I welcome Mr. John Higgins, Ms Eilish O'Brien, Mr. Pat Meskell, Mr. Jonathan Cooney, Mr. Denis Hennigan and Mr. Morgan Lyons from the Veterinary Officers Association who are here to discuss the Veterinary Practice Bill 2004, now on Committee Stage in the Seanad. Before the presentation begins, I draw the delegation's attention to the fact that while members of the joint committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not extend to witnesses. 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 Houses, or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
Veterinary Practice Bill 2004: Presentation.
Mr. John Higgins
The Veterinary Officers' Association, VOA, is pleased to be given the opportunity to address the Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food. We thank members for providing time to hear our views on the proposed Veterinary Practice Bill 2004.
The VOA is the representative organisation for veterinary surgeons in permanent employment in the Civil Service or the public sector and has 320 members who are employed in district veterinary offices, meat factories, meat product and dairy processing plants, laboratories, Agriculture House, Backweston, Maynooth and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland.
I am a veterinary inspector from County Westmeath who is working in County Longford. The association is also represented here by Mr. Pat Meskell, a superintendent veterinary inspector who is a native of west Limerick but living in County Cork and working in the north Tipperary district veterinary office; Mr. Jonathan Cooney, a veterinary inspector who is living in County Meath and working in County Westmeath; Mr. Denis Hennigan, a veterinary inspector who is native to and working in County Cork; Mr. Morgan Lyons, a superintendent veterinary inspector who is living in County Tipperary and working in County Laois; and Ms Eilish O'Brien who is secretary of the association and chairperson of the sub-committee which examined the Bill. She is a veterinary inspector from the north Kerry area and working in County Cork. I will now ask her to present our position paper on the Bill. Should any subsequent clarification be required the delegates will attempt to provide it to the committee's satisfaction.
Ms Eilish O’Brien
This morning I will outline the position of the Veterinary Officers' Association as regards those parts of the Bill of concern to us. As our members continue to review the Bill, other issues may be highlighted at a later stage.
The purpose of the Veterinary Practice Bill 2004 is to update and replace the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1931, as amended by the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1952 and the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1960, the legislation under which the veterinary profession operates as a self-governing health body. The Bill also provides for the statutory recognition of veterinary nurses. It will allow for the regulation of the veterinary and veterinary nursing professions, taking into account the changing environment in which they now operate. It will also allow for the establishment of requirements for continuing professional education and standards for veterinary premises.
The Veterinary Officers' Association, the association of State veterinarians, welcomes the publication of the Bill, in particular the expanded role of the Veterinary Council in the areas of education and training, continuing professional development, standards for veterinary premises, food safety and public health. We also welcome the provision for registration of specialists in veterinary medicine and the statutory recognition of veterinary nurses. The association recognises that these provisions are necessary to serve the needs of the profession in the years ahead.
As the representative association of State veterinarians, the Veterinary Officers' Association wants to ensure the Bill will ultimately emerge as one which will best protect animal welfare as well as serve the farming community, the general public and the profession for the future. This position paper has been prepared in that spirit.
Having examined the Bill and following consultation with our members, key issues have arisen. These will be outlined with recommendations in this paper. The following commentaries and recommendations are sequenced as the sections appear in the Bill.
The first part of the Bill about which we have concerns is Part 3 which deals with the Veterinary Council of Ireland. Section 13(1) provides that the regulation of the practice of veterinary medicine in the State will be the principal function of the Veterinary Council of Ireland. Sections 16 and 17 provide for the composition of the council; the selection, nomination and election of its members; the timing of and timescale for appointments and preliminary and operational arrangements.
The council is to consist of 17 members, of whom seven, veterinary surgeons, will be elected by registered veterinary practitioners. The council is to consist of 17 members, of whom seven will be elected by registered veterinary practitioners. The remainder will consist of four nominees of the Minister of Agriculture and Food, one nominee of the Minister for Education and Science, two from educational bodies, one from the FSAI, one nominee of the Director of Consumer Affairs and a veterinary nurse. The current council has 17 members, of whom 14 are vets, 12 elected, one appointed by the National University of Ireland and one appointed by the Minister. The proposed new council will also have 17 members, of whom as few as eight could be vets, seven of these to be elected by veterinary practitioners and one to be appointed by the Minister.
The Minister's decision to broaden the membership of the Veterinary Council to reflect interests such as education, consumer and food safety is to be welcomed, as it should provide a greater transparency in the regulation of the profession. However, the Veterinary Officers' Association believes that the council, whose principal function is to regulate the practice of veterinary medicine in the State, would be better served with additional veterinary representation. Veterinary surgeons, with their expertise and specialised knowledge, provide important and practical insights into the operation of the profession and what will be required of it in future years. On a practical point, the proposed new council will simply not include enough veterinary surgeons and practitioners to carry out their designated roles in committees.
The changes that the Veterinary Officers' Association is recommending to the composition of the council will not have any impact on the composition of the preliminary investigation committee or the fitness to practise committee, thereby retaining the necessary transparency and accountability of these committees. To achieve a greater veterinary representation on the council, we recommend the following amendments.
We recommend that section 16(1)(c) be amended to read as follows: “one person who performs functions relating to animal welfare”. This amendment would allow the nomination of a veterinary surgeon.
We recommend that section 16(1)(d) be amended to read as follows: “one person who is nominated for appointment as a member of the Council by the Minister of Education and Science and who is registered or eligible to be registered under Part 4 and engaged in the provision of higher veterinary education”.
We also recommend that section 16(1)(e)(i) be amended to read as follows: “one is registered or is eligible to be registered under Part 4”. These changes would provide the additional veterinary expertise for the council and its committees. They would remain ministerial appointees.
We have concerns with Part 4 of the Bill which deals with registration. In the Minister's address to the Seanad while introducing the new Bill, she referred to the pivotal role that the veterinary profession played in dealing with the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in 2001. She said:
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.
Section 46 of the Bill provides detailed rules for the limited registration of persons whose services are required for disease eradication or for education programmes. The Veterinary Officers' Association recognises that this approach is necessary to protect the health of the national herd and to protect trade and our economy as a whole. We believe that persons eligible for limited registration must be qualified as veterinary surgeons with a recognised veterinary qualification as prescribed under sections 44, 45 and 66. It is unacceptable to the Veterinary Officers' Association that a person who is not a qualified veterinary surgeon can register. We recommend that section 46 (11) be amended to read as follows:
For the purposes of subsection (2) (a) "disease eradication programme" means measures operated by or on behalf of a Minister to prevent, reduce the risk of, control or eradicate a disease (being a Class A disease as specified in Class A of Part III of the First Schedule of the Disease of Animals Act, 1966).
The Veterinary Officers' Association is seeking clarification on the reasoning behind the inclusion of section 46(2)(b), which permits the council to grant limited registration to an applicant if this person is required to participate in the provision of approved programmes of education or further education.
The next part of the Bill with which we have concern is Part 5, which deals with the practice of veterinary medicine. Section 54 sets out for the first time in Irish legislation a legal definition of the practice of veterinary medicine. The Veterinary Officers' Association believes that careful consideration should be given to this section. The definition of the practice of veterinary medicine must have legal certainty and be broad enough to encompass future developments in veterinary practice. We recommend that section 54(1)(a)(i) be amended to read as follows: “diagnosing disease, injury, pain, deformity, defect, condition or health”.
Section 60 empowers the Minister, following consultation with the Veterinary Council of Ireland, "to make regulations to provide that a person who is not a registered person may carry out a limited number of defined procedures that come within the definition of the practice of veterinary medicine". The purpose for which the Minister could make regulations under section 60 is comprehensive as to "maintain and improve the standards of animal welfare and health in the State" according to section 60 (2)(d), and to ensure “the adequate provision of veterinary services in the State” according to section 60(2)(f). The association insists that if a procedure is within the scope of the definition of the practice of veterinary medicine, then it should be performed by a registered veterinary practitioner, unless in the case of an extreme emergency when a veterinary surgeon is not immediately available, which is addressed in section 56(2).
As an organisation representing State veterinarians, we strongly object to the provision that a person who is not a qualified veterinary surgeon could administer an anaesthetic, which is classified as "veterinary surgeon only" under the Animal Remedies Regulations 1966. The Veterinary Officers' Association cannot condone the practice of veterinary medicine by persons who are not registered or eligible to be registered under Part 4 and Part 8. Consequently, the Veterinary Officers' Association strongly objects to the inclusion of section 60 in the Bill, as it our belief that animal welfare, public health, consumer protection and trade would be severely compromised. The Veterinary Officers' Association strongly recommends that section 60 should be deleted in its entirety.
Part 6 deals with veterinary education and training. Sections 63 to 68 require the Veterinary Council of Ireland to set up a veterinary education and training committee and also designates the make up of this committee. The veterinary education and training committee is given the remit of advising the Veterinary Council of Ireland on education and training, programmes of education in the State, continuing professional development and standards for recognition of qualifications obtained outside the State. The Veterinary Officers' Association acknowledges that the extensive functions of the veterinary education and training committee will lead to an improved standard of veterinary education. This will ultimately benefit the country both economically and socially. The statutory underpinning of continuing professional development is welcomed. The VOA believes that for the veterinary education and training committee to function effectively, it is imperative the number of veterinary surgeons on the Veterinary Council of Ireland be increased to allow sufficient veterinary expertise on this committee. Veterinary surgeons have the expertise and knowledge to bring our educational skills to a new height.
The composition of the veterinary education and training committee is outlined in section 63(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f). This section relates back to section 16(1) which details the composition of the Veterinary Council of Ireland. The education committee is to consist of eight members of the council, of which as few as three could be veterinary surgeons. Increasing the number of veterinary surgeons on the veterinary council, as per our recommendation under section 16(1), would allow additional veterinary expertise to be available to sit on the veterinary education and training committee. Section 64 also gives the education committee the remit to advise the Veterinary Council of Ireland on the knowledge and skill required for limited registration. In this regard, members should refer to our recommendations on section 46.
We also have concerns with Part 7 of the Bill which deals with fitness to practise. The Bill provides a new model for dealing with complaints regarding fitness to practise and a wider basis for imposition of sanctions on members of the profession. The association recognises that these provisions provide increased transparency and important assurances for the public. The proposed sanctions are accepted by the Veterinary Officers' Association and are acknowledged as necessary requirements.
Section 71(2) outlines the composition of the preliminary investigation committee. Section 72(2) outlines the composition of the fitness to practise committee. The recommendation of the Veterinary Officers' Association is that the composition of the preliminary investigation committee and the fitness to practise committee should be appropriate to the person under investigation, as this will facilitate the committee in formulating the correct opinion on the professional misconduct or unfitness to practise of the registered person concerned.
The Veterinary Officers' Association recommends the following amendments and additional clauses should be entered under sections 71(2) and 72(2) as follows. In the case of the preliminary investigation committee, we recommend that section 71(2)(a) be amended to read: “not more than 2 members of the Council who are registered or who are eligible to be registered under Part 4 when the person under investigation is registered or eligible to be registered under Part 4,”. The following additional clause should be added to section 72(2): “not more than 2 members of the Council who are registered or who are eligible to be registered under Part 4 or Part 8, when the person under investigation is registered or eligible to be registered under Part 8.” Section 71(2)(b) should remain as it is. It states: “not more that 2 members of the Council who are neither registered under Part 4 or 8 nor eligible to be so registered”.
In the case of the fitness to practise committee, we recommend that section 72(2)(b) read as: “not more than 3 members of the Council who are registered or eligible to be registered under Part 4, when the person under investigation is registered or eligible to be registered under Part 4”. The following additional provision should be entered under section 72(2): “not more than 3 members of the Council who are registered or eligible to be registered under Part 4 or Part 8, when the person under investigation is registered or eligible to be registered under Part 8”.
The following is a summary of the recommendations of the Veterinary Officers' Association. First, the number of veterinary surgeons sitting on the Veterinary Council of Ireland should be increased. Second, persons eligible for limited registration should have a recognised veterinary degree qualification. Third, the definition of the practice of veterinary medicine must have legal certainty. Fourth, section 60 should be deleted in its entirety. Fifth, the Veterinary Officers' Association believes that in order for the veterinary education and training committee to function effectively, it is imperative that the number of veterinary surgeons on the Veterinary Council of Ireland be increased to allow sufficient veterinary expertise on this committee. Sixth, the composition of the preliminary investigation committee and the fitness to practise committee should be appropriate to the person under investigation.
In conclusion, the Veterinary Officers' Association believes that if the changes we propose are adopted, the new Bill will provide for the maintenance of the highest standards within the veterinary profession into the future. These standards will ensure not only the highest standards of animal welfare, but will also ensure that the role of veterinary practitioners in animal health and welfare, disease eradication, animal and product certification, food safety and consumer assurance will safeguard both public health and the future of our agricultural economy.
I thank the Vice Chairman and members of the joint committee for allowing the Veterinary Officers' Association this opportunity to address the committee and to express our concerns regarding the Bill.
Thank you.
I welcome the association and thank it for its presentation. All the veterinary organisations which attended the committee made an argument concerning the numbers of veterinary representatives on the council in the context of the functioning of the committees. The committee will consider the matter on Committee Stage of the Bill, following whatever amendments are made in the Seanad.
I wish to refer to Part 4 of the Bill which deals with registration. The Department of Agriculture and Food plans to put an all-Ireland animal health regime in place. The North is considering the introduction of the taking of bloods by non-veterinary surgeons. What is the view of the Veterinary Officers' Association on this? Have the representatives of the association spoken with their colleagues on the other side of the Border on this issue, which has implications for the policing of an all-Ireland animal health regime?
Ms O'Brien referred to class A diseases in the context of the First Schedule to the Disease of Animals Act 1966. We all accept the issue in regard to class A diseases. However, by tying this to the First Schedule to the 1966 Act, if a subsequent class A disease is defined at some future date, we would have to amend the primary legislation. My understanding is that this is included in the First Schedule in order that the Minister can amend it as necessary, whereas if we write this into the legislation we could end up in a situation where we will have to amend the primary legislation. Will the delegation comment on this technical point?
In regard to section 54(1), the delegation proposes the inclusion of the word "health". What is Mr. Higgins's definition of "condition"? This question has been raised by other delegations. Is scanning included in the definition, for example? The delegation has obviously considered the issue as it is referenced in its amendment. Furthermore, what is the definition of "health"? It could be interpreted as including everything other than the kitchen sink. It is possible that the treatment of his or her own animals by a farmer and other common practices in this area may now be considered the practice of veterinary medicine under the import of the word "health". How can this potential difficulty be addressed?
In regard to the preliminary investigation committee and the fitness to practise committee, as set out in sections 71(2) and 72(2), respectively, the relevant section of the delegation's proposal includes no reference to the role of veterinary nurses. What is the situation under the delegation's definition if a veterinary nurse is investigated by the council? It seems that a right the delegation requires for veterinary surgeons is being withdrawn for veterinary nurses under this amendment. There is no provision for nurses to form part of the investigation committee.
How many vets does the delegation consider should be on the training and education committee? What does the delegation feel is the ideal number of educators? My experience of the education system indicates that academic appointments are often made on the basis of research achievements rather than a candidate's ability to teach. I do not include my honourable colleague, Deputy Upton, in this category.
It is critically important that educators who are members of any training and education committee should have the ability to educate in practice. This should be the main focus. For example, one of the main issues for the future, especially in the area of large animal health, is that relating to food safety. It is important that a person involved at the cutting edge in this area should be involved in the education committee. Food safety constitutes an integral part of the departmental veterinary role.
I thank Mr. Higgins and Ms O'Brien for their presentation. Almost all my questions have already been put by other members. It is important to observe that the delegation's veterinary colleagues to whom we have already spoken have raised a number of the same issues, particularly in regard to the number of veterinary representatives on the veterinary council. The committee has taken these opinions on board.
However, there are two areas on which I seek clarification. In regard to the preliminary investigation committee and the fitness to practise committee, will the delegation elaborate on its assertion that the committees' composition should be appropriate to the person under investigation? I would appreciate if the delegation could put this point in layman's terms by removing the legalistic framework in which it is couched.
The second point, which relates to the veterinary education and training committee, has already been raised. There is a case for taking a broad and inclusive approach in terms of the membership of that committee. Will the delegation elaborate on its belief, as I understand it, that the committee should consist predominantly of veterinarians? What role does the delegation envisage for other experts?
Mr. Higgins
In regard to Deputy Naughten's first point, lay samplers are already employed in the Department of Agriculture and Food for the purpose of taking blood samples for brucellosis. The results of those samples are subsequently interpreted by veterinary surgeons. I do not foresee any problems in this area.
Does Mr. Higgins believe this legislation changes that situation?
Mr. Higgins
No, I do not believe any change is envisaged. My colleague, Mr. Pat Meskell, will deal with the question regarding class A diseases.
Mr. Pat Meskell
Deputy Naughten asked why we want the restriction applied to diseases on the class A list.
That is not my question. I wish to know how the delegation is defining this under the 1966 Act. I accept the point Mr. Higgins has made in regard to class A diseases.
Mr. Meskell
I have a list with this information which I will circulate to members. When the Diseases of Animals Act 1996 was passed, there were only 11 diseases on the class A list. However, it is now a comprehensive list consisting of 44 diseases. In her Second Stage introduction to the Bill in the Seanad, the Minister observed that what she had in mind in regard to that clause was a situation such as an outbreak of foot and mouth disease. It relates to major disease outbreaks which would require a significant amount of veterinary assistance, some of which may be sought from foreign practitioners who may not be entitled to registration on the Irish veterinary register but would be facilitated through emergency registration. The list is quite comprehensive but other diseases will undoubtedly be added. The last diseases to be added were the transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, which include BSE.
However, the delegation's definition does not include BSE and bird flu, for example, because it refers to the principal Act, rather than the amended Act as it would be, and it is a Schedule which the Minister can amend by order.
Mr. Meskell
I am not an expert on the drafting of legislation.
My concern is with the legal wording of the definition.
Mr. Meskell
Our definition is intended to provide that the Minister will be entitled to amend that Act as he or she sees fit.
Mr. Higgins
Deputy Naughten asked about our definition of "condition" and the proposal to include the word "health" in this regard. Much of our work involves certifying the health of animals when they are being exported. I accept that scanning is not a condition. Is that the substance of Deputy Naughten's question?
Yes.
Ms O’Brien
Pregnancy is a condition.
The purpose of scanning is to check for a pregnancy.
Ms O’Brien
Yes, scanning is a method for diagnosing a condition.
Does it, therefore, come under that definition?
Mr. Higgins
Yes.
This is the difficulty in regard to the definition of "condition" and the inclusion of the word "health". I accept the point the delegation makes but its definition is so broad as to be all-encompassing. As Mr. Higgins has acknowledged, the definition means that scanning could not be undertaken other than by a veterinary surgeon, although it is currently done by the farm relief service. Perhaps the delegation could reconsider this issue and come back to the committee with a revised definition.
Mr. Higgins
Yes. Mr. Meskell will deal with the question regarding investigations of veterinary nurses by the preliminary investigation committee.
Mr. Meskell
Deputies Naughten and Upton had queries in regard to the composition of the preliminary investigation committee and the training and education committee. Our only concern is that the membership should include at least one vet in cases where a vet is being investigated. I accept the appropriateness of what has been said in regard to nurses and have no problem with a separate registration for them. However, nurses generally work in association with or under the supervision of a veterinary surgeon. One would expect a veterinary surgeon to know what normal acceptable practice by a veterinary nurse would be, whereas a veterinary nurse might not be in a position to know what would be normal acceptable practice by a veterinary surgeon, especially if the surgeon's work was outside the nurse's area of work. I am specifically referring to people like ourselves, who work for the Department of Agriculture and Food. We do not as yet have the luxury of veterinary nurses assisting us in our work. Therefore, veterinary nurses would not be in a position to adjudicate on our fitness to practise.
Ms O’Brien
Veterinary nurses are not included. If one looks at the Bill——
Mr. Higgins
One should look at the next section.
Ms O’Brien
Are we to look at section 71 or 72?
Subsection (2) (a) in section 71 and subsection (2)(b) in section 72.
Mr. Jonathan Cooney
I will clarify the issue. As proposed, only one nurse is guaranteed present on the council. The composition of the preliminary investigation committee requires the presence of a minimum of one person and a maximum of two people registered under Part 4 or Part 8. If we specify the two members present on the preliminary investigation committee when a nurse is involved must both be registered under Part 8, there may not actually be people present on the committee to fulfil that requirement. That is why we left it so that in the case of a nurse under investigation the two people involved may either be registered under Part 4 or Part 8. If a veterinary nurse is under investigation, it is appropriate that the nurse registered under Part 8 is present on that committee. If a second nurse is present on the committee, it is absolutely fine that she or he is the second person on the committee. However, if there is only one veterinary nurse on the council there should be both a veterinary nurse and a surgeon in the preliminary investigation committee. That is the only reason we stated this requirement in that section.
Mr. Higgins
Deputies Upton and Naughten both raised the issue of the education committee. I take their point regarding the Food Safety Authority of Ireland. We have members in the authority. They differentiated between vets and educators. It is quite likely a vet will be an educator. We would like to see a broader spectrum of vets in order that we have veterinary educators, vets in practice and vets in the Department. We would like there to be five vets on the education committee to encompass all branches of veterinary matters. The educators can be vets.
Based on my experience, they are not necessarily very good educators — present company excluded.
Mr. Meskell
That applies everywhere in terms of what constitutes a good or bad educator. One could not insert such a clause into a Bill. Ideally, a certain number of vets are needed on an education committee because most veterinary educators in Ireland are vets. A number of non-vets contribute and do much valuable work in the teaching of vets. However, the vast bulk of people involved in the training of vets are themselves veterinary surgeons. Therefore it is appropriate that the majority of people on such committees are vets.
I will offer other members the opportunity to speak.
I will not ask any questions. We have discussed this matter on a number of occasions with other representatives and I compliment the delegates on their clear and easy to understand presentation.
Most of the Veterinary Practice Bill is common sense. It is important to protect the profession and continue the great service given to the agricultural community over the years. Today we are looking at the importance of our disease free status. When major outbreaks threaten, such as foot and mouth, the role of vets becomes increasingly important. It is important to protect Ireland's position as a green food producer. I agree with most of the Bill, and our Minister would feel that way. However, I will not go back over the matter because we have discussed it on two previous occasions with groups representing vets. I wish the delegates well and compliment them again on their presentation.
Senator Coonan and Deputy Ó Fearghail will now ask questions, and then any other member who wishes to ask a question may do so. We will continue to bank the questions and return for an overall answer session.
Like other speakers, I welcome the deputation and thank them for briefing us this morning. Their presentation was helpful in that we will probably deal with the Bill first in the Seanad. We have already dealt with it to some extent and put a stop to it with many of the questions asked and issues also raised today. The Minister has gone away to consider them with a view to proposing amendments on Committee Stage.
Many of the issues that I wish to address are being dealt with. However, the summary on the final page of the presentation refers to the one in five. It states that the number of veterinary surgeons sitting on the Veterinary Council should be increased. Every presentation we have had has stated the same. How is it proposed to increase the numbers? How many more vets should be on the council? Should other people be discarded from the council, or should the overall make-up of the council be increased? In other words, should the number increase from 17, and if so, to how many? What are the association's exact proposals with regard to this?
Similar to the issue of item No. 5, the association proposes to allow for sufficient veterinary expertise on the education committee. What constitutes sufficient veterinary representation on the committee? Can delegates be more definitive?
Item No. 4 proposes the entire deletion of section 60. Veterinary Ireland made a submission and it agreed with this proposal. However, the present Veterinary Council does not. It states it should be replaced with the words "procedures which are incidental to the normal welfare of animals". What is the Veterinary Officers' Association's reaction to that proposal? I would like further clarification on these matters.
Like my colleagues, I thank the delegation for their presentation. I acknowledge the very positive nature of the approaches we have had from the veterinary profession in general on this particular issue. The engagement we have had with each of the three organisations has been helpful.
Each organisation has strongly focussed on section 60. What do delegates see as the practical consequences of the non-deletion of section 60?
I apologise for being late. The delegates' presentation has been clear and straightforward. I wish to return to the issue of what others can do in terms of farm relief. I was a practising farmer until I was elected, and still have a say in the running of a dairy farm. I know the value of a farm relief service. I also appreciate more than most the valuable service which vets provide both at Department and farm level. At least we can get a vet at any hour of the day or night. We cannot say the same for doctors. Thank God there is no vet on call system as yet. Costs at farm level are increasing at an enormous rate and the Farm Relief Service gives a valuable service in scanning, hoof care and so forth. I hope that will not change.
How does Mr. Higgins suggest the number of vets could be increased? Some of his predecessors emphasised the fact that if there were an overall increase in the board, the finances of the organisation would not be sufficient to manage that and it would also become unwieldy. I would like to have seen more practising farmers involved in it rather than somebody answerable to the Minister but that is another day's work. The main argument being made at this meeting is for more vets to be involved. How should that happen?
I welcome the delegation. Most of the questions I intended to ask have been raised. Deputy Naughten asked about scanning. My question is about x-rays. It has been specified that nurses may be allowed under the Bill to take x-rays. What are the association's views on that? What is its view of nurses operating separately from the association, for example? Mr. Meskell said that the organisation had not yet got the benefit of any nursing assistance. However, if the nurses were operating independently, how would the association feel about it?
I also have a question about certification of the animal's health, which Deputy Naughten mentioned. The certification of the health status of the herd and of the animal is required for export. If the vet is looking after the herd and the veterinary nurse is providing a service independently, unknown to and without providing information to the vet who has the normal responsibility for the health status of the herd, how do the two dovetail? How can the veterinary officer dealing with the export requirements be absolutely sure of the health status? How can that vet be in a position to certify with complete authority the health status of the herd and of the animal?
Deputy Ó Fearghail asked about the deletion of section 60. Why does the association want it deleted?
Mr. Higgins
A number of the questions related to the composition of the Veterinary Council. I believe Ms O'Brien made it clear in our position paper how we would propose to increase the council numbers from seven to ten. Other associations, such as Veterinary Ireland and the Veterinary Council, have made clear the importance of having extra vets on the Veterinary Council.
There are at least ten, and up to 14, committees of the council and many of these committees require the inclusion of a vet. These vets are all volunteers. Everybody appreciates how difficult it is to get volunteers to do anything, even to train an under age football team. If one gets volunteers and then makes them work constantly, one will not get them again. It is important that the number of vets on the council be increased to lessen the workload of those on the council at present. If the committee is unclear about Ms O'Brien's presentation on how it should be increased and her suggested amendments for increasing it, we can go through it again.
There are a number of ways.
Mr. Higgins
There are.
The association has outlined one.
Mr. Higgins
Yes, we have.
Vote for them in the council.
Mr. Higgins
That would be our second preference but, as was mentioned, the financial implications of doing so could cause a problem. It is a Veterinary Council problem more than our problem.
Deputies Connaughton and Upton asked why we want increased representation of vets on the education committee. Mr. Meskell outlined the reason. Could I, as a vet, sit on a committee that will educate doctors and decide what training a doctor should have? Is it not best that the people who will decide the educational requirements for vets should be vets? We believe so.
It would be nice to have a couple of patients on it as well.
Mr. Higgins
Absolutely. We are asking for it to be exclusively veterinary. A number of questions were asked about section 60. I will ask Mr. Cooney to address them.
Mr. Cooney
We believe that section 60, as drafted, should be deleted. The Minister stated that it will allow her to provide by regulations for non-qualified persons to carry out a limited range of procedures. However, section 60 as it stands is all encompassing as regards acts of veterinary medicine. It will allow for a non-registered person to perform any or every act of veterinary medicine. It goes against the spirit of the Bill.
The Bill seeks to actively define the practice of veterinary medicine by veterinary surgeons. At present, all health and welfare certification of farm animals for export and animal product for human consumption is performed by veterinary surgeons. Section 60 allows for a non-registered person to perform these certification functions and, in doing so, may well lead to reduced confidence at both national and international level in our food product exports and production for the domestic market. That is one of our principal concerns about section 60. We believe acts of veterinary medicine should be performed by registered veterinary surgeons. That is a public expectation and to legislate otherwise would lead to a reduction in public confidence in the veterinary profession.
If regulations to provide for the practice of limited acts of veterinary medicine by non-registered persons are to be included in this Bill, the section should be at least redrafted and the views of Veterinary Ireland, the Veterinary Officers Association and the Veterinary Council should be sought to produce regulations that are appropriate and will not have a negative impact on both animal welfare and consumer confidence.
Has the Department sought submissions from the association on section 60?
Mr. Cooney
Not at present.
Have any of the association's members been involved in the drafting of the Bill?
Perhaps the Veterinary Officers' Association would respond to the questions already asked, after which we can deal with subsequent answers.
Mr. Morgan Lyons
There was a question about certifying animal health. Could the Senator repeat the question? I did not get the connection between the vet and the nurse in the farm situation.
I noticed there was almost an absence of any mention of veterinary nurses. Other organisations have taken note of the fact that under the Bill, as drafted, veterinary nurses would operate independently of vets in practice. Certification of the health status of the herd or of the animal or animals for the domestic or export market is required.
The veterinary nurse operates independently. The vet conducts the usual standard management of the herd and is asked to certify the health status of the herd and of the animals going to the domestic or export market. However, on an occasional morning or evening the veterinary nurses might come to the same farm to carry out some duties. There is no registration of it and they operate separate from and independently of the vet who is expected to certify the herd. How can the authenticity of that signature be confirmed? How does the association accept it? In other words, is it right or wrong that veterinary nurses operate independently of the vets? I believe it is wrong. I believe they should work under the guidance of and side by side with vets.
Mr. Lyons
Our understanding is that they will not be operating independently of the vets. They will be involved at surgery or whatever level but we would require certification to come from the veterinary practitioner and that person only. A certification by a veterinary nurse would not satisfy our criteria to certify it further.
Why was attention not paid to it in the association's submission?
Mr. Lyons
We believe it is not relevant. They will not be able to certify.
Does the Bill not clearly state that veterinary nurses could well be operating independently?
Mr. Higgins
The Bill suggests that this will happen. Veterinary Ireland and the Veterinary Council have a problem with it. I believe the veterinary nurses would also have a problem with it. We would have a problem with it. We certify on the basis of a veterinary surgeon's certificate, in other words the private practitioner who certifies the health of the animals on the farm. We will further certify on the basis of that certificate. We would have a problem certifying on the basis of a nurse's certificate.
I would have expected that to be an important part of the association's contribution this morning.
Mr. Higgins
Veterinary nurses are not foremost in our thoughts at present.
Ms O’Brien
At present, they are not going on to farms to certify health.
The Bill does not provide for that.
I will not delay the meeting further.
Mr. Meskell
Senator Coonan mentioned deleting section 60 and Deputy Ó Fearghail also mentioned that section. There are concerns about section 60. It allows for the treatment of an animal in an emergency and it allows for the administration of an anaesthetic to an animal. We pointed out in our submission that anaesthetics are controlled medicines in the first instance and are restricted to veterinary surgeons because many of them are dangerous drugs.
During the Seanad debate, section 56 was mentioned by Senator Dardis. He spoke about watching a hunt one day. He asked what would happen in an emergency if a horse was injured in the hunt and needed to be put down. I strongly believe that no lay person would have the expertise or knowledge to put down a horse, irrespective of what type of weaponry he used, unless he had something like a cannon. I have put down horses a number of times during my time in practice. It involves shooting a horse in an area of its head that is approximately the size of a large postage stamp. If one shoots anywhere outside that area, one will greatly increase the distress of the animal. One will not even knock it unconscious.
In an emergency there should, by all means, be first aid treatment for the animal. Nothing in this Bill will prohibit people from engaging in first aid treatment. However, where tasks such as putting down animals are concerned, it must be done by somebody with the necessary expertise if it is to be done humanely. A person walking the fields with a shotgun will not have the expertise to do it. In fact, a shotgun is the last instrument I would consider using even if I was in dire straits when putting down a horse. We believe section 60 should be redrafted and re-examined.
Deputy Crawford mentioned the farm relief service. We have no objection to the farm relief service or to people engaged in hoof care. They provide a valuable service and we would like their activities to be recognised and regulated. Again, if we had been consulted in the drafting of section 60, we would have suggested different wording that would have catered for those people.
Clarification.
Mr. Meskell
Yes. Senator Callanan mentioned the nurses operating separately. The nurses believe, and the general opinion is, that they will work in association with veterinary surgeons. That is probably best for the nurses. They do not wish to work independently. There are a few areas in which they would be qualified to work independently, such as administering vaccinations and doing minor surgical procedures. However, if something goes wrong, as can happen in any type of surgery, they will have to fall back on somebody. I believe they would prefer to work in association with a veterinary surgeon. It would give them the safety net of having somebody to call upon, if required.
Mr. Cooney
Deputy Naughten asked about the amount of consultation that might have been carried out with members of the Veterinary Officers' Association in drafting the Bill. As far as we are aware, only one of our members was consulted in the drafting process. That is a minimal involvement given that the Bill will have a significant effect on all veterinary surgeons in the country.
Mr. Denis Hennigan
I wish to speak further on the reasons we have problems with section 60. We are called on to deal with some severe welfare situations that develop occasionally on farms. One of our prerequisites when we carry out these investigations is to find out what veterinary surgeon input there has been in these situations. Many of the severe welfare situations, some of which get exposure in the media, are difficult to resolve and often end up in the courts. It is foreseeable that, under section 60, the person who was the carer for these animals could claim that he was carrying out some of the veterinary requirements on his animals and that could make it difficult for us to deal with these welfare situations.
Ms O’Brien
We have concerns about section 60(2) which outlines the purpose for which the Minister may make regulations to provide for the practice of veterinary medicine by non-registered persons. Paragraph (e) states: “to regulate and ensure the proper practice of veterinary medicine in the State;”. That completely undermines the rest of the legislation. It demeans the rest of the paperwork. It was ill thought out and requires clarification.
Mr. Higgins
That section allows for a non-registered person to pass judgment on the standards of practice of veterinary medicine by a registered person. Needless to say, we are uncomfortable with this.
I wish to comment on Mr. Higgins's last point regarding the Veterinary Officers' Association's concern for the future implications of section 60 of the Bill which gives a blank cheque to the Minister for Agriculture and Food to make regulations at any stage. Has the VOA looked at section 93(3) (b) on page 67 of the Bill which will have greater implications for it than any other organisation? Perhaps my interpretation is completely wrong but it is that a veterinary nurse will be able to comply with any directive or regulation from Brussels, subject to consultation with the Veterinary Council and the Veterinary Nurses Board. Does the VOA have an opinion on the matter? Mr. Meskell mentioned the veterinary nurses who have a completely different interpretation. There are two separate sets of veterinary nurses, only one of which it seems has yet been consulted. There will be an interesting debate about this later.
Veterinary inspectors of the Department of Agriculture and Food — I appreciate I am straying from the Bill but this is relevant — are responsible for animal health and safety and checking animal condition and carcases. What is the procedure if an animal has been diagnosed with TB but no lesions subsequently show up in the plant? Is there a way to report this instead of locking up the herd because the animal went down in the original test? While the question is not specifically related to the Bill, it is relevant to the VOA's definition of "health" in its recommended amendment to the Bill.
Mr. Higgins
The Deputy has referred to a scenario whereby no visible lesions are found on an animal sent to a factory after being diagnosed with TB by a tuberculin test carried out by a private veterinarian. Is he suggesting the herd should not be restricted?
No, I am asking what the procedure is at that point.
Mr. Higgins
The animal is diagnosed with TB by the veterinarian carrying out the tuberculin test. The herd is then restricted and the animal removed to the factory. A post mortem is carried out and the results are returned to the herd's district veterinary office. The restriction is maintained until the herd passes two clear tests. At 120 days——
Does Mr. Higgins understand my concern when the carcase seems to be clear? Many farmers are concerned about this.
Mr. Higgins
Visible lesions are only found on 30% of slaughtered reactor animals but it does not mean they do not have TB.
Ms O’Brien
It is not visible to the naked eye.
Do the veterinary inspectors report back to the local district veterinary office?
Mr. Higgins
To decide whether the herd has TB——
Yes.
Mr. Higgins
The situation only changes if a single reactor is detected in a herd with no history of TB in a locality without TB and if the animal is found to have no visible lesions. We would then derestrict the herd after one clear test.
Mr. Meskell
Deputy Naughten may be under the impression that the carcases might not be fit for human consumption. Virtually all TB reactor carcases are fit for human consumption. Very few are affected in such a way that they could not be used.
On section 93(3) (b)——
Mr. Higgins
We have not examined it the way the Deputy has. We will look at it again.
The committee might come back to the VOA after it has done so.
Mr. Higgins
Yes. The VOA did not interpret it in the same way as the Deputy.
The VOA should correspond with the clerk.
I thank Mr. Higgins and his associates for their attendance, concise presentation and answers to the questions put. I suggest that a copy of the Veterinary Officers Association's submission be forwarded to the Minister for Agriculture and Food with the committee's support. Is that agreed? Agreed. The VOA also mentioned some other areas it may wish to revisit, including section 60 and the possibility of having a plan B. I invite it to put its recommendations in writing, as members requested. The committee would welcome them before proceeding to the next stage.
Mr. Higgins
I thank the committee for listening to our views and its questions.
The joint committee went into private session at 12.45 p.m and adjourned at 1 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 23 February 2005.