Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 17 May 2005

Vol. 602 No. 4

Veterinary Practice Bill 2004 [Seanad]: Second Stage.

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am pleased to introduce the Second Stage of the Veterinary Practice Bill 2004. As Deputies will be aware, the Bill was initiated in Seanad Éireann in October last and completed its passage through that House on 21 April. The debate on the Bill through all Stages in the Seanad was positive and constructive and the draft measure was improved during its passage through the House. The Minister's openness to taking on board ideas put forward is evidenced by the fact that she proposed 79 amendments during that process. While many of these were purely technical or textual in nature, a significant number reflected proposals and suggestions put forward by Senators. I hope, therefore, the House will be able to give the measure a speedy passage in order that we can put in place a more effective regime for regulation of the veterinary profession as soon a possible.

The veterinary profession has long played a pivotal role in the development of our agriculture and food sectors. The expertise and commitment of its members in the area of animal diseases has enabled our livestock sector to progress and improve and, by so doing, provide a safe raw material for our developing food industry. With developments in the area of veterinary medicine and treatment techniques, considerable progress has been made in combating a range of animal diseases which otherwise would threaten the stable food supply we now take for granted. These developments also contribute to the protection of consumers from diseases which are transmissible from animals to man.

While veterinary practice was traditionally focused on combating animal diseases, in more recent years food safety, trade and animal welfare have also become extremely important issues. The veterinary profession now fulfils a pivotal role in carrying out inspection and certification functions at various stages in the food chain to verify both the standard of animals entering the chain and the standards of the processing operations. The State veterinary service, in particular, plays a major role in international trade, for example, in determining trade rules at OIE — the World Organisation for Animal Health — and bilateral levels and reassuring foreign regulators and consumers through certification functions and otherwise.

Society has correctly become more concerned about the welfare of animals and this is reflected in a growing body of legislation in this area. Here again veterinary practitioners necessarily carry important responsibilities in ensuring requisite standards are complied with. Care of an increasing number and range of pet species has also become an increasing concern of society and here again veterinary practitioners play a pivotal role.

Given the role played by the veterinary profession and the weight of responsibility placed on individual practitioners, it is important from a public policy perspective that regulation of the profession accords to the highest standards and meets current requirements in terms of openness and fairness. It should also facilitate the further development of the profession and its individual members. The earliest elements of the existing legislative foundations governing the profession have been on the Statute Book for more than 70 years. While these were appropriate to their time, this can no longer be said to be the case. Consequently, the former Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Walsh, accepted the need to sponsor replacement legislation and brought this project a considerable way during his period in office. I am pleased to progress the work he initiated.

It is important to note that this is not a matter of imposing a new regime on an unwilling profession. The Veterinary Council, the body charged under the legislation with day-to-day regulation of the profession, has drawn attention to a number of shortcomings in the existing code, particularly in regard to disciplinary aspects, continuing professional development and standards of premises.

Against this background, the Bill is designed to bring regulation of the veterinary profession fully up to date, taking account of the many developments in the environment within which the profession has operated since the original legislation was enacted and will also serve the needs of the profession in the years ahead. It is also appropriate in the public interest that greater transparency should be introduced into regulation of the profession and broader legal developments, including in regard to human rights, should be reflected particularly with regard to disciplinary proceedings. Among the principal features of the Bill are provision for the first time in legislation of a legal definition of veterinary medicine, a broader membership of a re-constituted Veterinary Council of Ireland to reflect interests such as education, consumers, food safety and animal welfare and to provide a better balance between veterinary practitioners and others, an updating of the provisions dealing with registration and for recognition of specialities in particular areas in veterinary practice, provision for continuing professional development which would be a prerequisite for retention on the relevant register, a new model to deal with complaints and a broader range of proportionate sanctions, statutory recognition of veterinary nurses for the first time, the establishment and monitoring by the council of standards of veterinary premises and the council to be given investigative powers commensurate with its regulatory role in the profession.

The Bill is extensive and comprehensive, running to 138 sections and four Schedules. Part 1 contains a number of standard provisions, including definitions and repeals. In regard to the latter, the Bill provides for continuation of the residual aspects of joint recognition arrangements with the UK, under which practitioners registered before 1978 can retain membership of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, the UK regulatory body.

It is obviously necessary to provide for an orderly transfer from the existing Veterinary Council of Ireland to the body to be established under the draft legislation. Among other things, Part 2 will ensure that the existing staff are not disadvantaged by the abolition of the existing council and that all rights and liabilities are properly transferred to the new council. It is important to stress at the outset that the council has been and will remain a self-funding body that does not receive any moneys from the Exchequer.

Part 3 provides for a fundamental restructuring of the council. The current membership of the council is fixed at 17, of whom 12 are practitioners elected by the profession. Nominees of the Minister for Agriculture and Food and UCD, as the sole provider currently of a veterinary degree in the State fill the remaining five places. It is appropriate that the composition of the council should be rebalanced, to avoid an in-built majority of elected members of the profession and to provide for representation of other stakeholders by their nominees. This is not an implied criticism of past or the current councils. However, as a self-regulating profession operating under statute, to continue to command the confidence of society at large, a significant degree of external representation is required. Apart from any other consideration, the increasing complexity of the issues, which the council is likely to encounter in the future means that it will benefit from the range of perspectives and expertise being brought to bear on any particular issue by such an approach. Accordingly, the Bill provides, in addition to the elected membership, for nominees from the FSAI, the Director of Consumer Affairs, the Minister for Education and Science and from institutions providing veterinary education. The Minister would also appoint four members directly from consumers of veterinary services and from the animal welfare world.

As regards the elected membership, during the passage of the Bill through the Seanad, the Minister agreed to increase the number of veterinary practitioners to nine. This will ensure that there is a critical mass of practitioners on the council available to serve on its committees, which will be given an enhanced role under this Bill. The council will also include an elected member representing the veterinary nursing profession. In all, the membership of the council will be 19, compared to the current 17.

The amended composition is balanced in terms of the veterinary profession itself and broader societal interests and will enable the council to carry out its functions effectively in the public interest. While the Bill does not provide for an in-built majority for elected members of the profession on the council, a majority of the profession on the council is not precluded.

In terms of the continuity over time between councils, an amendment was agreed in the Seanad to meet the Veterinary Council of Ireland's desire to provide for a certain degree of overlap between councils by providing for elections midway through the four-year life cycle.

While it is appropriate that the council is being given all the necessary powers to carry out its role, including in staffing and financial matters, provision is made for the Minister of the day to give general policy directions to the council and ultimately for its removal after due process should it fail to carry out the functions assigned to it under the legislation.

Part 4 provides the mechanisms to enable the council to function in its central role of registering and maintaining registers of practitioners. Provision is being made to safeguard the position of those registered on the existing register who as of right will be brought on to the new register. In terms of the categories that may be registered, provision is made for those trained in the State, as well as ensuring that we are in a position to fulfil our obligations under the EU mutual recognition regime. It is also proposed to make better provision for the council to register persons trained in third countries, as under the existing legislation this was limited to countries with which the council had mutual recognition arrangements.

Experience of the 2001 foot and mouth disease episode gave ample demonstration of the potentially devastating effects of disease outbreaks in the national herd and the potential for damage to the economy as a whole. Accordingly, to ensure that in such circumstances at short notice we can call on an adequate supply of veterinary expertise from outside the State, it is proposed to provide for a category of limited registration. Limited registration could also be granted to suitably qualified persons whose expertise is required to teach trainee practitioners.

Some concerns were expressed in the Seanad about the provision for limited registration. However, we must make provision for exceptional circumstances and the relevant section includes important safeguards, including that the council itself must be satisfied of the need for such registrations and that applicants have the requisite knowledge and skills. The council is also enabled to put appropriate restrictions on limited registration, including time limits and limits as to the functions that may be performed.

Part 5 makes provision for the first time in legislation for a definition of the practice of veterinary medicine. This will give greater legal certainty to the council in the execution of its functions. The Minister proposed a number of amendments in the Seanad, which are designed to clarify this important definition particularly with regard to certain categories of procedures.

The Bill will make it an offence for a person other than a veterinary practitioner to practice veterinary medicine or to use a title, which implies that he or she is so qualified. 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. Bodies corporate will continue under this Bill to be precluded from engaging in the practice of veterinary medicine.

It is also necessary, however, to recognise the reality of situations that can occur on the ground when a veterinary practitioner might not be available to treat animals. Accordingly, provision has been made for treatment of animals in an emergency by a non-qualified person and for farmers to be enabled to continue to carry out treatments or procedures that were possible under the existing legislation. Provision is being made for a ministerial regulation-making power in this area also. During the passage of the Bill through the Seanad, the Minister took on board a number of concerns expressed and amendments were agreed to clarify certain aspects of these provisions. An amendment was also agreed in the Seanad, which clarifies the situation of student vets and nurses practising veterinary medicine to gain experience stipulated under their courses.

The significant funding provided for the construction of a state-of-the-art veterinary college on the UCD campus, which opened in 2002 evidenced the importance the Government attaches to the standard of veterinary education. This impressive facility provides the infrastructure and facilities to enable our veterinary graduates to be trained to the highest standards internationally. Bricks and mortar are only part of the story and people of the highest calibre are required to ensure that courses of study match best international practice. The Bill provides that recruitment of such people would be facilitated by this legislation. The Veterinary Council of Ireland itself has always carried a crucial responsibility in the prescription of courses required for registration as a veterinary practitioner and it is proposed to continue and reinforce this role.

As this House recognises, we live in an era of accelerating change, which requires a life-long learning approach. This is particularly true in the veterinary profession, where scientific progress and advances in treatments are constant. Accordingly, the Bill enables the council to prescribe by regulations programmes of education that will be a prerequisite for remaining registered, as well as optional courses. To ensure sufficient focus on educational aspects, a dedicated education committee will be one of three committees the council will be required to establish. The legislation provides for the make-up of this committee to draw particularly from the educational expertise on the council and, where appropriate, to consult external expertise. An amendment agreed in the Seanad will give the council greater flexibility in making additional appointments to this committee.

The education committee, as part of its role in evaluating standards, will be charged with inspecting providers of education and further education and reporting to council. Among its other functions, it will advise the council on specialties in veterinary medicine and on qualifications in veterinary medicine obtained outside the State.

Disciplinary procedures and sanctions were among the shortcomings of existing legislation that were most pronounced. This was mainly due to the lack of proportionality in the range of sanctions that could be imposed on those found guilty of wrongdoing. Part 7 provides for a comprehensive reformulation of the fitness to practise provisions, taking account of the proportionality aspect. In drafting the replacement provisions, it was also appropriate to provide for greater transparency in the disciplinary procedures. The Department of Agriculture and Food took account of advice from the Office of the Attorney General on developments in human rights, in particular the European Convention on Human Rights. The procedures provided for are designed to ensure complaints are investigated fully, expeditiously and in a fair manner, safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of the complainant and of the person complained against.

There is provision for two mandatory committees of the council, a preliminary investigation one and a fitness to practise one. The role of the former is to examine complaints and decide whether a full inquiry, to be carried out by the latter, is warranted. The procedures have been constructed so that where there is a doubt, the dynamic is in favour of a substantive inquiry taking place. Provision is also made for the council to be kept advised of developments on a complaint, while ensuring that its view of the case is not prejudiced.

The composition of both committees is prescribed to ensure balance and that outcomes will command confidence. Provision is made for equal representation of practitioners and non-practitioners on both committees. In addition, an external chairperson, nominated by either the Bar Council or the Law Society, is stipulated for the fitness to practise committee. For the purposes of an inquiry, the committee will have the same powers, rights and privileges as are vested in the High Court in enforcing attendance of witnesses, production of documents and administration of oaths. Penalties are provided for those persons who commit offences regarding appearance before the fitness to practise committee.

Following a fitness to practise procedure, provision is made for a range of proportionate sanctions that may be imposed by the council. These include removal or suspension from the relevant register, attachment of conditions to continuing registration, including undergoing specified medical treatment, giving of advice, warning or censure by the council and requiring the person complained against to make a contribution of up to €5,000 to the complainant or towards the costs of the council in investigating the complaint. Due process is provided for in terms of notification of a decision and appeal, including appeal to the High Court by the person who is the subject of an adverse finding. The council is empowered to decide to remove from the relevant register a person who has been found guilty of an indictable offence in this State, or equivalent offence in another state. Due process is also provided for in this instance. In the interest of transparency, it is important the public has access to the outcomes of fitness proceedings. Consequently, the council will be required to publish all relevant details in its annual report.

While veterinary nurses have long been a feature of a significant number of veterinary practices, they have not, unlike their counterparts in the human field, enjoyed any separate legal personality under the existing statutes. The growing popularity of veterinary nursing is seen with the specific three year diploma course in veterinary nursing available from University College, Dublin. Part 8 provides for the first formal recognition of veterinary nurses. Responsibility in the first instance for establishing a register of veterinary nurses will rest with the veterinary council, which will be required to establish such a register within two years of establishment day. The Minister may establish a veterinary nurses board of Ireland to take over the veterinary council's functions for veterinary nurses. These arrangements reflect the Department's view that, given their current state of development, it would not yet be appropriate to establish a separate nurses board.

The Bill proposes to designate the range of functions appropriate for veterinary nurses to carry out. Arising from amendments tabled in the Seanad and consultations with members of the veterinary and veterinary nursing professions, several amendments were made to clarify and make more precise what nurses may do and their relationship with veterinary practitioners. Provision is made for additional functions to be assigned to veterinary nurses in light of, for example, technological developments. It is essential to ensure that those working as veterinary nurses, but who do not have a formal qualification in this regard, should not be unduly disadvantaged under the legislation. Accordingly, it is proposed that those working as veterinary nurses on 27 October 2004, the date of publication of the Bill, may apply for provisional registration which can last for up to five years, provided they complete an approved course of education within that period. These arrangements provide an appropriate framework for the development of the discipline of veterinary nursing within veterinary medicine and are in the interests of consumers and of the profession overall.

On the basis of a voluntary scheme, the existing veterinary council has done considerable work with the profession in the improvement of veterinary premises. Under Part 9, these arrangements will be given a statutory basis. This provides for the council to make binding regulations relating to veterinary premises within one year of establishment day. These regulations will cover aspects such as the classification of types of veterinary premises, standards to apply to different categories of premises and signage aspects. Practitioners will have four years from the date of the council making its regulations to bring their premises into line with the requirements. Wide variations in the standard of veterinary premises exist. What may have been acceptable a generation ago is no longer the case. The lack of standardisation in signage can lead to confusion as to the standard of facilities to be expected. These arrangements provide a reasonable basis for practitioners to bring their premises to a required minimum standard progressively.

By definition, the veterinary council's role in the regulation of the veterinary profession is central. It must, therefore, be given the necessary enforcement tools to carry out this role and to be proactive, where appropriate. Accordingly, it is proposed to give the council the power to appoint authorised officers to carry out inspections at veterinary premises and investigations where it is believed an offence is being committed or where a registered person is acting in a manner constituting professional misconduct. Concerns were raised in the Seanad about the extent of the powers to be given to these authorised officers. There was a general feeling that great care should be exercised in extending powers of entry without a search warrant, available to the Garda and officers of the Department of Agriculture and Food, to other agencies, such as the veterinary council. The Minister indicated in the Seanad she would examine this and its related aspects. The Attorney General's office is considering the matter and, if necessary, it can be addressed on Committee Stage.

The Veterinary Practice Bill is comprehensive and well-balanced, taking account of the needs of the profession and the public interest. Several improvements have been made to the Bill during its passage through the Seanad and I hope this House will give favourable consideration to it. I commend the Bill to the House.

I thank the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food, Deputy Browne, for his presentation. I acknowledge the important role played by veterinary surgeons in animal welfare and food safety. Their contribution over the years has been critically important to the development of the food industry and its export trade. Everyone accepts the current legislation is outdated and needs reform. It is 74 years since the initial legislation was introduced in this House. It was introduced in 1931 and revised in 1952 and 1960. It is critically important that we provide up-to-date legislation which modernises the existing legislation and that we have effective regulation. The Minister spoke to the House on that issue.

Up to now, the veterinary profession has been self-governing, and with the introduction of additional members to the veterinary council, will continue to be so. Significant shortcomings existed regarding disciplinary aspects and the measures which could be taken under the code of practice. Putting the suggested procedures in place is a positive move so that issues need not go before the courts but can be thoroughly investigated and addressed by the veterinary council.

For the first time, the legislation will define the profession and will regulate for the veterinary nursing profession. That has hitherto been left out in the cold with no formal structure. Veterinary medicine is changing rapidly because of EU regulations and directives on animal health and welfare, advances in science and technology and other medical advances, with education and training. The legislation also makes provision for continual education and training by those already qualified and trained. Such retraining and upskilling, which did not take place to the extent it should have done, is critically important. There is also the context of the broader social and regulatory changes taking place.

The Fine Gael Party is committed to promoting the rights of the consumer, acknowledged in the legislation. In principle, the Bill provides for the type of regulation required for those who consume food and for the farmer who avails of veterinary services, as well as those who avail of the small animal services. As we go through the various sections of the Bill, I will go into more detail on these matters.

The veterinary profession is changing dramatically. Over the past few years, substantially more women have been entering the profession. Most of those women, who enter the profession from the leaving certificate stage, want to focus on small animal veterinary medicine. That will create challenges in terms of a potential shortage of vets in some parts of the country. Deputy McGinley and Senator McHugh have told me that in some parts of Donegal it is almost impossible to secure the services of a vet. The same thing is happening in parts of Connemara and is likely to happen elsewhere in the country as many new vets, on emerging from college, enter the more lucrative area of small animal practice, where one does not suffer the drudgery involved in the long hours associated with large animal practices, especially during lambing and calving season.

I recently raised this issue with the Minister for Agriculture and Food. She said she had no plans to fund the establishment or maintenance of veterinary practices in parts of the country. There is an onus on the Department to ensure accessibility to veterinary surgeons and practices. That issue will become more critical in the context of prescription-only medicines. If there is no accessibility to vets, there will be many more animal welfare problems. The Department must acknowledge that there will be challenges in this area.

The Department of Health and Children has acknowledged a similar problem in recent years and still has difficulties in getting GPs to some parts of the country. The Department has at least acknowledged that this is an issue and has taken certain steps, including the development of health centres in various parts of the country, with assistance and support for GPs who go into certain communities. The Department of Agriculture and Food must take similar steps regarding vets.

I am concerned that the Bill grants to the Minister extensive powers by regulation. Under section 59, the Minister will be able to regulate anyone to practise as a vet, or in any area of veterinary medicine. Under section 55, the Minister can regulate any type of veterinary medicines and define what they are. Under section 53, the Minister can introduce obligatory veterinary certificates for animals or animal products. Accordingly, there is maximum flexibility for the Minister to introduce anything he or she so wishes by regulation. We can debate this on Committee Stage but basically, under the provisions of the legislation as it currently stands, the Minister has the powers to rewrite virtually the entire Bill.

Part 9 of the Bill will impact directly on consumers. It paves the way for the inspection of veterinary premises and the establishment of standards thereon. That will be the front line, particularly for small animals practice but also to some extent for large animal practice. It is on the premises that people have their first contact with the vet or the vet's staff and it will therefore impact on them. I would like to know by whom these inspections will be carried out and by whom the cost of regulation will be carried. This is ambiguous in the legislation. My understanding is that at the end of the day, the consumer will have to foot the bill involved. In theory the veterinary surgeon will pay, but in reality the consumer, the person availing of the services, will foot the bill. Most particularly, farmers will have to foot the bill.

Considering the current agriculture environment, costs will have to be reduced if agriculture is to be financially viable under the new decoupled era. Farmers will not put in the resources to fund veterinary premises in the coming years. We must consider this. I do not want the situation to end up in the same way as child care or food regulations. In principle, it was accepted by all at the time that we needed to regulate child care and to bring in sensible regulations regarding the preparation and sale of food. However, we have gone from one extreme to the other. This is a case of bureaucracy and red tape gone mad. Currently, the best example is the suggestion at EU level that butchers should not be allowed to sell into the catering trade, into restaurants and hotels. This shows how something which started out as a sensible regulation, an effort to put basic standards in place, has gone from one extreme to the other. There are also huge cost implications involved.

We need to ensure a sensible approach is taken to the issue of upgrading premises. Everyone accepts they must be brought up to a certain standard, but it must be kept in mind that the consumer will have to foot the bill. Once the standards are established they should be set in stone and not continually changed every 12 or 18 months, as is the case with child care standards. These change nearly every year and, of course, costs increase dramatically with every change. That forces people out of business. The last thing we want, especially in the case of large animal practices, is veterinarians being forced out of business. There must be some element of competition so costs can be kept at a reasonable level. We must not force operators out of the business, which could happen if we are extremely prescriptive in setting the standards.

State premises are exempt under Part 9 of the Bill. Perhaps the Minister will elaborate on the definition of State premises. My understanding of the definition in the legislation is that it means anything that is under the control of any Minister. That would include Teagasc, for example. Many people in County Leitrim have serious questions about the procedures Teagasc employed last Monday week in the movement of cattle from the farm in Ballinamore. Those questions remain unanswered. Nobody was prepared to give answers as to whether there was compliance with the animal movement rules. It is important that Teagasc and every other State agency and premises are above reproach in these matters. They should be seen not only to meet the standards but to transcend them. That is critical. It is disappointing this issue was ignored by Teagasc in the movement of stock from the Ballinamore farm.

On the subject of competition, an important survey was published in the Irish Farmers Journal in January this year. It surveyed the charges for call-out services among veterinary surgeons. They ranged from €28 to €45 for a call-out. That is a 50% difference between the least and most expensive. The most striking finding of the survey is the variation in charges for TB and brucellosis testing. These are standard tests with standard procedures regardless of whether they are conducted in Donegal or Cork. There should not be a major variation in charges.

The call-out charge ranged from €32 to €57. In addition, there is the charge per head which ranged from €3 to €4 for TB testing, a 33% variation, and from €1.90 to €3.40 for brucellosis testing, an 80% variation in the cost of the test. This must be examined, perhaps by the Veterinary Council. How can there be such a major variation in the charges for TB and brucellosis testing? It is understandable that there can be significant variations in call-out charges according to the difficulty of the procedures conducted but there should not be a significant variation in the cost of TB and brucellosis testing. The Veterinary Council and the Minister should ensure this matter is examined.

Another matter, also relating to costs, which gives rise to concern is the definition of veterinary medicine. Section 53 provides for the exclusion of common practices for the care and husbandry of animal livestock by the farmer or his employee from the definition of a veterinary procedure. However, I am concerned that there could be different interpretations of the definitions at a future date. There was ambiguity, for example, about the scanning of sheep and cattle when this legislation was introduced. What is the situation with regard to dehorning and castrating young cattle?

I agree with the Minister there should be flexibility in regulating this area. If more strict interpretations than we wish are taken of the principles in the legislation, the Minister should be able to bring forward a regulation, with the approval of both Houses, which will ensure the issue is clarified. We will not know the impact of this definition until it is utilised in practice. At that stage we could discover that some practices which were traditionally carried out on farms could be illegal under these provisions. There have been indications that traditional dehorning and castration procedures will be outlawed under animal welfare regulations. Perhaps the Minister will elaborate on that. It is important to have clarity on this issue.

The final point I wish to raise about costs relates to section 55 and prescription only medicines. Under section 55 the Minister will have the power to make regulations and lay them before the Dáil. It is imperative that the powers under section 55 be thoroughly debated by the House and a positive approval of the House must be required for regulations on medicines. Prescription only medicines could have huge implications in terms of the re-emergence of a black market in the sale of drugs and the increased use of antibiotics. If farmers must go to a veterinarian every time they require a medicine, they will take the belt and braces approach on the first occasion. They will seek an antibiotic to treat the animal from the start rather than trying something less severe first. Unless we are extremely careful on this issue, it will lead to an increase in the use of antibiotics and increased incidence of antimicrobial resistance.

There could also be implications for animal welfare. If the cost of medicines increases dramatically, farmers will not use them. That is the reality. We have seen the result of a restriction on the sale of antibiotics to veterinarians and pharmacies. Take the example of one medicine, penstrep. It could be purchased for between €3 and €4 per 100 ml. It now costs between €12 and €14 through the veterinarian or between €6 and €8 through the pharmacy. It is clear that imposing a restriction on antibiotics has dramatically increased their cost. Another example is the vaccine PI3 IBR. It is on sale in the US for 91 cents but costs €8.50 per head in this country. This is due to the type of restrictions on the distribution of those medicines to farmers.

We must take a sensible and straightforward approach to this issue. Anything that does not have a withdrawal period should not be prescription only. It is also important that we do not create a structure that results in a monopoly for veterinarians in this area. The EU directive makes clear that qualified persons, not only veterinarians, are entitled to write prescriptions. I accept that with some medicines veterinarians are the most appropriate people to write a prescription. However, this should be limited to a restricted number of medicines and should not apply across the board. There must be a sensible approach to ensure that supply routes and competition in the marketplace are maintained while also ensuring food safety through the controlled use of medicines.

Section 57 deals with non-registered persons. Will they be able to write prescriptions or issue prescription-only medicines? That will happen in practice. The veterinarian will not issue them. When writing prescriptions veterinarians do not necessarily examine the animals. If they did so the costs would go through the roof. We must consider the practicality of implementing these regulations. Take the example of red water treatments. It is critical that those treatments are given to an animal as soon as the animal is diagnosed with a problem. If one cannot contact a veterinarian, how will one access such treatments, for example, on a Saturday evening? It could be supplied through pharmacies because they must have cover on a 24-hour basis. Many vaccines and emergency treatments could be stored and made available through chemists and other merchants. A sensible approach needs to be adopted in this regard so that it is not left to veterinarians.

I refer to the tuberculosis testing programme, which is a source of significant frustration for many farmers. The issue of the lack of lesions on a carcase following a post mortem where an animal is supposed to have gone down with TB causes frustration for farmers. It is illegal to perform a second confirmatory test on an animal but that brings the integrity of the system into question. Veterinarians will argue only a certain percentage of animals will have lesions and, while that may be the case, the integrity of the system must be ensured. A proper reporting mechanism should be put in place for animals that do not have lesions but which have tested positive for TB. Farmers should have the option of the test, even if they have to pay for it, to confirm whether the animal has TB. If a farmer is adamant an animal has not contracted TB and his stock has not mixed with other stock, the legislation should provide for a second test.

Will the Minister examine the use of the gamma interferon confirmatory test? The UK independent scientific group on cattle tuberculosis has examined the test. The group is critical of the tuberculin skin test, which is used in Ireland, saying it is too unreliable to be used as a confirmatory test and that, while it is effective as a surveillance test, it should not be used as an individual test. The group states the gamma interferon test is a good complementary test to ensure all the animals that have contracted TB are detected so that the disease does not recirculate and to ensure only these animals, which are reactors, are taken out of the herd.

TB has been an issue for long enough in Ireland and it has caused significant problems for many farmers. The Government should consider other measures to improve the standard of TB testing to eradicate the disease. The Minister should devise a field trial to compare the gamma interferon and the tuberculin skin tests. The UK is doing this and we should conduct research in this area because it would improve the integrity of TB testing.

I refer to the issue of qualified persons and the ambiguity in the regulations, which the Minster can introduce under the legislation. Section 45, for example, sets off a number of alarm bells regarding the powers to appoint staff to deal with disease eradication and education programmes. While the implementation of education programmes is understandable, veterinary practice must not be undermined. Everyone accepts that if a class A disease is discovered, professionals need to be brought in quickly. However, what is the Department's definition of "disease eradication", as it could be extended to include everything and anything bar the kitchen sink.

Section 57 provides for the Minister to make regulations to permit non-veterinarians to carry out elements of veterinary medicine. This provides a blank canvas to the Minister to rewrite the legislation. Safeguards must be included to ensure appropriate and adequate standards are in place so that the veterinary profession is not undermined.

Veterinary nursing is also an issue. Every submission made to the joint committee and the Minister of State's contribution referred to UCD and, while I have no difficultly with that, no one has mentioned Athlone Institute of Technology. Why is it being ignored? No one at the institute has been consulted about the legislation, even through veterinary nurses are being trained to at least as high a standard as in UCD. The Bill recognises veterinary nursing as a profession for the first time. I hope the profession will develop and diversify over the coming years.

However, I have a number of concerns about the legislation in this area. Only one veterinary nurse will become a member of the Veterinary Council, which will set rules and standards, but they will be put in place before he or she is appointed to the council. Under section 93, it could take two years for the provision to be enacted. While the Minister is providing for a five-year window for veterinary nurses, it will be two years before they have a formal input. They are being given three years, therefore, to ensure their certification meets the required standard. The timescales should be examined.

The issue of lambing, which is close to my heart, is ambiguous under the legislation. Under section 91(3), a veterinary nurse cannot pull a lamb on a neighbour's farm if a ewe is in difficulty. He or she can do so on his or her farm but he or she cannot cross the road and do it for an elderly neighbour. If a veterinary nurse does so, he or she could be struck off the register. If fewer people are entering the veterinary profession, it must be ensured veterinary nurses are protected. Such nurses should not take over the role of veterinarians but if they assist an elderly neighbour, proper standards must be put in place and flexibility provided so that a nurse acting as a good samaritan is not prosecuted or struck off the register.

HETAC is not mentioned in the legislation. UCD and the Veterinary Council have been consulted. Veterinary nurses did not make a presentation to the Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food, which was disappointing. Will the Minister of State, in his reply, elaborate on his consultations with veterinary nurses? A number of organisations that made presentations to the joint committee stated they were speaking on behalf of veterinary nurses. However, the legislation is focused on UCD to the detriment of the other institutions training people covered by it. I hope a balance is struck on Committee Stage so that due recognition is given to Athlone Institute of Technology. I will debate the issues I have raised in further detail on Committee Stage.

I welcome the Bill and I thank the Minister of State for introducing it. This Bill is long overdue, especially in light of the significant changes that have happened in veterinary practice in the last ten to 15 years. Many substantial changes have occurred which have impacted greatly on farming and the food industry. Major improvements in technology have made life easier in some ways, but in other ways they have made it more complicated because of the higher standards that are expected arising from such improvements. I welcome the improvements to the Bill, as they place an emphasis on the need to move on and to change the requirements where appropriate.

A relatively new but important aspect of veterinary practice is the value and relevance attributed to food safety and there are new stories in the newspapers about this every day. Vets have an important role in ensuring compliance with Irish and EU food safety standards. There are many EU directives in this area which must be taken into account and which have had an enormous impact on standards and quality in the food safety arena. EU legislation will be even more important in future and we must ensure that we keep abreast of directives and legislation. That is a significant demand because legislation from the EU tends to be complex, although efforts are being made to consolidate certain aspects of the food safety legislation.

As Deputy Naughton pointed out, the recognition of veterinary nurses in the Bill is very important. We must also recognise veterinary practitioners from other European countries. The law regarding the movement of services is positive. It offers opportunities for our professionals to engage at European level and also allows other Europeans the right to practise in Ireland. The reciprocal arrangement benefits everyone.

The veterinary profession has been central to the development of Irish agriculture and the food industry. Its role in the management and treatment of companion animals is becoming more important. It has also made a very significant contribution to research. When fire brigade action was needed to respond to foot and mouth disease, the veterinary profession directed our actions and prevented the worst horrors of what took place in the UK from happening here. It protected the country from the consequences of foot and mouth disease. Its role and contribution to Irish farming, the food industry and society in general cannot be overstated.

Animal welfare is an issue that has gained a very high profile in recent years. We are dependent on vets to ensure there is compliance with best practice. It is widely recognised that vets have a major role in mainstream animal husbandry, farm management and companion and small animal treatment. Their role in education is also significant and should be acknowledged. Veterinary practitioners, alongside other professionals, have played an important part in educating and training the next generation of vets who are coming through the university and institute of technology systems.

The legislation must be forward-looking and take account of the major changes in agriculture, the food industry and animal management practice, as well as the importance of companion animals. Vets can play a role in the control of horrific practices such as puppy farming. In this Bill there is no scope to deal with this, but I would like to revisit the issue at a future date. It is an important matter from an animal welfare point of view. The practice was highlighted in the media in the past two years and it is still in existence. Controls must be put in place and appropriate penalties imposed on those who are abusing the quality of life of animals in this manner.

The range of animals to be found in pet shops has widened considerably. Exotic animals are often bought as novelty items and are great fun for a few weeks. However, the glamour tends to wear off and appropriate care and management is not always provided by the purchaser of such animals. I wish to see tighter controls in this area. Apart from animal welfare concerns, there is a risk of these animals being released and causing havoc. One can imagine the scenario if a friendly python was found in somebody's back garden, which is not beyond the bounds of possibility. Exotic snakes and birds are being imported with very little, if any, controls. Exotic animal imports also raise concerns regarding exotic diseases. We should not overlook the real risk in that regard.

We must acknowledge the work of veterinary practitioners with organisations such as Blue Cross, where they provide a professional service for free or for a minimal charge. This service is greatly appreciated by people on limited incomes, particularly elderly people whose pets are very important to them. It is almost an unofficial medical card system for the treatment of animals and is a very important social service.

The broad thrust of the Bill is to bring regulation of the profession up to date, taking account of the many changes that have taken place in recent years. Another important function of the Bill is to bring greater transparency into the regulation of the profession. The reviewed composition of the veterinary council is broadly welcome. All of the representative veterinary bodies identified a need for a greater number of vets on the council. The case was made that they would be needed to service the large number of sub-committees that would operate under the council. The increased numbers recommended, following the debate in the Seanad, acknowledges the concerns in this area, but it is an issue that I would like to revisit on Committee Stage.

It is important that other stakeholders have representation on the veterinary council and I acknowledge that this is included in the Bill. The change in emphasis in the role played by veterinary practitioners highlights the need for broad representation on the council. Interests such as food safety experts — I appreciate that the Food Safety Authority is represented — and consumer advocates are central to the balanced composition of the council. It is important to strike a balance between strong veterinary representation and consumer and food safety representation on the council.

I welcome the fact that veterinary nurses are formally included in the legislation because they provide an important service which deserves recognition. I note the categories of functions that veterinary nurses are allowed to carry out were amended in the Seanad so it is clear that treatments being carried out by nurses are under the direction of a vet, but in some cases without the vet being present. The inclusion of this provision, as well as the formal recognition of nurses, is very important from the point of view of professional status. I also welcome the indication by the Minister that those working as veterinary nurses from the date of the Bill's introduction in 2004 may apply for provisional registration which would last for up to five years, providing they complete an approved course of education. It is entirely acceptable, if not desirable, that such recognition should be in place.

The point about the inspection of veterinary premises is important. The Bill provides the facility to carry out an independent inspection of the place where the practice is located. This process is in line with best practice in other professions and activities. Inspection and maintenance of standards in a practice are clearly in the interest of both the practitioner and those in receipt of the service. It is important inspections are available and will be carried out.

The point was made in the debate in the Seanad that where the veterinary council appoints authorised officers — this relates to investigations where there is concern that an offence is being committed — to enter a premises other than that of a vet, a search warrant is required. It seems only logical that the same standard should apply when considering the premises of a vet. I appreciate the Minister acknowledged this in his speech this afternoon and that the Attorney General is considering the matter. The issue of the differentiation is important. Why would a warrant be required for one and the other be exempt from such a requirement? This important point may hinge on some legal technicality that must be raised on Committee Stage. I look forward to hearing what the Attorney General has to say on this matter.

The veterinary education and training committee has responsibility for advising the Veterinary Council of Ireland on the education, training, programmes of education in the State, continuing educational development and standards for recognition of qualifications obtained outside the State. This is an important aspect of the veterinary profession, because it will determine the standards of care that are ultimately delivered by the profession in the care and treatment of animals and the profession's important role in setting standards for food safety in specified areas and in all other aspects of training. The rapid rate of change in this and other areas where new technologies apply will present a challenge. For this reason it is imperative that the broader educational aspects of the training and retraining of the professionals is kept under constant review.

Because of the right of vets from outside the State to practise here, it is important the standards of those entering the profession from outside the State are constantly monitored and updated. It is important to find the right balance between the veterinary practitioners and the committee and those who deliver education. Their roles may overlap, but it is important to remember that education and training must be monitored not just by vets but also by those with formal training in the process of the delivery of education, monitoring of standards and ensuring the quality of training. Deputy Naughten alluded to this earlier.

The veterinary profession is in the privileged position of being able to control many of the food standards that allow us to enjoy a safe food supply. The "farm to fork" concept is more important than ever, given our need to ensure safe quality foods for the consumer at home and abroad. Our highly regarded food export industry is important and must be maintained and sustained. We cannot allow any glitches to creep into the system or any damage occur to our reputation and destroy our clean, green image. It is a constant struggle to ensure this and is not an easy challenge by any means.

The legislation relating to food standards is very complex. Vets in particular have a major role to play in ensuring animal products are fit for human consumption. Increasingly, the sophistication of production, processing and packaging of foods impacts on the economy. Staying up to speed with these new developments will be one of the challenges for all involved in the food chain. However, the primary role in foods of animal origin will fall to the vets at both farm and factory level.

Foods of animal origin are those most likely to cause concern from a food safety point of view and economically. The recent lessons of the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001, BSE and, most recently, avian 'flu are stark examples of how animal diseases and illnesses can impact on human health and on the economy. These diseases have not gone away. We must be constantly vigilant to ensure we remain aware of them in other countries and prevent them impacting on our economy and food safety.

Section 55 of the Bill is important in that it makes it illegal for people to represent themselves as being suitably qualified unless they have been recognised and accredited by the veterinary council. There have been a number of unfortunate incidents in other professions where unqualified people have successfully passed themselves off as being qualified when, in fact, they were charlatans. Strict guidelines, through examination of documentation and formal training and qualifications should help to prevent this happening and ensure people who are not fully qualified are not allowed to bypass the system.

The need for additional back-up and professional resources is important for when there is a crisis or emergency. It is also important for when someone from a third country wants to practise in Ireland. It is important to have the procedures in place to allow flexibility for those people to practise. However, it is also crucial that the standards that are expected and demanded of vets who qualify in Ireland are maintained by those who come from outside the State.

The issue of limited registration is valuable in an emergency. I realise the difficulties surrounding the wording of this part of the legislation; it needs very careful consideration. It is vital in the exercise of discretion of allowing limited registration that professional standards are maintained and that neither animal welfare nor food safety are compromised. The risk is that this limited registration could open a back door to allow the registration of unqualified people. I accept the intention of this part of the Bill was to allow for call up of support persons in the case of an emergency such as happened with foot and mouth disease. The wording demands careful consideration to ensure protection is in place and there is no risk of any back door registration. This issue will be raised again on Committee Stage.

I welcome the amendment arising from discussions in the Seanad on the welfare of animals and the specifying that an unregistered person may treat an animal in an emergency only when a vet will not be available "within a reasonable time". The difficulties of wording and interpreting precise meanings are apparent in the use of "within a reasonable time" rather than "immediately available". The term "within a reasonable time" takes account of the difficulty and removes the difficulty with "immediately available", which is something that probably could not be delivered on anyhow.

The issue of the writing of prescriptions was raised previously. Account must be taken of the serious concerns that prescriptions that could only be written by vets may mean that people will buy up the prescription in quantity or that a black market may open up. This issue has been debated in the Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food a number of times. It is an important issue that must be addressed.

I welcome the extension of the Freedom of Information Act to include the veterinary council and that the disclosure of information by the members of the council or its staff in the course of their work, will be liable under the FOI Act, subject to the usual provisions. This was never a concern, but there was a query as to whether this should be covered under the Act or under this Bill. I would prefer if it was covered in this Bill, but this may be a matter for further consideration on Committee Stage.

Following from the right of disclosure under the FOI Act, or through this Bill as proposed, it is important transparency should apply when the council is investigating a complaint against a vet. This issue is addressed at some length. Early consultation with the vet against whom the complaint is being made is important for the credibility of the system and for justice to be seen to be done. Actions taken or hearings carried out behind closed doors or without informing people lead to resentment at best and may lead to unnecessary and protracted investigations which might be avoided with appropriate initial consultation. A consultation with the alleged offender may well clear up what is a minor issue. If it is a major cause for concern, it is equally important that all investigations are seen to be open and transparent. Therefore, an initial consultation process is desirable.

I welcome the Bill in principle, because it is overdue. It is important for the veterinary profession, the economy, the welfare of our animals and the maintenance of safety in the food chain.

Vets work extremely hard, often in difficult circumstances. We are lucky that there is an excellent faculty of veterinary medicine in this country. We should recognise that Athlone Institute of Technology provides a very good service by training veterinary nurses. The institute also delivers equine training courses, which are closely related to the matter under discussion although not necessarily relevant to this Bill. As I was closely involved with the former National Council for Educational Awards, which is now known as the Higher Education and Training Awards Council, it is important for me to recognise that all the various courses will develop from certificate to diploma to degree courses, as appropriate. I know HETAC will meet the needs of those who are looking for courses of a high standard.

The standards of the long-established UCD veterinary college are widely acknowledged throughout the world. Many of the college's graduates are recognised for their expertise, not only as practitioners but also as professionals in the fields of research and teaching. The college provides education and training on various aspects of the duties of veterinary professionals, as delivered by such professionals on a daily basis. I read a fascinating profile of a veterinary professional earlier this week. The woman in question returned from Australia to Ireland, via the UK, to establish a veterinary practice specialising in exotic pets in County Wicklow. It was interesting to read about the wide range of exotic animals, including snakes and rare birds, with which she deals. It must be extremely challenging to treat such animals. The job of doctors is much easier, by comparison, given that their patients can communicate and give some hint of the direction they would like their treatment to take. One's labrador cannot say whether its grumpy humour is caused by a toothache or a hamstring strain.

I am worried about the rottweiler, rather than the labrador.

A certain level of skill is needed to ensure the right treatment is delivered. While veterinary professionals are assisted in that regard by modern technology, including sophisticated x-ray equipment and radiological techniques, it is important for them to have empathy with large and small domestic animals.

When the Veterinary Practice Bill 2004 has finally been agreed, it is to be hoped that it will address the concerns of veterinary professionals for the standards of their profession. They deserve to be well served by the new legislation.

I wish to share time with Deputies Sargent and Cowley.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I am happy to lend my support and that of Sinn Féin to this Bill because I agree with what it sets out to achieve. It is important that the various veterinary professions are governed by legislation that takes into account the changes in their various areas of expertise. We should ensure that those who comprise the profession are properly qualified and subject to the necessary supervision.

I welcome the updating and broadening of the criteria governing registration in the profession, to take account of various changes and to include specialisations that have not been given the recognition they deserve before now. Part 8 of the Bill is of particular note in this regard because it provides for the statutory recognition of veterinary nurses, who play an increasingly important role in the profession. Everybody who has spoken on this legislation has highlighted the role of veterinary nurses. It is good that their status is being formally recognised in this Bill.

I do not believe one should object to the provisions in section 46 for the temporary registration of suitably qualified persons for particular tasks, although some people have expressed reservations about them. We hope we never again have to face a crisis similar to that presented by the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. If the circumstances of 2001 and 2002 are repeated, however, it is important that we secure the temporary services of persons who can help to contain and eliminate such a threat over a limited period. Some cross-Border provisions should be made in this regard, especially as the cross-Border aspect of the preventative work that followed the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in 2001 was noted by all public representatives, regardless of their political persuasion.

Concern has been expressed by people who are involved in, or have contact with, the veterinary profession about other aspects of the Bill, such as the provisions in sections 16 and 17 for the composition of a veterinary council, which will be charged with regulating the sector in line with this new legislation. Some people are worried that just seven of the 17 members of the council will be members of the veterinary profession. Problems have arisen in other sectors when the impression has been given that certain professions operate a system of regulation that makes it seem that they are immune from real public scrutiny. Submissions were received from the veterinary profession and discussions took place before this Bill was published. While the profession did not seek a majority on the council, it called for an increase in the number of veterinary professionals on it. Perhaps one or two extra veterinary professionals can be accommodated at a later stage.

There is a need for people who do not have a direct interest in the profession to be part of the regulating authority. That can be provided for without reducing the proportion of professional representatives to a minority. The other nominees to the council are uncontroversial. They will represent the Food Safety Authority, the Department of Education and Science and the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs. One of the members of the council will be a veterinary nurse. I welcome such provisions, which are among the positive elements of this Bill.

I am concerned by the lack of statutory representation of farmers, who are the main users of veterinary services, on the council. While there is nothing to prevent the Minister from appointing a representative of farmers as one of her four nominees, it would be better if the legislation specifically provided for such representation. I trust the Minister will appoint representatives of farmers to the council, rather than nominating a person to whom it is felt some political reward is owed for past service, but who does not bring personal knowledge or expertise to the area.

That would never happen.

It often seems that such people are chosen when bodies of this nature are being appointed. People are given such positions as a way of providing them with a kind of retirement fund.

Many such people are farmers.

We will not go there.

The farming organisations should be asked to nominate a member of the proposed veterinary council because the system of political appointments is open to abuse. I do not suggest that the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, abuses it.

He is looking forward to doing so at some stage.

What about a certain farmer from County Donegal?

The Bill appears to exclude farmers, or others with personal experience of certain practices, from performing fairly basic animal care procedures, such as the paring of hooves. It will be ridiculous if farmers have to call veterinary professionals every time they want to perform such a relatively simple task, which can be done safely and without causing harm to animals by those reared on farms or with direct experience of animals. I will be breaking the law if I pare a donkey's hooves, as I did last weekend, after this legislation is enacted. I would not like to break the law.

The hooves of donkeys are quite valuable. There is a great trade in donkeys in Ballinasloe.

The relevant section of this legislation should be re-examined and, if necessary, amended. Perhaps that can be done by changing the definitions in section 54.

The Animal and Plant Health Association has highlighted another issue, which relates to the sale and provision of certain animal medicines. Most of the people involved in this area, including many farmers, feel that if the Bill is not amended, such items will be sold by qualified veterinary practitioners only. That is unnecessary, given the nature of the remedies in question. It would also add to the costs imposed on farmers. While it is of course in everyone's interest to insure harmful and illegal substances are not sold as animal medicines, we are dealing in this regard with legitimate retailers and safe substances. The current system of operation, whereby the co-ops and others are a source of supply to farmers, has worked well. If supply is by prescription only and farmers must visit a vet, cost will be a factor and a black market will be created. This will undo much of the good work in the Bill. The Minister should reconsider the matter to ensure it does not happen.

While I am generally in support of the Bill, there are areas which may require further amendment. I may return to these during the progress of the legislation.

I support the Bill. The importance of vets is widely recognised. As a rural general practitioner, I have much in common with them. I have often been asked to treat animals, although I stopped short of treating an Alsatian with a fish hook embedded in its jaw.

That was definitely passing the buck.

As I value my hands, I was glad to refer the matter to a veterinary surgeon in Westport. Vets do valuable work. It is only right that there would be adequate legislation to ensure that development proceeds correctly in the veterinary trade.

In the Dáil last week I raised the issue of alternative practitioners. The Bill is in stark contrast to the manner in which the Government has treated the regulation of alternative practitioners, who deserve similar legislation. However, we seem to treat our animals better than people on some occasions, of which this is one. With regard to alternative practitioners, animal health will be better regulated than human health following the passage of the Bill.

Staff at Davitt House in Castlebar are to be redeployed because of changes to the single payment system for farmers. I pay tribute to those staff who have worked hard to get the single payment system sorted out — I understand today is their last day. The staff are in limbo because they do not know what is happening, although they deserve to know. Any redeployment would involve shift work, which is unsuitable for those with families. I raised this matter in the House and was present when Deputy Kenny raised it, although the Minister for Agriculture and Food stated I was not present at that time. I raised the matter with her on one occasion.

Changes have been made to the Bill since it was passed in the Seanad. Sections 14 and 22 seem to give the Minister for Agriculture and Food very strong powers, in particular during times of dispute. When those sections are considered with section 45, there is cause for concern. If the provision is to deal with a pandemic, why is this not stated? Why not limit the measure to class A diseases? A future Minister might interpret limited registration differently and it is possible that a court would also do so if some kind of challenge were brought.

My other major concern relates to section 127 whereby authorised officers of the veterinary council can enter and search the premises of a vet without a search warrant, by force if necessary. However, a search warrant must be obtained to search the premises of a lay person. The Minister stated she would discuss this issue with the Attorney General.

I thought the new Bill would give an opportunity to regulate para-veterinary services, such as hoof trimming and so forth. The Minister has not opted to regulate such services at this stage but she might consider it. Although veterinary practice in Ireland is changing rapidly from a mainly agricultural service to a greater percentage of companion animal work, the emphasis of the Bill is still very much on the agricultural side of the practice.

Currently, only vets are eligible to be on the veterinary register. Under the new proposals, the register would contain persons who are not vets but who would have limited registration, such as laboratory scientists. These persons would not have to have a veterinary degree but would be called veterinary practitioners with limited registration. The legislation replaced by the Veterinary Practitioners Bill is the Veterinary Surgeons Act. Some vets see this change as a demotion, believe it or not, as if they were no longer deemed surgeons. The Bill broadens the definition of veterinary practitioners but that may prove misleading in the interests of animal welfare, especially in the treatment of small animals.

There is increased leeway for non-vets to carry out veterinary procedures on animals. Veterinary practitioners with limited registration will flock in, it is felt, from the east of Europe. There is a view that such vets are not trained to the same level as those trained in Irish colleges. Yet the Minister for Agriculture and Food is willing to allow them to set up as veterinary practitioners, which worries vets.

There are onerous entry requirements for veterinary schools as for medical schools. Moreover, the life of a vet, no more than that of a rural doctor, is very tough. It would be easier if they could talk to the animals, as Dr. Doolittle said. As with vets, doctors must treat children who are too young to talk. They have great sympathy with vets, who must deal with animals that cannot describe what is wrong with them.

Vets deserve to be well treated and respected for their qualifications. It is necessary that there would not be unfair competition. A feeling exists that all that would be required to set up as a vet following passage of the Bill is for a person to prove he or she attended a veterinary college and has no criminal record. A further concern is that the potential for falsification of documents is substantial in the countries concerned. The Minister should outline how the Department intends to research and verify documents to prove they are legitimate.

Many staff currently working in the Department of Agriculture and Food in quality control type positions are apparently applying for the new title of veterinary practitioner with limited registration. Would it be fair to let unqualified people loose on the animal population? How would this area be policed? Some vets feel that the Department's plan to prove and investigate these records is inadequate. They think it is unfair to admit to the register those less qualified than vets who may have spent five years studying in veterinary college and another four years completing a PhD, for example. Some feel let down by the Minister's plans to appoint as vets those who are less qualified than Irish vets.

The Veterinary Council of Ireland has a poor ratio of vets to council members. The constitution of the council of 17 members has as few as seven registered veterinary practitioners, and the remainder includes people with no veterinary qualifications. I can see the point of having a broad representation but vets may see this as a further dilution of their authority. The council will include persons nominated by the Minister for Education and Science, the Director of Consumer Affairs and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, and a veterinary nurse. Vets claim they need to be properly represented on the board and see these appointments as excessive dilution.

It seems unfair to have vets judged, and possibly struck off, by council members who do not have equivalent and relevant qualifications. However, a disciplinary committee is a good thing and vets do not disagree with this. Currently, a vet may only be struck off or fined as appropriate if he or she interferes with TB testing. A good disciplinary body raises the tone of the profession across the board and would help.

It is felt that the veterinary council needs to raise its level of involvement in the profession as a whole, especially in regard to food safety. Council members who are not vets who would meet the standard of approval would include doctors on food safety issues, pharmacists, representatives of the National Drugs Advisory Board, a member of the IFA or a professor in the agriculture department of a university. Vets disagree with representatives of animal welfare agencies who often have no qualifications and, although well-meaning, are often self-appointed and have their own agendas. The animal welfare agencies certainly have a point of view but vets can feel threatened by a council with less veterinary representation.

Considering there are vets throughout the country, is it necessary to have provisions which would allow lay people to carry out emergency veterinary procedures? Vets maintain that it takes less than 20 minutes to answer an emergency call, although some might disagree with that assertion. However, vets have fears regarding such provisions. Some vets regard the legislation as making them feel less wanted. They perhaps do not want lay people to be allowed to provide treatment in emergency situations. It is not that they do not wish for emergency situations to be dealt with, but in terms of human medicine people do not know what constitutes an emergency. They might see a calf injured on the road but not know the best thing to do. They may think it best to run the calf over with a car, or something similarly silly. These are the sort of issues which pass through people's mind and any change is difficult.

I support the thrust of the Bill and have stated my reservations. We value our vets, in particular along the western seaboard. It is important that they be allowed to continue testing for TB as well as their other work. We must ensure that legislation is in place but we must also value our vets.

Tááthas orm deis a fháil labhairt ar an mBille agus tá cúpla rud le rá agam atá an-tábhachtach mar tá an reachtaíocht an-tábhachtach, mar atá an proifisiún an-tábhachtach i saol na tíre agus go mórmhór i saol na talamhaíochta sa tír.

The Veterinary Surgeons Acts 1931 to 1960 will be repealed by the enactment of this legislation, so there is hopefully a considerable body of expertise and experience behind it. Equally there has been quite a change in veterinary practice and conditions around the country in general which require expertise. It is therefore important that this is addressed in a calm and systematic manner.

The state of agriculture in this country has suffered from the closure of many of the abattoirs which provided a local access point for farmers, and the heavy reliance on large meat factories should be on our minds with regard to this legislation and in general. The veterinary profession is a very important part of the ongoing regulations needed to maintain a wide and plenteous network of abattoirs if that could be managed. It would certainly help in terms of options for farmers compared to what currently happens.

It is very important that the Minister takes on board the fear that exists amongst many vets, some of whom I have spoken with. Although the recognition of veterinary nurses is a good development, there is a perceived fear that a person who is not registered or fully qualified as a vet would be empowered to set up in opposition to a vet. The Minister must clarify the matter so there is no reduction or lessening of standards. The high standards which vets must attain in training should be applied to those who wish to be recognised as fully registered. It has been suggested that the registration and recognition of veterinary nurses or "mini" vets, whatever that term means, should be subject to a new examination of the training process. This has happened in other professions, such as nursing and teaching, where recognition has been increased from what the training colleges did to what the colleges of education now do. Similarly, if there is a new level of recognition, it is perhaps necessary to look at the training process so veterinary nurses are equipped beyond that which they do at the moment. This issue should be negotiated between all concerned, rather than being prescriptive.

Many vets in towns and cities work primarily with small animals. However, as previously discussed in the House, not all small animals are treated for the sake of making them healthy or having their lives terminated on humane grounds. Some of them are used in the very dubious and unacceptable practice of fur farming. It represents a very tiny part of the country's economic activity but has a big impact in rural areas, for example, in terms of escaped minks. The issue should be examined again in the context of the general discussion surrounding this legislation as to what we expect vets to do. A vet does not get job satisfaction from being in any way involved in the slaughter of thousands of small animals for the sake of vanity.

Testing, for TB eradication schemes, needs to be reviewed in the context of new and ongoing threats to this country. Luckily, we managed to escape relatively unscathed with regard to the foot and mouth disease epidemic. However, there is still a need to be very vigilant and this legislation gives us an opportunity to re-examine the way in which we test for Johne's disease, IBR, leptospirosis, BCD and others. These have a greater economic impact than in terms of animal welfare or health. The matter should be examined again because the issue must be addressed.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share