I am pleased to present the Veterinary Practice (Amendment) Bill 2011 to the Seanad. I am glad to say that this Bill, which proposes to amend the Veterinary Practice Act 2005 in a number of areas in light of experience since its adoption, was well received in the Dáil and its passage through that House during the second half of last year was uncontentious. I look forward to the measure being scrutinised in the Seanad.
Veterinary Practice (Amendment) Bill 2011: Second Stage
Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I apologise for interrupting, but could we have a copy of the Minister's speech?
It is being distributed now.
Reflecting the fact that the Bill enjoyed support on all sides of the House, no Opposition amendment was tabled during its passage through the Dáil. However, arising from ongoing consideration within my Department and consultations between my Department and various stakeholders following publication, I proposed a total of 12 amendments by way of refining and improving the Bill. I am glad to say that these amendments were readily agreed by all sides in the House. Before giving an outline of the Bill, I propose to make some preliminary remarks about the context in which the Bill is being presented and the role played by veterinary practitioners, nurses and others in the treatment and care of animals.
The primary role of the veterinary profession continues to be animal health care, with the greatest number of veterinarians working in this field caring for farm animals, sport animals and, increasingly, companion animals. At farm level, vets perform a very important function in assisting farmer clients to maintain the high health status of their animals and in minimising disease risks which can have a significant impact on farm income. Vets are also a critical part of the official inspection service, both at farm and processing levels, in terms of verifying that food is safe for consumers. Vets are also, of course, involved in many other roles within industry, including research as part of the pharmaceutical industry, reflecting how the profession has responded to evolving demands and is prepared to participate fully in the broader economy. Veterinarians can truly be said to be involved in the food industry from farm to fork.
The veterinary profession was the first of the professions in Ireland to have its underpinning legislation significantly reformed and brought up to date. The Veterinary Practice Act 2005 significantly overhauled regulation of the profession with regard to the make-up of its regulating body, the Veterinary Council of Ireland. It also improved disciplinary procedures and established mandatory continuous professional development and premises accreditation schemes. The 2005 Act also represented an important milestone in the development of the veterinary nursing profession, as a discipline in its own right, with the Act conferring formal recognition on veterinary nurses for the first time in Ireland. This has enabled the veterinary nursing profession to develop a distinct personality. Almost 500 nurses are now registered to practice.
In the field of nurse education and training, we have moved from a situation in which most nurses had to go overseas for training to one in which five colleges in Ireland now offer approved and accredited courses. All of these positive developments have taken place in the relatively short period since the 2005 Act came into force. I look forward to the members of the veterinary nursing profession developing further in tandem and in co-operation with their veterinary practitioner colleagues in the years ahead.
It may be useful to state at this stage that the measures involved in this legislation can be divided into two broad strands. The first strand, which is covered in section 2, concerns mechanisms for exempting certain activities from being reserved to veterinary practitioners or veterinary nurses. The second strand, which is covered in sections 3 to 9, relates to changes designed to streamline and improve the operation of the legislation in light of experience. In the majority of cases, the changes proposed derive from suggestions made by the Veterinary Council of Ireland on the basis of its direct experience of implementing the 2005 Act. The proposed amendments also take account of more recent legislation governing the regulation of the professions, particularly the Medical Practitioners Act 2007 and the Pharmacy Act 2007.
I wish to outline some of the specific elements of the Bill. As I have indicated, section 2 is the kernel of the Bill. My objective is to ensure that activities and services concerning animals that have traditionally been carried out by people who are neither vets nor nurses, do not become reserved to the veterinary profession. The 2005 Act sought to address a shortcoming in the previous legislation. It created a greater degree of legal certainty around what constitutes the practice of veterinary medicine by introducing a definition of veterinary practice. This definition is contained in section 53 of the Act. Since the 2005 Act came into force, however, the Veterinary Council of Ireland — the regulatory body for the profession, which is charged with day-to-day implementation of the Act — has raised concerns with my Department that the definition of veterinary practice, which, of necessity, is expressed in broad and general terms could be interpreted as embracing a range of procedures or activities that have traditionally been carried out by people with appropriate skills, training and experience. The procedures in question include farriery, equine dentistry, bovine hoof trimming, micro-chipping of companion animals, scanning of cattle and sheep and physiotherapy. Such day-to-day farming and animal husbandry practices should not be the sole preserve or function of vets or veterinary nurses.
The legal advice obtained by my Department indicated that in the event of legal disputes arising, there could be doubt about the status of such procedures carried out on animals. As competitiveness is a key issue for our economy, it would be invidious if services to farmers and other animal owners were to become overly restricted, especially as that would have negative cost implications for those concerned. Therefore, it is appropriate to address this situation. My Department has received advice from the Office of the Attorney General to the effect that this cannot be done in a comprehensive manner without amending the Veterinary Practice Act 2005. Under the amendments I am proposing, my office will be vested with a delegated power to make ministerial regulations, exempting specified procedures from being reserved to registered people. The exercise of this function will be subject to appropriate principles and policies approved by this House in the primary amending legislation. If Senators wish, we can examine these aspects in greater detail on Committee and Report Stages.
It is appropriate that there should be formal consultation on a statutory basis with the Veterinary Council of Ireland before any activity is exempted. The Bill provides for this. There will also be consultation with other stakeholders.
The amendments also provide for any exemptions to be made subject to appropriate conditions, including education, training and skills, membership of specified bodies and so on. The conditions to be applied to each exempted activity will be determined on a case by case basis. The process will, in effect, build on the existing informal arrangements in place across the disparate groups. In this respect, it will provide clients with a greater degree of quality assurance in regard to these procedures. It will also facilitate the imposition of limits on the scope of particular procedures, where appropriate, which can be performed by non-registered persons, or non-veterinarians, which will bring a much greater degree of legal certainty to the area.
My Department has consulted widely on this issue and it is fair to say that there is a general welcome it is being addressed. Many of the groups representing the current service providers see the changes as a basis for developing their areas of activity in accordance with best practice.
I will turn to the other main themes covered in this Bill. I refer to disciplinary procedures and enforcement. Professions, including the veterinary profession, occupy an important and somewhat privileged position in society. Given their nature, society also places a great deal of trust in the professions. It is critical, therefore, that society has confidence in the way the professions are regulated. This places a particular responsibility on us, as legislators, to ensure that legislation underpinning the professions guarantees that regulation is robust, effective and transparent and that any hint of closing of ranks around colleagues is avoided.
The 2005 Veterinary Practice Act brought regulation of the profession up to date in many important respects, including a greater degree of external representation at council level, an external chair of its fitness to practise committee, publication of findings of disciplinary proceedings and so on. While the mechanisms are working well, nonetheless, based on feedback from the Veterinary Council of Ireland, I propose to adapt some provisions to further improve their effectiveness.
The first amendment, which is in section 4, is designed to give the Veterinary Council of Ireland a greater range of options in terms of the sanctions it can apply where its fitness to practise committee has upheld a complaint against a veterinary practitioner or veterinary nurse. These sanctions include striking off, suspension, attachment of conditions, etc. Currently, under section 80 of the Act, the council is enabled to apply any of these sanctions only where the fitness to practise committee has made an explicit finding of unfitness to practise. This is too restrictive and what I propose is that, even if does not make a finding of unfitness to practise, the council will have the discretion to impose an appropriate penalty from the range specified in the legislation where an aspect of the substantive complaint has been upheld by the fitness to practise committee. It follows that in exercising this function, the council is required to apply penalties which are proportionate to the scale and import of the breach which has been established.
I am also proposing in section 9(k) of the Bill to amend the definition of “professional misconduct”. As Senators will appreciate, this definition is critical for the purposes of upholding standards in the profession. As I said earlier, members of any profession must be measured to the highest standards, reflecting their role in society.
I also drew attention to the fact that more recent legislation governing regulation of doctors and pharmacists has come into force since the enactment of the Veterinary Practice Act 2005. I propose, therefore, to adapt the definition of professional misconduct in the current Act to align it, in so far as possible, with the equivalent provisions in more recent related legislation.
On Committee Stage in the Dáil, having considered further representations from the Veterinary Council of Ireland and having taken legal advice, I obtained agreement to an amendment to further refine this definition to take greater account of the most recent case law in this area relating to the medical profession.
It is also proposed in section 7 of the Bill to enhance the effectiveness of the council's investigative and enforcement functions.
Experience, both here and elsewhere, has demonstrated the need for regulatory bodies, where necessary, to be able to investigate complaints or concerns expeditiously, for example, before evidence can be removed or destroyed. Currently, under section 126 of the Veterinary Practice Act 2005, authorised officers of the council are required to obtain a search warrant to enter any premises, unless the agreement of the person concerned is forthcoming.
The council has expressed the view to my Department that this situation unduly inhibits its ability to investigate effectively. Accordingly, I am proposing to enable authorised officers of the council to enter premises, where that is necessary for the purposes of carrying out an investigation, without the need to first obtain a search warrant from a District Court judge. I stress, however, that a search warrant would continue to be necessary to enter a domestic dwelling. In other words, we will not have investigating officers coming into people's homes. That would be inappropriate without the appropriate warrant. That is the approach followed generally in regard to the powers of entry for authorised officers and follows the approach, for example, in the Pharmacy Act 2007.
A number of other minor procedural amendments are proposed in the area of disciplinary procedures which can be examined in detail on a further Stage.
A requirement for indemnity insurance is not a feature of the existing Veterinary Practice Act, and the council believes this legislative opportunity should be availed of to address that. From a public policy point of view, provision should be made to enable the Veterinary Council of Ireland ensure that clients of registered persons are protected against adverse events where civil liability attaches to the professional. Thus, section 3 proposes the insertion of a new provision into the Act to enable the council, with the consent of the Minister, make regulations making indemnity insurance mandatory for specified types of veterinary practice. However, the requirement will not apply to practitioners in respect of official duties.
In my earlier remarks I drew attention to the fact that the 2005 Veterinary Practice Act was a major milestone in the development of the veterinary nursing profession in Ireland. The Act, as currently structured, provides for recognition of trained nurses from Ireland and from other EU states. The current Act also provided for transitional arrangements for nurses who had been practising as such before the legislation was contemplated by affording them a five year period to formalise their education status. However, provision must now be made to enable the council register nurses coming from third countries.
A need has also been identified by the Veterinary Council of Ireland for registration processes for persons with particular expertise in the field of veterinary nursing who are needed to be part of course delivery at the education and training establishments. The amendments in section 6 are designed to address these issues by providing the Veterinary Council of Ireland with a broader range of recognition options in the case of veterinary nurses. In so doing, the range of registration options for veterinary nurses is being brought into line with those currently provided for in the Act for veterinary practitioners.
In the area of registration, I am availing of this legislative opportunity to remove any doubt that the registration mechanisms are capable of accommodating short-term registration, for example, of veterinary specialists from third countries who are accompanying horses from overseas participating in sporting events, which is a practical response.
Regarding EU mutual recognition obligations, mutual recognition arrangements for veterinary practitioners and six other professions, including doctors and dentists, have been a reality at EU level for many years. That is on the basis that training requirements in each member state are required to reach a common EU standard. More recently, as part of the initiatives at EU level to make the Single Market a reality across a range of services, free movement arrangements were extended to a range of activities, including veterinary nursing, where minimum educational standards are not co-ordinated at EU level. This process included initiatives to make it easier for veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses, as well as a host of other service providers, to provide services on a temporary basis across national borders. At EU level, this regime is laid down in Directive 2005/36. Our national legislation embodies these requirements, which are contained in the European Communities (Veterinary Practice Act 2005) (Qualifications in Veterinary Medicine) Regulations 2007, S.I. No. 745 of 2007. However, taking account of legal advice, I am proposing to consolidate the Statute Book by restating, in primary legislation, relevant provisions currently contained in that statutory instrument. This is the purpose of section 8 of the Bill. In addition, in order to take account of technical observations received from the European Commission on three minor aspects of S.I. No. 745 of 2007, the relevant provisions are being amended to align them more closely with the requirements of the directive. The amendments concerned relate to the status, in the home EU state, of the veterinary practitioner or nurse wishing to provide cross-border services on a temporary basis in this country and the time limit governing such applications. I can go into these in greater detail on Committee or Report Stages.
The Bill also contains a number of other miscellaneous and consequential amendments in section 9. These are mainly designed to facilitate greater efficiency in the carrying out of the council's business, including filling of casual vacancies and quorums for meetings. In summary, this is a timely update and clarifies the Veterinary Practice Act 2005. I look forward to hearing the views of Senators and I will try to accommodate any concerns. I commend the Bill to the House.
I welcome the Minister to the House yet again and broadly welcome the Bill. As the Minister indicated during his speech on Second Stage, the Bill passed through the Dáil without any controversy and it is interesting that a Bill dealing with a profession received such broad welcome. We are used to hearing about restrictive practices in professions through the decades and they are loth to relinquish these practices. In fairness to the veterinary associations and those who represent veterinary practitioners, they were involved in embracing the 2005 legislation — which was a milestone — and have actively lobbied on some of the amendments to be introduced by the Minister. Considering the wide consultation with the stakeholders undertaken by the Department and the discussions on Second Stage and Committee Stage, I am not surprised this legislation comes to the Seanad without any great baggage.
There are a number of interesting aspects that I want to tease out. I was impressed to learn that there are almost 2,500 registered vets, and almost 500 veterinary nurses. Based on 2008 estimates, some 61% of vets in Ireland operate in the 650 private practices registered under the premises accreditation scheme. A noticeable feature of new vets on the register in recent years is the rise in the number of female vets. In 1993, the profession was 90% male dominated, a figure that dropped to 74% in 2007. The Minister has more up-to-date figures on that.
I am grateful to the Oireachtas Library and Research Service and I acknowledge its publication of a briefing document on this Bill. The Competition Authority noted the large influx of foreign trained vets. Between 2001 and 2007, nearly 40% of new vets registered in Ireland qualified outside the State. The authority expressed some concern over Ireland's reliance on other countries to produce vets for its needs and recommended that the number of vets being produced should be closely monitored to ensure that no shortages arise in the future.
How many veterinary students are currently in our colleges? Are the numbers sufficient? Is there a sufficient amount of work for those who are graduating? Unfortunately, in some other professions, particularly nursing, graduates have had to leave to find work outside the State. I am not aware of the current situation regarding supply and demand. Perhaps the Minister might be able to let us know about that.
Near the end of his presentation the Minister went into detail about the registration and EU mutual recognition obligations. I hope he is satisfied the Bill will take account of some concerns that have arisen in the medical profession. I am not sure whether they extend to the veterinary profession. There have been some horror stories about doctors from other countries who have not been checked by those that have employed them in our hospitals. Is the Minister satisfied the registration process is transparent enough to ensure those who may not be up to the required standards do not slip through the net if there are shortages in the profession and people wish to come here to work?
The reference to the EU is interesting. I think I am right in saying that there is no legal requirement to vet the academic qualifications of those in the EU generally. I am not sure how that applies to this Bill. The Minister may wish to elaborate on that issue.
There is mutual recognition.
Is the Minister satisfied that the mutual recognition policy will not raise any concerns about the quality of those who wish to come to the country? I am not referring to those who may wish to come on a short-term basis but those who may wish to relocate here to work. I recall a case in the medical profession of an applicant applying for a job in an Irish hospital. The person came from Romania and it transpired that he or she was not up to speed. The person conveyed that he or she had achieved certain academic qualifications which had not been checked by the hospital in question.
As the Minister correctly said, the focus of the work of vets in general is to ensure we have safe food. It is an issue to which he referred in his presentation. It is not directly connected to this Bill, as an amendment to the primary Bill, but it is important he put that on the record. Ireland's image, as the Minister articulated so well on many occasions, as a clean food producing economy is vital to our national recovery and was particularly highlighted with the visit of the Chinese Vice President at the weekend. The Minister was involved in the visit and I compliment him on it.
The Minister will also be very proactive in ensuring potential jobs and markets are opened up for many of our agricultural products. It is important to note that the amendment will ensure restrictive or exclusive practices pertaining to registered vets will now be extended to those who are non-vets. Ultimately, the Minister is ensuring that Ireland's clean image as a food producing nation will not be compromised in any way by the Bill.
I refer to a measure included in the Bill which concerns costs. I am sure other contributors will mention it. The president of the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association, Mr. Gabriel Gilmartin, stated:
All avenues must be explored to reduce running costs, and veterinary bills are near the top of farmers' expenses. We would also encourage the minister to look at reviewing the cost of medicines in Ireland. Our animal medicines are hugely expensive when compared to our nearest neighbours in the North and the UK.
As the Minister will know, this is not confined to veterinary but extends across a range of medical disciplines. The issue has been discussed in this House and has been raised quite regularly. The Minister might wish to address that. I compliment him on introducing this legislation. He will certainly have no opposition on this side of the House. We welcome the legislation and support fully the Minister's effort to ensure the agrifood business and the associated veterinary practices are in keeping with promoting the very best of Ireland.
I welcome the Minister to the House and I am pleased to speak on Second Stage of this Bill. I commend the Minister and his staff on their work on drafting the Bill. As the Minister outlined, the Bill amends the principal Act of 2005. It will make provision for the mutual recognition of qualifications and a register of individuals, and persons other than veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses will be permitted to conduct procedures. It will allow for additional powers to be exercised by the Minister and his Department.
It is very positive that the Department has responded swiftly and adequately to concerns raised by the veterinary profession. This Bill encompasses the changes required to make the veterinary profession function better.
As a farmer, I have much experience with local veterinarians and those employed by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. They provide a very necessary service to farmers and owners of companion pets in the home. It would be remiss of us not to acknowledge the important contribution that veterinarians make to society. As was stated, many Irish students study veterinary practice abroad, including in the United Kingdom and Hungary. Compliance with the EU free-movement regulation is important in this regard.
According to the Veterinary Council of Ireland, on 13 February this year there were 2,343 veterinary practitioners registered in Ireland and 381 registered veterinary nurses. It is interesting to note that the Veterinary Practice Act 2005 overhauled the regulation of the profession in certain areas, including in regard to the composition of the regulatory body, the Veterinary Council of Ireland. It established mandatory continuous professional development and introduced premises-accreditation schemes. The principal Act entered into force on 1 January 2006.
Let me touch briefly on some of the principal proposals of the Bill. Its main purpose is to clarify fully the legal position established in the Veterinary Practice Act 2005 to enable the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to exclude specific activities from being reserved to veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses. The enactment of the Bill into law will not incur any extra departmental expense.
Section 2 provides for the introduction of three new sections to the principal Act and it will allow for ministerial regulation-making powers to exclude specific activities from being reserved to veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses. Provision is being made, under section 54A, for the Minister to make special exclusion subject to appropriate conditions and to consult in advance the Veterinary Council of Ireland.
Section 54B ensures that the principles and policies governing the exercise of the Minister's regulation-making powers under section 54C contain a standard offence clause for failure to comply with the regulations.
Section 3 inserts a new provision to enable the Veterinary Council of Ireland, with the consent of the Minister, by regulation, to make indemnity insurance mandatory for specific types of veterinary practices. This will modernise the law for veterinary practitioners in line with their counterparts in other professions.
Section 4 is to modernise aspects of the disciplinary provision for veterinarians and bring them into line with recent legislation, including the Medical Practitioners Act 2007 and the Pharmacy Act 2007. This will give the governing body a greater menu of options to deal with disciplinary case actions, including the actions to strike off, suspend or impose conditions.
As the Minister outlined, section 5 will restructure the veterinary nurses regulation.
Section 6 will give the Veterinary Council the ability to recognise third country veterinary nurses. This will ultimately allow for suitably qualified, experienced veterinary nurses from non-EU jurisdictions to work in Ireland subject to certain conditions, including a strict language requirement.
Section 7 will empower the Veterinary Council to mobilise authorised officers to enter premises, where necessary, for the purpose of an investigation. This will not require a warrant, nor will it interfere in a homeowner's right to protection within his or her own dwelling. The Minister has already referred to that important point.
As previously mentioned, Irish students are pursuing veterinary practice, education and training in other EU countries and further afield. This Bill will ensure the complete mutual recognition of foreign qualifications for admittance to the veterinary register in Ireland. It will give students and existing veterinary practitioners legal certainty concerning the standing of their qualifications in Ireland. This is a practical addition to the Bill.
Section 9 extends the definition of "professional misconduct" in the current Act to align it with the equivalent provision under the Pharmacy Act 2007. This section also amends a procedural requirement in the case of a lesser sanction of advice, warning or censure which may be applied by the council. Under this amendment the council would not be required to get High Court approval in cases where a person complained against chooses not to appeal against a proposed decision of the council to advise, warn or censure him or her.
I thank the Minister for taking the time to address the House today on the passage of this Bill. I look forward to the Bill being enacted at an early date. I firmly believe the proposed legislation will strengthen and enhance the veterinary profession in Ireland.
I welcome the Minister to the House. He said this Bill was uncontentious in the other House and I am sure, as the Minister will have gathered, it has already reached that status here, which is good to see.
I note the explanatory memorandum refers to some items of conduct, which had been inadvertently reserved for veterinary practitioners or veterinary nurses. That is an important factor because, as the Minister said, professions have tended to be regulated in their own interests rather than those of society at large. As the introduction to the explanatory memorandum states, that was sometimes done inadvertently.
Farmers regard veterinary costs as an extremely expensive part of farming and Senator Mooney also mentioned the high cost of veterinary medicines. We had to import a substantial number of veterinary surgeons from outside the State, which leads one to conclude that the veterinary school itself was an obstacle to the development of Irish agriculture due to limiting the number of people who could study there, although that is a goal we all share.
I recall the judgment of Mr. Justice Roderick Murphy in the taxi deregulation case — that people do have a right to enter a profession or trade for which they have the skills and training, and the public has a right to the services of such persons. As the Minister said, it is important for us to look at all of these sheltered section professions, which is part of the IMF agreement. In this regard, the Minister is looking at vets today.
The House recently agreed to deregulate the general medical service lists, while I gather the Minister for Justice and Equality will introduce legislation dealing with lawyers. The ratio of shop price to turnover for pharmacists in the Republic of Ireland far exceeded what it was in Northern Ireland. We still have to get to grips with the professional standards in accountancy, which is a major background to the financial collapse of Irish banks in 2008. No legislation on accountancy, similar to the Bill before us, has come before the House. We must ask whether the accounts of Irish banks were a true and accurate account of their finances. Might there in fact be a right of action by the taxpayer against those accountancy firms? To take an agricultural metaphor, did we buy a pig in a poke when we took over some of those banks on the basis of accounts which may not stand up to much scrutiny? This is the background. A former Member of this House, Dr. T.K. Whitaker, referred to the disease eradication programmes as the greatest financial scandal in the history of the State. Granted, that was in an earlier time. However, we must watch what happens. In the standard economic literature of Milton Friedman and Simon Kuznets on the American medical profession, they said back in the mid-1940s that if one allowed the American medical association to determine who could become a doctor or what foreign doctors could be licensed to practise in the United States, one would end up with an extremely expensive health service. The only question among economists is whether they were right. We need to represent the public interest, as the Minister is doing, and the consumer interest, when we regulate the professions. Of course, we want the highest standards but there is a tradition of restrictive practices in professions, especially limiting the number of entrants. I was glad the Minister for Health, when he was in this Chamber last week, cast doubts on the HPAT test which seemed to be designed to stop women from studying medicine. I gather their share of places has been reduced since that test was introduced and the Minister regards that as a restrictive practice and entirely unnecessary. I note that the veterinary profession has had an increase, as Senator Mooney told us, of up to 74%.
I will now deal with the section 2(3) which states "Before making regulations under this section the Minister shall consult with the Council." Would it be a good idea if the Minister took representations from the customers and the farming organisations? If they have views on that section, should they be formally consulted so that one gets both points of view? I know there are user representatives on the Veterinary Council, but they are usually from producer bodies. The farm bodies are not very reticent about coming forward and expressing views and the Minister might invite them to participate under section 2.
The issue of indemnity insurance struck me as strange. The veterinary surgeon in private practice must have this insurance but the requirement does not apply to practitioners in respect of official duties. Again, to the outsider, why not? Does it not matter to us if somebody makes a mistake in a disease eradication programme or in treating a Garda horse, or a horse from the Army equitation school, that this is not covered by insurance? Should this not also be covered?
We have a National Treasury Management Agency report which states on page 21 that there are €786 million in medical malpractice claims outstanding against the State, so why is the State not engaging in the protection that is afforded to us as private consumers of veterinary services? I put that proposition to the Minister for what it is worth. I support the extended functions of veterinary nurses and other measures.
Section 8 deals with the mutual recognition directive, which is based on Directive 20, 2005/36/EC. Would the consumer have been better off if we had implemented the directive earlier? It is now seven years since it issued and that is part of the benefit of being in the European Union.
Section 9(d) deals with appropriately qualified veterinary surgeons. I ask whether the number of points required to study veterinary medicine was too high in the first instance. Many of those who wanted to train as veterinary surgeons went to study in Hungary. High points courses in university indicate a number of factors, one of which is that the earning levels of those in the profession were too high and it is not based on the intellectual requirement needed to study veterinary medicine. I wish to comment further on section 9, the requirement for a number of elected veterinary practitioners and the single veterinary nurse to deal with issues. We should require some kind of a list system of those who are eligible or who finished down the way in the election. What we should try to avoid in that and in the next section, is that the Veterinary Council or any other body is not trying to pick a jury after a case has started. It should be obvious that if Mr. A cannot attend, one goes down to Mr. K, Mr. L or Mr. M.
We have done that.
The alternative of trying to scramble around to assemble a jury after a case has started revives the Munster tradition — a man was called "Peter the packer", because he had to pack juries. It is better that the list of names should be there and published, with substitutes, before any case begins.
I welcome the Minister to the House. I welcome also the amendment to the Bill. As I am sure others have said, it is good to be in agreement and to have a Bill that gives definition to "practise a veterinary medicine". When one speaks about the Bill outside, people ask what it is about. When we think about it seriously, the professionalisation of veterinary practice is important. People do not always realise the crucial role that vets play. We often think, perhaps, of a sick cat or dog but it is in the agricultural field that one is more aware of their importance and, therefore, the Bill is welcome.
Allowing non-veterinary professionals to carry out their procedures without fear of anybody saying they should not do it is the essence of the Bill and will ensure that farmers can reduce costs and take advantage of the professionals they need to carry out the services required instead of, perhaps, saying he or she cannot afford the vet on this occasion and will wait until the next time and possibly put an animal at risk. Given current costs and investment forfarmers, anything that reduces expense for them is always welcome.
I welcome particularly the extensive consultation that has taken place in the preparation of the amendment. I am aware the Minister has spoken with a wide group of people, including the farmers' bodies, the Equine Dental Association of Ireland, Veterinary Ireland, the Society of Chartered Physiotherapists, farriers and farm relief services and so on. That everybody has been part of the creation of the amendment is a good model.
The growth in the number of veterinary nurses in Ireland adds to the professionalisation of the whole area. It means we can see the difference between the responsibilities of vets and the responsibilities of the nurses and, together, they can grow the area and make the welfare of animals of utmost importance. Given that I have only had experience of paring sheep's feet, I would not qualify under the Bill and will not be rushing out to do it again. If the industry is to be regulated, the training must be appropriate and keep up with modern developments in veterinary practice. It is important that our professions grow in understanding of the various changes that are occurring.
It is good that the indemnity insurance will become mandatory for veterinary practitioners although I share the query raised by Senator Barrett as to why it does not apply to those in official practice. I am sure there is a good reason it does not apply to those in official practice. Ultimately, we will rely on growing the food industry into the future and we know Ireland's reputation for food is a good one. It is a clean, green, safe environment, by and large, and, in the main, we forget to thank the vets who have been part of that chain. The reputation we have had, that perhaps was taken for granted, will mean more to us as each year passes. I know that issue is of concern to the Minister. During the visit of the Chinese Vice President, Mr. Xi Jinping, at the weekend we saw how important it is to be able to show how healthy and safe our food production is and I trust a vet was on hand when the new heifer, Jinping, was born.
I do not think so. It was a healthy animal.
Perhaps that is what we are getting at.
It was a healthy heifer.
Therefore, there was no need for a vet, thank goodness. Following the dioxin scare in 2008, even though that had nothing to do with vets, we became aware of the danger of contamination. Given that Irish pork was supplied to 23 countries throughout Europe and the world, one realises how intricate and complex the food chain has become and each step in the chain requires a higher professional approach with appropriate regulation. Perhaps it is time for the vets to step forward and take a more public ownership of that as they have been very much in the background and not recognised for the part they play in keeping food safe. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland also has a clear role in the area and that the Irish system of official food control is regulated by the authority and the European Commission.
The importance of food safety is recognised at a senior level but I wonder if our vets have hidden their light under a bush. As the industry becomes more complex the need for vets and good regulation — no more than we would have liked to have seen it in the banking system — is welcome. Today, with the introduction of such regulation, there will be clarity on veterinary responsibilities. Can the Minister tell me how much co-operation there has been? Is there room for greater co-operation, particularly in the area of training, between the Food Safety Authority of Ireland and vets and veterinary nurses? Agriculture is such a professional sector but is there a way for both sectors to work more closely together?
I am glad to have an opportunity to comment on the Bill. I was at the CPP meeting and missed the Minister's speech but I have read his script. For once the explanation note on the back of the Bill is accurate when it states it is an Act to enable persons other than veterinary practitioners and veterinary nurses to carry out certain procedures. That is what the Bill must be about and I welcome the Minister's strong statement in that regard.
Irish agriculture and farming families have had a strong and positive relationship with their veterinary surgeons down the years. I am sure that many of us watched the old television series, "A Country Practice", and while not based in Ireland it set the tone for how Irish people thought of their vet. There was, and is, a very strong link, not just a professional one. In many cases a friendship exists between the vet and farmer. On many occasions we have discussed the state of the health service in both Houses and we sometimes reflect that it is impossible to contact a doctor to tend to a sick child, adult or elderly person whereas a vet never says "No". The vet has a positive link with his or her client by which the agricultural industry and economy has benefitted enormously. We must ensure that link continues.
The Minister has said on many occasions that we need to ensure competitiveness is at the core of the new Irish agricultural sector. Part of that is keeping costs to a minimum and the Bill strikes the right balance between on the one hand, what a vet must do, being prescriptive and regulated, and on the other hand, what veterinary nurses, farmers or agricultural practitioners can do. The legislation also allows for proper exemptions. The Minister said the Bill ensures that only high end functions are reserved for veterinary practitioners and that is appropriate. In Ireland most farmers are well trained, not just by farming but by holding a green certificate and studying courses in agriculture, AI and so on, many of which are college based. They can carry out most of the duties that were once reserved for veterinarians and in the process save themselves money. Everybody benefits.
I am interested in what the legislation provides for in respect of veterinary nurses. The Minister stated that approximately 500 veterinary nurses are now qualified and that there are five colleges or places of education that facilitate such training. It is a fascinating career for many people and one that has great potential. Perhaps it is not well advertised. I was struck by the Minister's statistic that five colleges provide training because I was unaware they existed.
As we continue to develop agriculture, animal husbandry and animal welfare, there will be many more opportunities for veterinary nurses and, accordingly, it should be advertised more as a career for school leavers. The veterinary business is no longer just about the cow, the bullock or the horse. Small animal clinics have grown across the country and people are taking care of dogs and cats to a level which was not the case heretofore, which should be welcomed and encouraged. There are also many exotic pets in the country, sometimes causing difficulties. When there is such investment in smaller animals, veterinary practitioners and nurses have a major role to play in their welfare.
The Minister described section 2 with its exemptions as the kernel of the Bill. Again, it is a question of common sense legislation and getting the balance right. I welcome this legislation as it will strengthen the role of the veterinary surgeon and nurse and their link with agriculture. It will allow farmers and other animal owners to carry out necessary interventions where practical and possible and in an economical fashion. I look forward to the enactment of the Bill as it can only do good.
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. Mar aon leis na hurlabhraithe ó na páirtithe eile, ba mhaith liom a rá go bhfuil mo pháirtí ag tacú leis an mBille praiticiúil, ciallmhar agus tráthúil seo. Déanfaidh sé leas do na hainmhithe agus na feirmeoirí araon.
Sinn Féin agrees with the broad thrust of the Bill and will support its passage. We see it represents a sensible way forward for agriculture. While it is not a perfect Bill, we note separate animal health and welfare legislation is forthcoming which should deal with any outstanding issues. At the weekend, the Minister's counterpart in the North, Michelle O'Neill, visited Galway where she spoke of developing animal health and welfare legislation. I am sure there is much tick-tacking going on in this area, as there must be strong and close all-island co-operation in the area of animal welfare. The Fortress Ireland initiative is an example of such an all-island approach.
The primary function of the Bill is to exempt certain functions and activities from being reserved to veterinary practitioners or nurses. Given that there is a cost for the services of a veterinarian, it is sensible to allow for such functions as farriery, equine dentistry, bovine hoof trimming, microchipping of companion animals, scanning of cattle and sheep and animal physiotherapy to be carried out by people other than by a vet. The Bill also provides for regulation which is sensible and valuable to animal welfare. This is a good approach which strikes a balance between the need to be practical and allow for flexibility while keeping animal welfare in mind.
On that matter, I am glad the Irish Farmers Association has seen fit to support this legislation. I take that as a positive indication of farmers' attitudes towards it. At the same time, I note Veterinary Ireland has some concerns about section 2 and has sought further clarification along with the introduction of primary legislation to regulate the classes of persons suitable to carry out functions which are not considered to require veterinary expertise. I know the Minister will consider this, particularly in light of the forthcoming animal health and welfare Bill.
Veterinary Ireland also suggested the regulation of such persons should be carried out independently rather than by the Department. I would welcome the Minister's views on this. Veterinary Ireland's views must be considered given the significant role it plays in supporting agriculture. Proper regulation is needed due to the possibilities that otherwise the work of veterinary practitioners could be undercut and undermined. It is important it is financially viable for vets to operate as the loss of a vet to an isolated rural community can be damaging to vets and farmers. I have had experience of this in Connemara where we find it difficult to attract vets to settle down.
We have a limited number of vets who are able to practise there. It did not help that there was a support scheme available through the Department responsible for the Gaeltacht previously, which the previous Government abolished, that made it a little more viable for a vet to practise in those areas because they find it very difficult if they are based in Clifden to go on a call out to Lettermore and then perhaps another one over as far as Oughterard. The amount of time spent on the road makes it very difficult for them to make an honest living. I would welcome the Minister's thoughts on how vets can be supported in rural areas to ensure that it is worthwhile for them to be based there.
I note that Senator Bradford mentioned that sometimes it is easier to access a vet than a doctor in a rural area but it can be the opposite as well. That is certainly the case in areas such as Connemara where it can be difficult at times to get a vet, even though they are fantastic and give a wonderful service and come out at all times of the day or night. The time factor involved in them travelling from their base to wherever they are needed can be crucial to the delivery of a quality service. We cannot contemplate that it would not be viable for them.
I take the opportunity to recognise the important role that is played both by veterinary practitioners and those who carry out the functions and activities vets cannot provide. There is a role for both categories and we need to find a middle way. The agriculture sector is healthy and vibrant and those who tend our livestock can take no small amount of credit for that, as they provide a world-class service. However, it is crucial that the area is properly regulated.
I would welcome clarity on a number of issues relating to the Bill. Will the House be supplied with the list of procedures that can be carried out by unregistered practitioners? Could we have access to a list of the procedures the Minister intends to designate as non-prescribed procedures? We will continue to support the legislation. We will not oppose the Bill on Second Stage but there may be a need to amend it on Committee Stage. The Bill's purpose is valuable and commendable and we welcome it.
I echo the thoughts of Senator Mooney on the cost of medicines. That is an area on which it would be important to have North-South co-operation as the proximity of the two markets can impinge on each other. I would welcome all that could be done to ensure the cost of medicines is as competitive as possible because it will reduce the price to the final end-user, namely, the farmer or owner of an animal. Ba mhaith liom a rá go bhfuil muid ag tacú leis an Aire agus tréaslaím leis as an gcur chuige atá tógtha aige sa chás seo.
I welcome the Minister. He was in my county at the weekend doing very important business. It was an extremely successful visit, in particular from the point of view of agriculture. We will see the rewards from the visit in the future. I commend the Minister on it.
The legislation is non-contentious and is supported by all sides of the House. It is a question of common sense prevailing. We are fortunate in this country that previous Governments, which includes Senator Mooney's party, invested in the education of young farmers. We now have a new generation of farmers who are exceptionally competent. They know medicines inside out. They know all about antibiotics and the care and treatment of animals. The Bill ensures that they can continue to provide the necessary care for their animals and that we will not face restrictions in that regard in future.
Regulation is important in all walks of life and constant reform is essential. We have seen proposals from the Minister for Justice and Equality that are not as universally acceptable as the proposals before us, but at least he is bringing forward legislation that will foster debate and discussion. The person who will win at the end of the day is the consumer. That is the objective of all of us, and that is the case with the legislation with which we are currently dealing because it will ensure that there is proper competition. Senator Bradford and others referred to veterinary nurses. These matters are important in terms of keeping costs down and ensuring that the unit costs for farmers availing of services is kept at a reasonable level. If this is done, the farmer will never hesitate to contact a veterinary surgeon when an intervention is required to ensure an animal's welfare is protected. I take on board the point made by my colleague, Senator Ó Clochartaigh, regarding availability. It is a difficulty I have experienced. Although I am not from a farming background, I have acquired a great deal of knowledge from neighbours and friends. Sometimes, access can be a problem. A farmer should never hesitate to retain a necessary service, particularly from a financial point of view.
When farmers and the people around them are competent in, for example, dosing cattle and other animals, the Bill will allow them to do so. Since they will have the training, they will not require the services of veterinary surgeons unless necessary.
In recent years, particularly the past year and a half or so, there have been significant advances in agriculture and it has become a career about which young people will be excited and in which they will engage. They can see a livelihood in it for themselves. There have been improvements in methodologies and ways of doing business. Farming has been professionalised in the past decade.
I look forward to the animal welfare Bill, which is necessary. While the Bill before us is important, it is just a baby step. The Minister's stewardship will ensure the welfare of animals and the farming profession. He will also ensure that the potential of our exports will be realised and that significant new jobs will be created in farming and farming-related industries.
I thank Senators for taking a keen interest in this legislation. I will try to answer some of their questions and reply to a number of comments.
The point of this legislation is to enable the Minister to put the list of procedures together. We are debating the legalities involved. The list can be changed, but there will be ongoing consultation with stakeholders in that regard. Whether it is equine dentistry, hoof paring or microchipping a horse or dog, we will consider the skill set required in a function to determine whether confining that function to a veterinary practitioner or veterinary nurse as opposed to an unlicensed or unregistered person is appropriate.
Senators mentioned the animal welfare Bill, on which my Department has worked hard for the past six months. I received it back from the Attorney General's office today and we should be in a position to publish it. It is approximately 120 pages long. I made significant additions to the draft Bill that was ready when I entered into government. I have strong opinions on animal welfare matters that need to be addressed in legislation. People will see that when the Bill is published. I look forward to a significant engagement with this House on the question of animal welfare. A number of Senators have a specific interest in this area.
We are still operating on the basis of animal welfare legislation that is approximately 80 years old. It is outdated. For example, we cannot comprehensively deal with organised dog fights, the mutilation of horses or donkeys in family feuds, etc. That all needs to end. We must put legislation in place that can allow the Garda to address these problems properly.
As the Senator probably knows, I have got to know my counterpart in the Northern Executive very well. I work with her on a series of matters from CAP to CFP and in particular on the cross-Border mechanisms available to us. We are working on a common approach to animal health and welfare, and in particular for practical reasons on disease control given that the spread of disease does not respect borders. We need to have a fortress Ireland approach to keeping out of Ireland diseases that can be prevented from coming here.
There are some risks because of the excitement about agriculture particularly owing to the pricing of beef and lamb. Young animals are being brought into Ireland from the UK in particular and from other parts of Europe as farmers try to get their hands on calves to build up their herd sizes. That causes a particularly difficult enforcement problem for us in ferry ports and so on given that there is the right to free movement of animals as well as the free movement of people around the European Union. For example, in the south and south west of Britain the cattle disease that is being spread by midges needs to be kept away from this island. That is a particular challenge and we need to do everything we can to enforce it.
I take the opportunity to get a message to vets generally. We have an ongoing discussion with vets at the moment over their supervisory role in meat factories. Vets perform a very important standard control role within factories. We are reviewing that role at the moment because it is my responsibility to get the best value for money we can. There is a perception among some vets that I am somehow trying to remove vets from factories, which is not the case. We have a panel of approximately 400 private vets whom we pay approximately €18 million for their inspection and active supervision role in factories, which is very important. We are trying to get better value for money for that service at the moment and we are talking to representatives of Veterinary Ireland. While it is taking time to get agreement, I encourage it to talk to us in a proactive way.
On indemnity insurance I was asked why there is a difference between a vet acting in a private capacity and a vet working for the Department. The reason is that when a vet is acting in a private capacity he or she is generally performing a service for a client, for example calving or dealing with a fallen animal in a field. If the vet makes a blunder from which the client has suffered financial loss and if there is a complaint resulting in a civil case, there needs to be indemnity to ensure that those debts can be paid. If a vet is acting in an official capacity it normally relates to inspection or supervision and is acting on behalf of somebody else. In those cases if there is a civil action it would normally be against the employer, which is the State or the Minister and there is no need for that vet to have legal indemnity. That is the difference between the two. Senators might like to look more closely at the legislation and we can return to it on Committee Stage if necessary.
A number of speakers made pointed reference to the role of vets in the modernisation of farming, which is true. For example, a few weeks ago in Kilkenny mart I launched a new initiative, which is costing us €5 million this year, to encourage beef farmers, particularly suckler beef farmers, to participate in what is called a discussion group structure whereby they would challenge each other and be exposed to new, better and more profitable ways of running their business. They would be required to take on new practices, some involving vets working with farmers to help put better commercial and animal husbandry practices in place. They would consider matters such as stocking rates, disease control, fertility and a range of other practical measures to allow farmers become more efficient in what they do and get more from their animals and from their herds.
That is the kind of proactive role from which vets can not only make a living but can also make a significant contribution to raising the overall standard of agriculture and particularly beef farming where there is a chasm between the beef farmers who do a particularly good commercial job in getting a return from the market from their herds and those who do not. I could bore the Senators for many hours with the figures on that because I am fascinated by it. I have responsibility to try to close that gap and move everybody in a more efficient direction, which we will do in time.
Senator Mooney raised the issue of the cost of medicines. I do not have any direct control over this. The main driver behind this legislation is the cost competitiveness of farming. It seeks to ensure that farmers do not need to pay vets to do things that farmers are more than qualified to do themselves. If there is any evidence to suggest there is some kind of cartel developing between vets in the provision of medicines, we need to hear about it. The Competition Authority needs to hear about it, as does the regulatory authority.
In recent years we have tried to introduce more competition into the provision of veterinary medicines by, for example, allowing veterinary medicine to be sold through pharmacies, which was not the case in the past. There is more competition and awareness of different pricing structures among farmers than there has been in the past but more work probably remains to be done.
I do not have the figure for the number of veterinary places in Irish colleges, but we can give the Senator that detail. I know that many vets in Ireland would have studied abroad, particularly in the UK. It may be something we need to review. The reality is that the agrifood business is growing in the midst of recession and, if I have my way, will continue to grow rapidly between now and 2020. I want to increase the herd size from a beef and dairy point of view. We have seen a decline every year for the past five years in the beef cattle herd, although not in the dairy herd. The sheep flock has, however, stabilised this year and in fact it increased by 6.5% in the past 12 months. This is the first time in a decade that we have not seen a year-on-year decrease in the national flock of sheep. Again, this is driven by higher prices forlamb.
Something is changing for the better in the agri-food sector and it is driven by commodity prices for meat and dairy products. We are modernising agriculture to allow us to add value to products carrying the Irish label in terms of the sustainability, safety, disease control and animal husbandry that Irish food can promise. This is allowing us to target premium markets in new areas, such as China.
We are entering into a period of sustained growth in agriculture and agri-food which will continue for the next five to ten years. There will be ups and downs along the way from a pricing point of view but the trend will be in one direction. That means veterinary practitioners and nurses will continue to play a significant role and an increasing number of these professionals will be required to service the industry as we become more advanced and scientific in our production techniques. That is good news for the veterinary profession. This Bill puts in place the appropriate legislative framework to ensure the profession is properly regulated and to define in law the roles that veterinary nurses and practitioners can play.
I look forward to working with the House on improving the legislation if Members put forward amendments on Committee Stage.
Question put and agreed to.
When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?
Next Tuesday.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 28 February 2012.
Sitting suspended at 5.10 p.m. and resumed at 6 p.m.