Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

It is being distributed now.

Reflecting the fact that the Bill enjoyed support on all sides of the House, no Opposition amendment was tabled during its passage through the Dáil. However, arising from ongoing consideration within my Department and consultations between my Department and various stakeholders following publication, I proposed a total of 12 amendments by way of refining and improving the Bill. I am glad to say that these amendments were readily agreed by all sides in the House. Before giving an outline of the Bill, I propose to make some preliminary remarks about the context in which the Bill is being presented and the role played by veterinary practitioners, nurses and others in the treatment and care of animals.

The primary role of the veterinary profession continues to be animal health care, with the greatest number of veterinarians working in this field caring for farm animals, sport animals and, increasingly, companion animals. At farm level, vets perform a very important function in assisting farmer clients to maintain the high health status of their animals and in minimising disease risks which can have a significant impact on farm income. Vets are also a critical part of the official inspection service, both at farm and processing levels, in terms of verifying that food is safe for consumers. Vets are also, of course, involved in many other roles within industry, including research as part of the pharmaceutical industry, reflecting how the profession has responded to evolving demands and is prepared to participate fully in the broader economy. Veterinarians can truly be said to be involved in the food industry from farm to fork.

The veterinary profession was the first of the professions in Ireland to have its underpinning legislation significantly reformed and brought up to date. The Veterinary Practice Act 2005 significantly overhauled regulation of the profession with regard to the make-up of its regulating body, the Veterinary Council of Ireland. It also improved disciplinary procedures and established mandatory continuous professional development and premises accreditation schemes. The 2005 Act also represented an important milestone in the development of the veterinary nursing profession, as a discipline in its own right, with the Act conferring formal recognition on veterinary nurses for the first time in Ireland. This has enabled the veterinary nursing profession to develop a distinct personality. Almost 500 nurses are now registered to practice.

In the field of nurse education and training, we have moved from a situation in which most nurses had to go overseas for training to one in which five colleges in Ireland now offer approved and accredited courses. All of these positive developments have taken place in the relatively short period since the 2005 Act came into force. I look forward to the members of the veterinary nursing profession developing further in tandem and in co-operation with their veterinary practitioner colleagues in the years ahead.

It may be useful to state at this stage that the measures involved in this legislation can be divided into two broad strands. The first strand, which is covered in section 2, concerns mechanisms for exempting certain activities from being reserved to veterinary practitioners or veterinary nurses. The second strand, which is covered in sections 3 to 9, relates to changes designed to streamline and improve the operation of the legislation in light of experience. In the majority of cases, the changes proposed derive from suggestions made by the Veterinary Council of Ireland on the basis of its direct experience of implementing the 2005 Act. The proposed amendments also take account of more recent legislation governing the regulation of the professions, particularly the Medical Practitioners Act 2007 and the Pharmacy Act 2007.

I wish to outline some of the specific elements of the Bill. As I have indicated, section 2 is the kernel of the Bill. My objective is to ensure that activities and services concerning animals that have traditionally been carried out by people who are neither vets nor nurses, do not become reserved to the veterinary profession. The 2005 Act sought to address a shortcoming in the previous legislation. It created a greater degree of legal certainty around what constitutes the practice of veterinary medicine by introducing a definition of veterinary practice. This definition is contained in section 53 of the Act. Since the 2005 Act came into force, however, the Veterinary Council of Ireland - the regulatory body for the profession, which is charged with day-to-day implementation of the Act - has raised concerns with my Department that the definition of veterinary practice, which, of necessity, is expressed in broad and general terms could be interpreted as embracing a range of procedures or activities that have traditionally been carried out by people with appropriate skills, training and experience. The procedures in question include farriery, equine dentistry, bovine hoof trimming, micro-chipping of companion animals, scanning of cattle and sheep and physiotherapy. Such day-to-day farming and animal husbandry practices should not be the sole preserve or function of vets or veterinary nurses.

The legal advice obtained by my Department indicated that in the event of legal disputes arising, there could be doubt about the status of such procedures carried out on animals. As competitiveness is a key issue for our economy, it would be invidious if services to farmers and other animal owners were to become overly restricted, especially as that would have negative cost implications for those concerned. Therefore, it is appropriate to address this situation. My Department has received advice from the Office of the Attorney General to the effect that this cannot be done in a comprehensive manner without amending the Veterinary Practice Act 2005. Under the amendments I am proposing, my office will be vested with a delegated power to make ministerial regulations, exempting specified procedures from being reserved to registered people. The exercise of this function will be subject to appropriate principles and policies approved by this House in the primary amending legislation. If Senators wish, we can examine these aspects in greater detail on Committee and Report Stages.

It is appropriate that there should be formal consultation on a statutory basis with the Veterinary Council of Ireland before any activity is exempted. The Bill provides for this. There will also be consultation with other stakeholders.

The amendments also provide for any exemptions to be made subject to appropriate conditions, including education, training and skills, membership of specified bodies and so on. The conditions to be applied to each exempted activity will be determined on a case by case basis. The process will, in effect, build on the existing informal arrangements in place across the disparate groups. In this respect, it will provide clients with a greater degree of quality assurance in regard to these procedures. It will also facilitate the imposition of limits on the scope of particular procedures, where appropriate, which can be performed by non-registered persons, or non-veterinarians, which will bring a much greater degree of legal certainty to the area.

My Department has consulted widely on this issue and it is fair to say that there is a general welcome it is being addressed. Many of the groups representing the current service providers see the changes as a basis for developing their areas of activity in accordance with best practice.

I will turn to the other main themes covered in this Bill. I refer to disciplinary procedures and enforcement. Professions, including the veterinary profession, occupy an important and somewhat privileged position in society. Given their nature, society also places a great deal of trust in the professions. It is critical, therefore, that society has confidence in the way the professions are regulated. This places a particular responsibility on us, as legislators, to ensure that legislation underpinning the professions guarantees that regulation is robust, effective and transparent and that any hint of closing of ranks around colleagues is avoided.

The 2005 Veterinary Practice Act brought regulation of the profession up to date in many important respects, including a greater degree of external representation at council level, an external chair of its fitness to practise committee, publication of findings of disciplinary proceedings and so on. While the mechanisms are working well, nonetheless, based on feedback from the Veterinary Council of Ireland, I propose to adapt some provisions to further improve their effectiveness.

The first amendment, which is in section 4, is designed to give the Veterinary Council of Ireland a greater range of options in terms of the sanctions it can apply where its fitness to practise committee has upheld a complaint against a veterinary practitioner or veterinary nurse. These sanctions include striking off, suspension, attachment of conditions, etc. Currently, under section 80 of the Act, the council is enabled to apply any of these sanctions only where the fitness to practise committee has made an explicit finding of unfitness to practise. This is too restrictive and what I propose is that, even if does not make a finding of unfitness to practise, the council will have the discretion to impose an appropriate penalty from the range specified in the legislation where an aspect of the substantive complaint has been upheld by the fitness to practise committee. It follows that in exercising this function, the council is required to apply penalties which are proportionate to the scale and import of the breach which has been established.

I am also proposing in section 9(k) of the Bill to amend the definition of "professional misconduct". As Senators will appreciate, this definition is critical for the purposes of upholding standards in the profession. As I said earlier, members of any profession must be measured to the highest standards, reflecting their role in society.

I also drew attention to the fact that more recent legislation governing regulation of doctors and pharmacists has come into force since the enactment of the Veterinary Practice Act 2005. I propose, therefore, to adapt the definition of professional misconduct in the current Act to align it, in so far as possible, with the equivalent provisions in more recent related legislation.

On Committee Stage in the Dáil, having considered further representations from the Veterinary Council of Ireland and having taken legal advice, I obtained agreement to an amendment to further refine this definition to take greater account of the most recent case law in this area relating to the medical profession.

It is also proposed in section 7 of the Bill to enhance the effectiveness of the council's investigative and enforcement functions.

Experience, both here and elsewhere, has demonstrated the need for regulatory bodies, where necessary, to be able to investigate complaints or concerns expeditiously, for example, before evidence can be removed or destroyed. Currently, under section 126 of the Veterinary Practice Act 2005, authorised officers of the council are required to obtain a search warrant to enter any premises, unless the agreement of the person concerned is forthcoming.

The council has expressed the view to my Department that this situation unduly inhibits its ability to investigate effectively. Accordingly, I am proposing to enable authorised officers of the council to enter premises, where that is necessary for the purposes of carrying out an investigation, without the need to first obtain a search warrant from a District Court judge. I stress, however, that a search warrant would continue to be necessary to enter a domestic dwelling. In other words, we will not have investigating officers coming into people's homes. That would be inappropriate without the appropriate warrant. That is the approach followed generally in regard to the powers of entry for authorised officers and follows the approach, for example, in the Pharmacy Act 2007.

A number of other minor procedural amendments are proposed in the area of disciplinary procedures which can be examined in detail on a further Stage.

A requirement for indemnity insurance is not a feature of the existing Veterinary Practice Act, and the council believes this legislative opportunity should be availed of to address that. From a public policy point of view, provision should be made to enable the Veterinary Council of Ireland ensure that clients of registered persons are protected against adverse events where civil liability attaches to the professional. Thus, section 3 proposes the insertion of a new provision into the Act to enable the council, with the consent of the Minister, make regulations making indemnity insurance mandatory for specified types of veterinary practice. However, the requirement will not apply to practitioners in respect of official duties.

In my earlier remarks I drew attention to the fact that the 2005 Veterinary Practice Act was a major milestone in the development of the veterinary nursing profession in Ireland. The Act, as currently structured, provides for recognition of trained nurses from Ireland and from other EU states. The current Act also provided for transitional arrangements for nurses who had been practising as such before the legislation was contemplated by affording them a five year period to formalise their education status. However, provision must now be made to enable the council register nurses coming from third countries.

A need has also been identified by the Veterinary Council of Ireland for registration processes for persons with particular expertise in the field of veterinary nursing who are needed to be part of course delivery at the education and training establishments. The amendments in section 6 are designed to address these issues by providing the Veterinary Council of Ireland with a broader range of recognition options in the case of veterinary nurses. In so doing, the range of registration options for veterinary nurses is being brought into line with those currently provided for in the Act for veterinary practitioners.

In the area of registration, I am availing of this legislative opportunity to remove any doubt that the registration mechanisms are capable of accommodating short-term registration, for example, of veterinary specialists from third countries who are accompanying horses from overseas participating in sporting events, which is a practical response.

Regarding EU mutual recognition obligations, mutual recognition arrangements for veterinary practitioners and six other professions, including doctors and dentists, have been a reality at EU level for many years. That is on the basis that training requirements in each member state are required to reach a common EU standard. More recently, as part of the initiatives at EU level to make the Single Market a reality across a range of services, free movement arrangements were extended to a range of activities, including veterinary nursing, where minimum educational standards are not co-ordinated at EU level. This process included initiatives to make it easier for veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses, as well as a host of other service providers, to provide services on a temporary basis across national borders. At EU level, this regime is laid down in Directive 2005/36. Our national legislation embodies these requirements, which are contained in the European Communities (Veterinary Practice Act 2005) (Qualifications in Veterinary Medicine) Regulations 2007, SI 745 of 2007. However, taking account of legal advice, I am proposing to consolidate the Statute Book by restating, in primary legislation, relevant provisions currently contained in that statutory instrument. This is the purpose of section 8 of the Bill. In addition, in order to take account of technical observations received from the European Commission on three minor aspects of SI 745 of 2007, the relevant provisions are being amended to align them more closely with the requirements of the directive. The amendments concerned relate to the status, in the home EU state, of the veterinary practitioner or nurse wishing to provide cross-border services on a temporary basis in this country and the time limit governing such applications. I can go into these in greater detail on Committee or Report Stages.

The Bill also contains a number of other miscellaneous and consequential amendments in section 9. These are mainly designed to facilitate greater efficiency in the carrying out of the council's business, including filling of casual vacancies and quorums for meetings. In summary, this is a timely update and clarifies the Veterinary Practice Act 2005. I look forward to hearing the views of Senators and I will try to accommodate any concerns. I commend the Bill to the House.