Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FOOD debate -
Wednesday, 26 Jan 2005

Veterinary Practice Bill 2004: Presentation.

I welcome Mr. John Horan, chief executive; Mr. Frank O'Sullivan, president; Mr. Peadar Ó Scanaill and Mr. Andrew Byrne from Veterinary Ireland who are with us today to discuss the Veterinary Practice Bill 2004 which is currently on Committee Stage in the Seanad.

Before we start I draw the attention of Mr. Horan to the fact that members of this committee have absolute privilege, but the same privilege does not apply to him. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Both Mr. O'Sullivan and Mr. Horan will make the presentation.

Mr. John Horan

Veterinary Ireland is the representative organisation for the profession and has more than 1,000 members throughout the country. We are represented today by our president, Frank O'Sullivan, who is mainly a food animal veterinarian and has an MA in food science, by Peadar Ó Scanaill who is principally involved in equine practice and by Andrew Byrne who concentrates on companion animal veterinary practice and who is also the honorary secretary of the Federation of European Companion Animal Veterinary Associations. The team is completed by my colleague, Peter Bishton, who is the operations executive of Veterinary Ireland and me. I am chief executive of the organisation.

Veterinary Ireland is a young organisation established on 1 January 2001, the product of an amalgamation of four separate veterinary bodies, namely, the Local Authority Veterinary Officers Association, the Irish Companion Animal Veterinary Association, the Irish Veterinary Union and the Irish Veterinary Association. This latter association was, in fact, established in Leinster House in 1888. We are pleased therefore, 116 years later, to be back at base and to have this opportunity to present the collective view of our members to this key committee. These views have been included in our position paper on the Veterinary Practice Bill, Getting it Right. Copies of the paper have been provided for the clerk to the joint committee and have been circulated to the members for ease of reference.

I now call on our president, Frank O'Sullivan, to outline the general approach we have taken on this matter. I then propose to present the detail of our paper for consideration.

Very well. I am delighted the president of the association is from County Meath.

Mr. Frank O’Sullivan

As we face into 2005 the veterinary profession has the provisions of the new Veterinary Practice Bill under careful scrutiny. This new legislation will repeal the Veterinary Surgeons Acts 1931 to 1960 and will dissolve the existing Veterinary Council.

Given that the current legislation for the profession was passed over 70 years ago and was last amended 44 years ago, it seems reasonable to assume that we will have to live with this new Bill for decades to come. This will set out how the veterinary profession will be regulated and managed. Therefore, it is important that we get it right from the start.

Veterinary Ireland has approached this task by first ensuring that its members are fully apprised of what is being proposed and by facilitating them in making their views known on the pros and cons. The organisation is also endeavouring to make the collective view of the profession known to the people who can influence the outcome of the legislative process that is now under way.

We are doing this with a view to ensuring that the Act which ultimately emerges is one which will best serve the Irish community in the years ahead. Our position paper has been prepared in that spirit.

Thank you.

Mr. Horan

By way of introduction to our position paper we note that when introducing the Veterinary Practice Bill in the Seanad, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Mary Coughlan, made the following comments:

Cé go bhfuil an Bille seo tábhachtach, tá sé fada. Tá súil agam go mbeidh díospóireacht bhreá againn agus go mbeidh an dlí is fearr ar fáil ag éirí as an díospóireacht.

She went on to say, "It is important to place on record that this is not a matter of imposing a new regime on an unwilling profession," and that she was:

bringing forward a comprehensive Bill which 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 operates since the original legislation was enacted and which will also serve the needs of the profession in the years ahead.

She concluded by saying that this was "well balanced legislation" which "takes account of both the needs of the profession and the public interest" by creating "a regulatory framework suited to modern circumstances."

Veterinary Ireland, the organisation for the profession, welcomes the publication of the Bill which provides for definite improvements over some aspects of the existing legislation. These are highlighted in our position paper which is designed to provide advice and guidance, from the professionals at the veterinary practice coalface for the legislators, to assist them in the legislative process. We want to work with the Minister and everyone involved to ensure the Bill, which will eventually be passed, is the best it can be for the profession, for the animals under its care, for the changing needs of veterinary clients and for protection of public health generally.

Against this background we present the following commentary and recommendations. Veterinary practitioners are actively reviewing the full implications of the Bill's proposals and will continue to do so. Wherever potential improvements are identified as the legislative process unfolds, these will be highlighted by Veterinary Ireland. In the meantime the following commentary and recommendations arise from Veterinary Ireland's initial consultations with its membership throughout the country. They focus on some key issues that have arisen. For ease of reference they are treated in the same sequence as they arise in the Bill.

I will first deal with the definition of "emergency". Section 2(1) has to be read in conjunction with a later section, 56(2), which provides for non-veterinarians carrying out treatment in an "emergency". As the definition of "emergency" includes "the putting down of the animal", it is important that this must be done humanely and only where absolutely necessary. Veterinary Ireland's recommendations are to amend the definition of "emergency" to provide for "humane" putting down and to change the reference in section 56(2) from "where a registered person is not immediately available", to, "is not available within a reasonable time".

The proposed membership of the Veterinary Council as set out in section 16 is a matter of concern for us. The current council has 17 members, of which 14 are vets, 12 elected, one appointed by the National University of Ireland and the chief veterinary officer from the Department of Agriculture and Food, appointed by the Minister. The proposed new council will also have 17 members, of which as few as eight could be vets, seven elected and one ministerial appointee.

The public interest reasoning behind the Minister's decision to broaden the membership of the Veterinary Council is understood. Veterinary surgeons, however, with their specialised knowledge, provide important insights into the operation of the profession and care should be taken not to lose this. On a very practical note, considering all the functions of the new council, the proposed composition will simply not include enough vets to carry out effectively their designated roles in committees, etc.

The following recommendations would go some way to catering for this potential shortcoming without losing the public interest dimension. The key protection for the public lies with the fitness to practice committee provision in section 72, where non-registered persons will always have an inbuilt majority, including legal expertise.

Veterinary Ireland has three separate but related recommendations. The number of vets could be increased slightly, first, by removing the entitlement to a nominee in section 16(1)(d) of the Minister for Education and Science and increasing the number of elected vets to eight. Higher education is covered separately and adequately with two nominees under section 16(1)(e). Currently the NUI nominates the dean of the veterinary faculty and this practice should be continued by providing specifically for such an arrangement under this section.

The Bill proposes the appointment of one person who performs functions relating to animal welfare, but goes on to exclude the possibility of this person being a vet. This exclusion should be removed from section 16(1)(c ).

I will now deal with section 46 on limited registration. The Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Coughlan, in her speech to the Seanad when introducing the new Bill, stated:

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.

She further stated:

The veterinary profession played a pivotal role in dealing with the 2001 outbreak and it has been widely recognised that our effective and timely interventions ensured we were spared the large scale economic and social damage which would have arisen from a failure to deal with the outbreak.

As members of the committee will be aware, the spectre of foot and mouth disease reared its ugly head again in the past week, though thankfully we can breathe a sigh of relief following the test results on this occasion. Continuing vigilance is required, however, and the Minister is obviously acutely aware of this. In her speech to the Seanad the Minister went on to say that as there are "ongoing threats of disease outbreaks we need to ensure that, if necessary and at short notice, we can call on an adequate supply of veterinary expertise from outside the State." She proposed to provide for a category of limited registration to make this possible.

Veterinary Ireland can support this approach to protect the health of the national herd and the economy as a whole and the educational requirement covered in section 46(2)(b). However, the legislation as written needs to be fine-tuned to more accurately reflect these requirements and at the same time to ensure that appropriate veterinary standards are maintained. Our recommendations are designed to achieve that purpose. We recommend the amendment of section 46(2)(a) to read as follows; “to participate in a “Class A” disease eradication programme”, and section 46(3)(a) to read the same as section 43(2)(a), “has undergone courses of training and education, and acquired educational qualifications prescribed under section 66”.

Section 54 deals with the definition of the practice of veterinary medicine. This is the first time the practice of veterinary medicine has been defined in legislation and is a particularly welcome development. A specific question arises in relation to the use of the term "condition" in section 54(1)(a)(i). Does this cover scanning, for example? These matters have already come under scrutiny in initial deliberations on the Bill. To give legal certainty in the future on these matters it is vital therefore that the overall definition is clear and unambiguous in its intent. Veterinary Ireland is offering to work with other interested parties such as the Minister and her officials, the existing Veterinary Council and the legislators to carefully scrutinise the proposed definition to ensure that it is precise, can be clearly understood, and will stand the test of time in practical operation.

Of major concern for the profession are the proposals on non-registered persons as dealt with in section 60. The entire thrust of the new legislation is to better regulate the operations of the veterinary profession. This section however allows for the practice of veterinary medicine by non-registered persons. The Minister's stated intention here is to provide for unqualified persons to carry out a very limited range of procedures. The legislation as drafted however goes much further covering specific matters such as non-qualified persons administering an anaesthetic to an animal, even though anaesthetics are classified for use by veterinary surgeons only, VSO, under animal remedies legislation.

The purposes for which a Minister could make regulations under this section are as all-encompassing and embracing as to maintain and improve standards of animal health and welfare, and to ensure the adequate provision of veterinary services in the state. Veterinary Ireland and its members have the most serious concerns about the inclusion of this section. Given the Minister's own view that the maintenance of the highest standards within the veterinary profession is a matter of great social and economic importance to this country, its inclusion seems incongruous and the prudent approach would be to exclude this possibility in the best interests of animals, their owners and the community at large. We would put particular emphasis on our recommendation on these matters. Our strong recommendation is that section 60 should be deleted in its entirety.

I will now deal with some proposed committees beginning with the education committee. Section 63 requires the veterinary council to establish a dedicated veterinary education and training committee with extensive functions in this area. Action has already been taken on the development of the undergraduate curriculum for veterinary training and the profession itself has introduced a voluntary continuing veterinary education accreditation scheme for registered vets. Statutory underpinning of these approaches is welcomed. Our recommendation is as follows. The Bill provides for a committee of eight, of which as few as three members could be vets. In order for this committee to function effectively it is vital that the number of vets participating on it be increased significantly. The proposed fitness to practise committee, as set out in section 72, will provide important public interest assurances with an inbuilt non-vet majority. The Bill also provides in section 80 for a wide range of proportionate sanctions that may be imposed. These are accepted by the profession and acknowledged as appropriate developments.

Veterinary nurses are dealt with in section 92. The statutory recognition of veterinary nurses for the first time is a welcome development. Nurses are an important resource and the profession has already made significant progress towards the development of formalised education and training programmes for them. What is needed in the new statutory context is an appropriate structure for their operation in conjunction with veterinary surgeons. The overriding concern in this regard must be the health and welfare of the animals entrusted to our care. Matters such as the choice of appropriate medications, possible adverse reactions post-injection, immediate access to a directing veterinary surgeon and so on are all vitally important in this context.

As drafted, the legislation could become seriously divisive as between veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses. A relatively minor adjustment could overcome this potential difficulty and ensure that the excellent co-operation, could be maintained and developed. This approach is also supported by veterinary nurses. Our recommendation is that section 92(2)(b) should be amended to read, “procedures which may be carried out by a veterinary nurse on animals, under the direction and supervision of, but otherwise than in the presence of a veterinary practitioner, consisting of . . .”.

Finally I turn to veterinary premises. Part 9 makes it a requirement to have a "certificate of suitability for veterinary premises". It can be seen as a logical statutory development of the practice premises accreditation scheme currently operated on a voluntary basis by the profession. While there are concerns about the cost implications of implementing the new system, the profession acknowledges the logic behind the proposed approach.

Provision is also made for the appointment of "authorised officers" to inspect such premises. The powers to inspect premises as set down in section 127 and aimed particularly at registered persons are quite extensive, including "forced entry". Section 128, aimed apparently at non-registered persons, provides for the use of District Court warrants in certain circumstances. In terms of equity, this requirement for a warrant should also apply to inspections carried out under section 127.

We have four recommendations. The definition of "veterinary premises" should be amended to cover premises operated specifically by "persons registered under Part 4", in other words, vets. Section 110(2) should be amended to permit partners to apply jointly for a certificate of suitability. In section 34(2)(g) which deals with the fixing of fees, the reference to additional fees for the “renewal of a grant” of a certificate of suitability should be deleted. A requirement should be included in section 127 that these powers be exercised only on foot of a District Court warrant.

On behalf of Veterinary Ireland, the organisation for the veterinary profession, we would wish to record that the role of Veterinary Ireland is to represent veterinary surgeons in Ireland and to facilitate the veterinary profession in its commitment to improving the health and welfare of the animals under its care, to protecting public health and to serving the changing needs of its clients and the community through effective and innovative leadership.

We have presented today the collective views of more than 1,000 veterinary surgeons on the proposals in the Veterinary Practice Bill 2004. As stated at the outset we have done this with a view to being of assistance to the legislators. We will continue to be available to assist in any way we can in the weeks and months ahead. Of course we would be happy now to provide any further information or clarifications committee members may require.

I thank Mr. Horan for his presentation.

I thank Mr. Horan, Mr. O'Sullivan and the other representatives of Veterinary Ireland for making their presentation and for circulating their very well prepared submission well in advance of the meeting. It is important to have a properly regulated veterinary sector in this country. It is also important to have a future for the large animal practices in the veterinary sector as they are likely to come under pressure in coming years and they provide a very valuable service in many rural communities. In the context of this Bill it is important to be conscious of that fact.

Section 46(3)(a) covers the educational requirements for someone coming from abroad. If this section remains as drafted, could it delay the appointment of additional staff who might be required in emergencies? For example, if we had a very serious outbreak of foot and mouth disease, which is extremely contagious, would the need for the Veterinary Council or the Department to verify educational qualifications in the short term instead of getting people working on the ground, delay the effort to eliminate the disease? I have a related question on education. Are any restrictions imposed on a veterinary surgeon, who qualified in another EU country, practising here?

Both Veterinary Ireland and the Veterinary Council of Ireland have raised concerns over section 60. What are the real concerns? Has Veterinary Ireland looked at the changes suggested by the Veterinary Council of Ireland and, if so, what is its opinion on that suggestion? Section 92(2) refers to minor treatments carried out by veterinary nurses. Can minor surgery be non-invasive? The definition seems to be contradictory and I seek clarification.

Section 92(2) refers to minor treatments carried out by veterinary nurses. Can minor surgery be non-invasive? The definition seems to be contradictory and I seek clarification.

Mr. Horan asked whether the word "condition" in section 54(1)(a)(i) covered scanning. Is his concern that scanning will be or will not be restricted to vets subsequent to enactment of the Bill? In most counties the farm relief services carry out this procedure, especially on sheep. What discussions have taken place with the representative organisation of the veterinary nurses regarding the Veterinary Ireland submission?

I thank Mr. Horan, Mr. O'Sullivan and their colleagues for the presentation. I compliment them on the submission they provided in advance of the meeting. Having the specifics spelt out saves considerable time in getting to grips with the detail. The recommendations are all quite clear.

A very specific recommendation is made to change section 46(2)(a) in order that it reads, “to participate in a “Class A” disease eradication programme”. This refers to limited registration. I ask Mr. Horan to elaborate on what is involved in that and why it is so important to refer to a “Class A” disease eradication programme, which seems particularly detailed.

In consultation with the Veterinary Council of Ireland last week we again had a long discussion on veterinary nurses. I made the point that I would like to hear from the veterinary nurses to understand their concerns about section 92(2). We have undertaken to do that.

Veterinary Ireland proposes the amendment of section 110(2) to permit partners to apply jointly for a certificate of suitability. Is it possible that some partners might not be veterinary surgeons? I thought a partner would always be a veterinary surgeon, but perhaps this is not the case.

I thank Mr. Horan and Mr. O'Sullivan for their presentation and I welcome the entire delegation. Veterinary Ireland's recommends amending the definition of "emergency" to provide for "humane" putting down and changing the reference in section 56(2) from "where a registered person is not immediately available" to "is not available within a reasonable time". Who would define what constitutes a "reasonable time"? This term is ambiguous and open to being exploited by anybody who wishes to do so.

Section 127 refers to forced entry without a District Court warrant and section 128 covers the powers to inspect with a search warrant. It strikes me that, from a position of equality, people have been litigated against. Has legal opinion been sought or consultation taken place with the Equality Authority on the matter? I suggest that could be looked at.

I have no problem with increasing the number of veterinarians on various committees. Nobody knows the profession better than the people at the coalface on a day-to-day basis.

I welcome Mr. O'Sullivan, Mr. Horan and their colleagues, and thank them for their presentation. Mr. Horan started by telling us how they had succeeded in bringing the various veterinary bodies together. Reading the presentation and having listened attentively to the Veterinary Council last week, it is clear the profession seems to be very much ad idem on the Bill. That is encouraging. As Veterinary Ireland is very positive in its approach, I do not have very many questions.

The point raised by Deputy Ferris is a valuable one. I observed a hunt in my area last Sunday and watched people trying to negotiate a river. I wondered, listening to the presentation, how the representatives of Veterinary Ireland would define a "reasonable time" in the event of a horse being seriously injured in a scenario such as that. As the Bill addresses the need to deal with such circumstances immediately, it is much more humane and responsive to the needs of the animal than the idea of dealing with it within a "reasonable time", which, as has been said, is open to subjective interpretation.

I understand the concerns the witnesses have raised about section 60. When we talk about non-qualified people, we refer, among others, to contractors, farm relief services and whoever might come out to a farm to do hoof paring. It is not an easy task and there may be circumstances in which it is necessary to administer an anaesthetic to deal with a problematic animal. If section 60 is excluded, how do the witnesses envisage the practical issue on the ground being dealt with? What proposals do they have in that context?

I was somewhat surprised to realise there are more than 1,000 practising veterinary surgeons in the country. As has been alluded to by one of the other Deputies, there is a major challenge there for those working in cattle practices and on farms. I am certainly full of admiration for the people who work in that area. It is often difficult and back-breaking. When veterinarians went out to farms in the past there was often a farmer with a couple of helpers. People are lucky now if even the farmer is present to help out.

I have great regard for the work of veterinarians. At our last meeting, Deputy Crawford alluded to the fact that in many parts of the country the local veterinary surgeon is far more readily available than the local general practitioner. That will probably change. Perhaps the delegates will comment on the future of veterinary medicine and the level of demand there will be for people to enter the profession.

I apologise I must leave. I am interested in the partnership issue. Does it include veterinary nurses? As I said before, I have great admiration for veterinarians. In case the Chairman thinks he has one up on me, I also have a relation in veterinary practice. He is in Trim. Therefore I have some contacts there which may be useful in the next few days.

I had better watch that.

Veterinarians provide a wonderful service and make calls at all hours of the day and night. I will certainly work with my colleague, Deputy Naughten, to do anything we can to help improve the Bill.

I join my colleagues in welcoming the members of Veterinary Ireland to the committee. As Deputy Ferris said, it is necessary to provide a clearer, tighter definition of "reasonable time".

Section 63 provides for an education committee comprising eight people, a minimum of three of whom shall be veterinarians. What number would the delegates prefer to see? Veterinary Ireland was not specific in its submission and I would be interested to know what it would be prepared to agree on the composition of the panel.

Veterinary Ireland asks that section 60 be deleted altogether. I am concerned that if section 60 is deleted, non-registered persons will have no legislation or guidelines under which to operate. An amendment could be considered. If the section is completely removed, I am concerned that people might feel they have a free licence to do whatever they want as opposed to the current limited permission to perform various duties under section 60.

I welcome the statutory recognition in section 92 of veterinary nurses. Will the witnesses tell the committee how many veterinary nurses there are in Ireland? I am aware that there is a course available in Athlone Institute of Technology.

It is quite a good course.

I am aware of one person undertaking studies there. I would be interested to hear whatever additional information can be provided on that.

I join in welcoming the delegation to the committee. We have discussed this issue at length over the past few weeks privately and otherwise. What Veterinary Ireland asks for is reasonable. In the context of the discussion of "reasonable time", I have found that a veterinarian always gets to an animal as fast as he or she can. While I acknowledge that the phrase may give rise to concern now, it is not something that one can define very easily. I have found in the case of difficult terrain that the veterinarian was good to call.

I have no problem supporting Veterinary Ireland's reasonable points. I wish the organisation well and expect its members will find the Bill favourable when finalised.

I apologise for brining in so many members. I call on Mr. Horan, but any member of his delegation who wishes to contribute is more than welcome to do so.

Mr. Horan

We are delighted to see so much interest from the members of the committee and to hear their very kind comments about the profession. They are welcome and appreciated. I propose to answer some of the points raised before passing on to the president of the organisation to talk about the future of the profession and large animal practices as adverted to by Deputy Naughten and others. I will ask Andrew Byrne to talk about veterinary nurses given his particular expertise here and in Europe, which may be of benefit. I will ask Peadar Ó Scanaill to talk about minor versus large surgery and body cavities etc. They should not feel restricted to discussing the topics I have just allocated.

On the definition of "veterinary medicine" as it relates to scanning and so on, we have asked whether "diagnosing condition" includes diagnosing the condition of pregnancy. We were not satisfied with the answer we got from the people we believe were involved in drafting the Bill. We want to sit down with them, the committee and anyone else with an interest in this area to be specific and clear about whether scanning is in or out. We believe scanning is currently carried out by non-veterinarians and think this will continue. In broad terms, much of what happens today will continue. However, if we are to go to the trouble of drafting new legislation to define the practice of veterinary medicine for the first time, we should get it right and be clear about what is or is not an act of veterinary medicine. What is not can be dealt with elsewhere. For that reason, it is inappropriate to include section 60. While it properly and precisely provides a badly needed definition of the practice of veterinary medicine, it allows the Minister, having consulted with the Veterinary Council, to establish regulations according to very broad terms. Such a provision is not appropriate in the legislation, although it may be appropriate to make provision for other activities which are outside the scope of veterinary medicine elsewhere. It is important we are all clear about the scope of the practice of veterinary medicine, which is not yet the case.

As regards the term "reasonable time" as it applies to the response to an emergency, an issue dealt with in section 56(2), we seek a change in the current wording which would ensure the provision allowing for intervention could not be invoked where a registered person is not immediately available but is available within a reasonable time. The phrase "immediately available" in the context of an accident involving a horse, dog, cat or cow could be interpreted as meaning that if a person on the scene looks around and does not see a veterinary surgeon, he or she may intervene. The term "within a reasonable time" may need to be defined. A court of law applies this type of test by asking what would a reasonable person do in a particular set of circumstances. This is the basis on which our proposal is made. I note the Veterinary Council of Ireland, which appeared before the joint committee recently, made a similar proposal, except it used the wording where a registered person is not available "within a reasonable timeframe". I am not sure what is the difference between the words "time" and "timeframe". Some allowance must be made for the possibility of getting a vet to the scene within a reasonable period of time.

I ask the president of Veterinary Ireland to address specifically the issue of the future of large animal practices raised by Deputy Naughten and others.

Mr. O’Sullivan

The future of veterinary medicine on this island is important with regard to large animal practices. Veterinary surgeons in that role are aware of the changing demographics in farming. We are conscious, for example, that we export up to 90% of our farming produce. There is strong reliance on veterinary involvement for a number of reasons. We add value to on-farm food safety and subsequently at meat inspection. In this way, we add to the credibility and marketability of food in international markets.

Veterinary surgeons are also becoming increasingly aware of the importance of animal welfare issues on farms. It is said that if one picks up a mobile phone anywhere in the Republic of Ireland, a vet will arrive on request within an hour. That is true. We recognise that people consider animal welfare issues, particularly in the European context, when assessing the food they eat, asking, for example, whether the animal's welfare was well looked after. The Department of Agriculture and Food is conscious of animal welfare and issues such as traceability.

This is an exciting time for veterinarians. Veterinary Ireland, together with the Veterinary College and other partners, has attempted to address issues of on-farm disease by introducing herd health management plans. One reads daily in the newspapers about veterinary surgeons upskilling and stimulating farmers to assume a disease prevention role. This will help make farms more profitable while encompassing animal welfare and food safety.

It is no surprise to us that the number of leaving certificate points required for veterinary medicine is high. We encourage people to get involved in the profession, particularly in Ireland. We pay tribute to farmers and cherish our relationship with them as it makes our job more enjoyable. It is with an eye on these issues and concerns that the points in our presentation were raised.

Mr. Peadar Ó Scanaill

County Meath is well represented and Ashbourne is my home base.

As I am not allowed to go to the part of the country, I was not aware of that.

Mr. Ó Scanaill

Tá áthas mór orm chomh maith Gaeilge a chloisteáil ó John Horan. Ní raibh a fhios agam go raibh Gaeilge chomh maith sin aige. I am delighted to hear that. I will ask my colleague, Andrew Byrne, to address the issues of minor and major surgery. Deputy Ó Fearghaíl raised the example of a horse which breaks a leg on a hunt. We must remember that lads break their legs on football fields every Sunday. They are lifted and transported to Blanchardstown or another hospital where they sit for five, six or seven hours before being seen. It is not necessary to panic or insist that an animal must be put down immediately at the bottom of a ditch. I hunt, although we do not hunt on Sundays where I am from. People who hunt are practical and will know what is a reasonable length of time to determine if a horse is in spinal shock or has a broken back or leg. While this is often hard to determine, there is no need to take immediate action.

Our concern is that, rather than acting on behalf of the horse at the bottom of the ditch, someone might abuse such a situation, most of which are dealt with very well. For example, a person in a hurry who runs over a dog and believes it to be seriously injured may decide that the event is an emergency and reverse his or her car over the dog several times to make sure it is dead. No reference is made to humane destruction, which is the reason we seek to insert the word "humane". Our proposal would ensure the Bill provides that "reasonable time" must elapse to give veterinary surgeons a chance to get to the scene of an accident. As several Deputies stated, veterinary surgeons are easier to reach than our opposite numbers in the human medical profession.

The issue of hoof paring was also raised. John Horan raised the issue of people outside the definition of "veterinary medicine" performing certain tasks. We need to properly define what is veterinary medicine. Hoof paring is different from the diagnosis of disease in a hoof, which entails diagnosing whether there is a pedal abscess or the animal is lame because an infection has spread into the hock. It is unfair to expect somebody who is paring hooves to make a diagnosis of such matters. We expect that hoof paring and scanning in cattle will continue. Our concern is whether a diagnosis of a condition is being made. This matter must be straightened out. A layperson crosses the line if he or she asks why the cow is not in calf and concludes that it is because she has endometriosis. How can a layperson outside the veterinary profession, with all the trappings with which I must deal daily, make a diagnosis on an infection in the womb? Pregnancy scanning and hoof paring are perhaps acceptable but let us not go much further. Dehorning is fine provided it is done humanely. We must be careful about how people are trained to dehorn.

My understanding of section 60 is that it does not specifically provide for people to be trained and allowed to do limited work. From my reading, the Minister may decide to allow someone of any or no training to do everything veterinary surgeons do. It does not provide that the Minister may allow people to do one or two specific tasks, rather they may carry out veterinary medicine, including the administration of an anaesthetic.

To respond to Deputy Ferris, a person who does not understand the effects of medicines on all of the systems, including a diseased animal, or the interaction between pathology — disease — and its effect on tissues should not be allowed to administer an anaesthetic. It is unfair to expect a person to take a short post-leaving certificate course of half a day, week or month to reach the point veterinary surgeons reach having gone through the hassle of completing various courses over five years at veterinary school. It cannot be done.

Mr. O’Sullivan

I will address the point made by Deputy Hoctor. We do not expect all other para-professionals to be regulated by the Bill. That would be an unfair expectation. The point should be that it is important for us to define acts of veterinary surgery and veterinary medicine but it is unfair to expect everything else to be legislated for in the Bill. Further consultation is needed on some of the definitions. We are offering to partake in those debates and give ongoing examples. We are not happy that they have been properly clarified.

Lest there should be confusion in the farming world, a farmer is entitled to carry out procedures on his or her farm so as to keep his or her animals in good stead. He or she is entitled to carry out castrations and disbudding etc. on his or her own farm. Existing legislation covers some of the other issues. The animal remedies legislation interlinks with and covers the use of local anaesthetic. The Bill cannot contradict existing legislation. However, it would be an issue if a person set themselves up to carry out certain procedures on a wide scale. In future that sort of thing should be covered by licence. A licensing type of arrangement should cover the type of people who might be involved in such an area. However, perhaps it should not be done within the scope of this Bill.

Mr. Andrew Byrne

Some good points were made and questions asked about veterinary nurses and their role. The veterinary profession very much welcomes the legal recognition of veterinary nurses. The veterinary and the veterinary nursing professions are two complementary professions that work well together. In order to ensure the ongoing development of high quality veterinary services it is necessary for us to have well trained nurses in practice who work alongside vets in a team atmosphere. It is very important that nurses who go through good training courses such as the ones in Athlone and in UCD are kept in the profession. To do that we need to give them professional satisfaction in the job they do and allow them to utilise the skills they gained in their training.

For that reason, working alongside and under the direction of veterinary surgeons, it is quite proper that veterinary nurses are allowed to carry out certain tasks of minor surgery. One of the definitions of minor surgery is that a body cavity is not entered. It is always difficult to define minor and major surgery but on a day-to-day basis in modern practice there are tasks which veterinary nurses carry out under the direction of a vet such as, for example, wound management, closure of wounds, suturing and flushing of wounds, abscess drainage, insertion of wound drains, intubation during anaesthesia, resuscitation techniques and castration of some species. The castration of cats under the direction of a veterinary surgeon does not involve entry into a body cavity. In other countries, veterinary nurses are permitted to carry out this procedure under the direction, supervision and in the presence of a veterinary surgeon. It is right that nurses who are properly trained can carry out such procedures. We have to strike a balance between giving nurses professional satisfaction and not putting undue pressure on them. We must not ask them to undertake tasks which they are not trained to do. It is not good for the animal, its owner or the nurse.

I recently discussed this issue with a group called VETNET which is the European network of veterinary nursing educators, which had its annual meeting in Nantes, France, shortly before Christmas. This issue was discussed quite openly. The question was asked whether nurses should be allowed to practise by themselves outside a veterinary practice. There was unanimous agreement among the nursing educators from around Europe that they do not want that to happen. They want to see veterinary nursing develop as human nursing has done, where the nurses work as part of a veterinary team with the support, guidance and direct access of a veterinary surgeon in their work. That is what the veterinary nurses want and the veterinary profession would like to see that as well. I very much welcome the inclusion of opinion from veterinary nurses into this forum at a later date.

In terms of education, the recent development of the UCD course is an example of co-operation. I had the opportunity to chair the forum for the development of nursing education in Ireland and the forum which designed that course was made up of the Irish Veterinary Nursing Association, Veterinary Ireland, UCD and the Veterinary Council. The course was designed to train our nurses in all species. In many other European countries nurses are only trained in companion animals. In Ireland they are now also trained in large animals in order that they will form part of large animal practice teams as well as the companion animal practice team. There are other courses in addition to the one in UCD. We heard of the course in Athlone. There is also a course in St. John's College in Limerick. These students come out very well trained but some of them choose to go on to the UCD course to get further training. There is an initiative in Europe to develop some kind of Europe-wide accreditation system in order that we can identify and define nursing courses.

I do not have exact statistics on the number of nurses in practice in the country but there are approximately 50 qualified nurses at present. Approximately 25 students will come from the three-year UCD course annually. Similar numbers would be produced in St. John's College and Athlone.

Mr. Horan

I note that three specific questions have not been answered and I will deal with them very quickly. Deputy Naughten asked about section 46(3)(a) and whether changing the educational requirements could slow up the effort to get in vets. I would say what we are proposing would speed it up because at present the wording is that a person would have to satisfy the council that he or she has the requisite knowledge and skills for the purpose of subsection (2). We say that it should simply be made the same educational qualification as set out in section 43(2), which is the requirement for a vet. Most days of the week the Veterinary Council has applications from people from outside Ireland who present their qualifications and want to practise in Ireland. There is a standard procedure for getting that through. If one tries to introduce some other sort of strata, then it will cause confusion and delay. What we propose would speed things up.

Deputy Upton asked a question in regard to section 46(2)(a) as to why we are concentrating so much on class A diseases. The Minister had proposed a category of limited registration for people to participate in a disease eradication programme. In introducing the Bill she said, as there are ongoing threats of disease outbreaks, we need to ensure that we can call on an adequate supply of veterinary expertise from outside the State if necessary and at short notice. She was clearly thinking about — her departmental officials can confirm this — a major threat to the national herd. That is the class A disease with which we are all familiar such as foot and mouth disease, swine fever, cattle plague, pleural pneumonia and so on. We would want and need extra resources in cases where there would be an immediate threat to the national herd. The section on limited registration should be there to provide for that, as the Minister wishes, but the wording is much broader than it should be and we do not think it is a good idea to leave in the current wording.

Deputy Hoctor asked about section 63, the education committee. The current proposal is that there would be eight people on the committee. It is proposed that as few as three could be vets. She asked how many vets there should be. We say there could be more than three and up to seven but not necessarily eight. The maximum input of veterinary expertise into the education committee would be desirable. This committee would advise the council on what the educational requirement should be for someone to qualify as a vet and what educational requirements one should meet to continue to register every year as a vet. That does not happen at present. It happens on a voluntary basis but it will become mandatory in due course under the legislation. Therefore, we think there should be a strong veterinary input into that aspect.

The final question was from Deputy Upton. She queried our use of the term "partners" in section 110(2). She is absolutely right. The use of the term may be slightly misleading. We are talking about people who are working in a veterinary partnership where there may be two, three or five vets who are partners in a veterinary practice. They should be entitled to apply for a grant of a certificate of suitability. The Bill states "only a registered person may apply". If this were changed to "only a registered person or persons", rather than causing confusion through the use of the word "partners", it would be a better amendment and eliminate any doubt.

Has Mr. O'Sullivan anything further to add?

Mr. O’Sullivan

Let us consider Deputy Upton's point on the singling out of class A diseases. Mr. Horan says he does not believe it is a good idea. To some degree, the points I raise also apply to non-registered persons. There is mutual recognition of veterinary degrees across the EU. This allows for the inflow and exchange of veterinary graduates and veterinary surgeons between member states, thus resulting in standardisation in the areas of veterinary surgery and medicine, be it concerned with small animals or food safety. We feel limited registration would allow persons who may not have suitable qualifications to become involved in issues where critical training in animal welfare is important. In other areas where mutual recognition is sought, limited registration may be responsible for the introduction of a lower standard of registered veterinary surgery. It is very difficult for the public to understand the system that obtains. However, we support limited registration in respect of class A diseases and participation in further education programmes. If there were no suitable mutual recognition between Ireland and Australia, for instance, an Australian veterinary surgeon who wanted to teach here could not do so. There should be a facility whereby he or she could be registered here and allowed to teach.

I have two brief supplementary questions, the first of which concerns the education committee. Surely it is as important, if not more so, for the committee to have educators as members as it is for it to have vets as members. This is because the educators would set the standards, as they do in respect of other curricula.

Based on what Mr. Byrne said about nurses, if a registered nurse was from a farming background and assisted in a case where a ewe or cow was having difficulty giving birth, could that nurse be struck off the register on the basis of the existing definition? It seems ambiguous. I will hear the answer later as I now have to go to the Dáil Chamber.

My question relates to the recognition of the nursing qualification, which is conferred in three different colleges. Is there an overarching responsible body or is it the responsibility of Veterinary Ireland or the Veterinary Council to ensure that the colleges' qualifications are comparable? Are the courses identical such that all veterinary nurses would be regarded as having reached a specific standard?

Do the delegates see any challenges arising from the expansion of the EU in terms of the ten newly acceded countries? Does their accession impinge on the mutual recognition directive?

If it is the case that unqualified persons are carrying out TB or brucellosis testing or overseeing the slaughter of animals in meat factories, for example, is it likely that there could be no vets at all in certain rural areas in the future, such that vets might have to travel 100 miles to a farmer? I am very concerned about this.

A qualified person must administer an anaesthetic to human beings. I see no reason the same practice should not apply to animals. It would be very unfair to animals if qualified persons were not available to administer an anaesthetic to them.

Mr. Horan

Mr. Byrne will deal with the question on nursing courses.

Mr. Byrne

The Deputy raised a very important point. There is no mechanism currently in place by which veterinary nursing courses can be accredited. The proposed Bill is a tremendous step forward because, for the first time, it defines what a veterinary nurse is and the role he or she can undertake. This is very important. I am very pleased the Bill will confer the responsibility of defining veterinary nursing courses on the Veterinary Council and subsequently the veterinary nursing board, when the Minister establishes it.

There is the problem of accreditation in many European countries. There are good accreditation systems in the United Kingdom and North America. The network of nursing educators is currently coming together to develop a voluntary accreditation system for nursing courses in Europe. This is a collaborative venture involving the nursing organisations, the nursing educators and the veterinary profession in Europe. The project began just before Christmas and will run for approximately two years, after which some accreditation guidelines will be laid down. In Ireland, on the basis of this Bill, the Veterinary Council will be able to achieve the goal of that project.

Mr. O’Sullivan

It ties in somewhat with the question on the challenges within the EU and the mutual recognition of veterinary degrees. In light of the need to have a system of recognition pertaining to veterinary faculties in countries that have recently acceded or which will accede to the EU, concerns were raised at EU level. They have been addressed by providing for mutual recognition and through a quite severe inspection of the standards in veterinary education facilities.

The colleges in certain EU countries are of a very high standard. Spain and Italy are two examples but because they are producing so many graduates those graduates do not have the necessary practical experience in terms of full field exposure. We have helped in this regard. Mr. Ó Scanaill and I have taken students during holiday periods to assist in their educational programmes.

On the Chairman's question on the possibility of there being no vets in certain regions, we are not near that situation in Ireland. We certainly recognise that veterinary surgeons act as sentinels with regard to notifiable diseases and the Department recognises their value in this. Some European countries offer financial assistance to veterinary surgeons in order that they can stay in a given region. The Norwegian Government provides financial assistance for veterinary surgeons along the western seaboard of that country. These veterinary surgeons could have to travel 100 miles to visit an animal having difficulty giving birth and therefore it is reasonable that they be offered such assistance. However, we have not yet reached this position in Ireland. In some ways the wheel has turned full circle in that many European graduates love the concept of farm animal practice followed in Ireland and are seeking to come here to work in what are perceived as remote places. Nonetheless, I agree that the matter needs constant monitoring.

Mr. Ó Scanaill

Deputy Naughten has asked whether we envisage a veterinary nurse being struck off simply because he or she has assisted with a cow calving or a ewe lambing. That is not the case. Our concern is that the Bill seems to be trying to set up veterinary nurses separately in competition with veterinary practices. This would be a poor move because the veterinary nurse relies completely on the veterinary practice for his or her training. If we, in private practice, were to provide that training as part of the training of veterinary nurses and then they set up in practice in opposition to us, it would lead to friction. Moreover, if they were to set up in opposition to us such as in Ashbourne, mentioned earlier, and if a veterinary nurse ran into trouble somewhere, our concern is that he or she may feel he or she could not contact the local practice because he or she was in competition with it. Veterinary surgeons and nurses should work in cohesion.

It is not that a veterinary nurse would get into trouble for assisting with a cow calving or a ewe lambing but that he or she has instant access to the umbrella organisation called the veterinary practice in which there is a veterinary surgeon. In other words, they should not be in competition with each other; rather they would be far better off augmenting each other's services. The veterinary nurse would not be in trouble for assisting with a cow calving but should have the veterinary surgeon's voice on the other end of a telephone line if he or she feels the need to avail of the assistance of a veterinary surgeon.

Deputy Naughten asked about the real "nuts and bolts" concern in regard to section 60. As veterinary surgeons, we have to go through college and so on. We must also have our premises recorded, certified and checked and undergo a CPD — which was voluntary — properly and correctly. Section 60 will allow someone to practice veterinary medicine without doing any of this. This is unfair.

Mr. Horan

Deputy Naughten asked about our proposal concerning the education committee and the need for educators and people with expertise to be members of it. Our proposals to increase the veterinary expertise available to the committee are not envisaged as being at the expense of educators who have a valuable role to play. The Deputy is correct in that regard.

On the broader role of the veterinary profession, the question of others doing some of the work that vets do at present and its implications, we would not like to see a running down of the veterinary service available throughout Ireland. Anything that impinged on this would have implications for animal welfare, food safety and disease surveillance, as will be recognised with the running down of the service in other jurisdictions. There is real value in the involvement of veterinarians from that point of view. There is a real value in the veterinary certification of the product we produce in terms of food safety in the domestic market and in terms of the 90% plus of our output that we export. Therefore, we urge caution in any moves which would in any way undermine this aspect. We are not doing so from the perspective of a vested interest but that of the national interest.

Prior to the publication of the Veterinary Practice Bill on 27 October 2004, Veterinary Ireland, the representative organisation of the profession, was not consulted on its content. This is not a complaint but a statement of fact. Following its publication, we sought a meeting with the Minister for Agriculture and Food. On 17 November 2004 we received a reply that she was willing to meet the organisation. She went on to suggest that a meeting with officials, in the first instance, to discuss the more detailed aspects of the Bill would be beneficial. This meeting took place on 23 November 2004. We have renewed our request to meet her directly. We look forward to that opportunity.

We subsequently recorded our interest in the Bill with the committee through the clerk, Mr. Eoin Faherty, and were pleased to receive the invitation to meet it today. Members will note from our position paper that we have offered to work with interested parties such as the Minister, her officials, the existing Veterinary Council and legislators to carefully scrutinise the proposed definition of the practice of veterinary medicine to ensure it is precise, can be clearly understood and will stand the test of time in practical operations.

We would be pleased to be part of a co-ordinated effort to work on other aspects of the Bill. This input could be valuable. We formally extend this offer in the interests of ensuring the Bill is the best it can be.

On behalf of the joint committee, I thank Mr. Horan and his colleagues from Veterinary Ireland for attending and responding to questions raised by members. We all appreciate the tremendous work they do. They have a difficult job to do, as any of us who is a farmer knows well. Every member of the committee has met representatives of the organisation in each county. I met Mr. O'Sullivan and his colleagues from County Meath. Other public representatives who are not members of the committee have approached me. We have also received correspondence from others who could not be here today. I suggest that the submission by Veterinary Ireland be forwarded to the Minister for Agriculture and Food. I am sure members have alternative ways and means to make changes to the Bill. We will all work in that direction. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Top
Share