Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

The Senator is trying to limit the application of an emergency provision to Class A diseases. This is what the amendment means. I am aware this is not exactly what the Senator intends to do as he has agreed there are practical emergencies, where someone must deal with a fallen or injured animal. We do not wish to become tied up in red tape about that issue. I appreciate that what the Senator is saying is that one should have time to ensure that people who are temporarily registered can only deal with Class A diseases which harks back somewhat to the previous amendments. The Senator is correct in stating that Class A and B diseases change as new diseases arise. I am considering the possibility of introducing a consolidation Bill on the issue of animal disease, but this will take some time. We have flexibility in that there are prerequisites to determine what a disease is in the first place.

The amendment arises from an undue worry that this Bill undermines the veterinary profession. However, the Bill is intended to place the veterinary profession on the same level as the medical profession, as was reflected in a number of amendments. We have high educational standards for our vets and I do not want to have them undermined. That is not the intention or the practical implication of the Bill. This is also the case within the European Union and some other countries such as New Zealand and Australia. I will keep on eye on this issue and if we detect a situation whereby the rules are being circumvented, it will be dealt with quickly. However, many issues arise pertaining to emergencies and if I accept this amendment it will mean that unwittingly, I will prevent people from dealing with an emergency, which is not the Members' intention.