. As I said previously, the Minister is still awaiting definitive advice on this issue from the Office of the Attorney General. However, the Minister hopes to be in a position to address the matter on Committee Stage.

This Bill has nothing to do with the prescription of veterinary medicines. That aspect is regulated under the Animal Remedies Act and regulations made thereunder. It is intended that regulations will be introduced later this year, both to amend prescribing rules and to implement the recent EU directive.

I again wish to thank Deputies for having raised various issues in the course of this debate. Their positive contributions have been helpful and I look forward to a lively debate on Committee Stage. Hopefully the Bill will be passed as quickly as possible thereafter.

I thank my senior official, Mr. Séamus Healy, an Assistant Secretary General in the Department, for keeping us all on the straight and narrow. I also thank the main Opposition spokespersons, Deputy Naughten and Deputy Upton, for their contributions on Second Stage, and my colleague from Mayo, Deputy Carty.