Seanad debates

Thursday, 4 November 2004

Veterinary Practice Bill 2004: Second Stage.

 

12:00 pm

John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

Under section 80, the penalty for non-payment of fees is disproportionate; it is almost the same as the penalty for being unfit to practice. I know they want the money but it does not seem fair.

I wonder about being able to issue a direction that a person should obtain specified medical treatment. The Minister mentioned human rights. A professional body would not have the legal competence to instruct someone to receive treatment.

It is reasonable that premises should be defined and that there should be standards in place that conform to certain criteria. Under section 107, however, a veterinary premises can be a farm. Does this create a loophole? A person could say a premises was a farm and practise without having to conform to the standards required in buildings not surrounded by land.

An authorised officer can only enter other premises with the consent of the occupier. This is provided for under section 127(1)(a)(ii). Under the Animal Remedies Act, where hormones were being used in cattle, the State conferred enormous powers of entry. There was much debate in the House about the human rights aspect of this in that one could enter a premises without a warrant. This was correct as it had a positive effect. It seems in this case, however, the power is delimited. Perhaps the Act covering the use of hormones could be used where necessary. When dealing with land which does not belong to a vet, one must get the permission of the occupier. This is an area which might bear examination.

I welcome this important Bill, parts of which we can examine on Committee Stage. Perhaps the Minister will examine some of the matters I have raised beforehand because it could save time and avoid the need for me to vote with the Opposition which I would hate to have to do. The profession has served us well, although there have been a few notable high profile exceptions, as is the case with every profession.

The areas of food safety and animal health have changed dramatically, as has the old image of the country vet who, like the country doctor, was available 24 hours a day and come out in the middle of the night for a difficult calving. There are still vets who will do this — fair play to them — but, like everybody else, the vet is entitled to a reasonable quality of life. This has led to the creation of group practices and so on.

It is important that the legislation in place is brought up to date and that the profession has defined guidelines within which it can operate. It is also important that it is self-regulating.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.