Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

This amendment might go too far in that it would require the council to demonstrate how the ability of a person to practise has been affected by a decision on a matter by the courts which might be totally unrelated to and outside the person's veterinary practice. However, it must be noted that we are referring to a conviction for a serious matter which, if the person was to continue to be registered, could bring the profession into disrepute. It should also be noted that the person affected has the full appeals procedure available to them and, in the final analysis, the courts would determine whether the decision of the council is reasonable.

I have some concerns regarding this issue in that it may be taking matters too far. An offence may or may not be serious and may not really interfere with a person's ability to practise as a veterinarian. It could be restrictive. The council must consider situations where serious issues that would have an impact on a person's ability to carry out their work professionally arise. However, the courts will determine what will be the consequences. There are issues of a personal nature which would not prevent a person from working as a veterinary practitioner. One might tie people up and that would be somewhat unfair.