7 Jul 2022
Plans include proposals to remove the requirement - under certain circumstances - for vets to conduct a physical exam before deeming an animal to be 'under their care'.
Allister Webb
Job Title
RCVS councillors have backed plans to launch a consultation on proposed reforms to the organisation’s “under care” guidance.
Veterinary professionals will be asked for their views on the planned changes, which include controversial proposals to remove the need for vets to conduct a physical exam on an animal before prescribing POM-V medicines under certain circumstances.
Respondents will also be asked to consider proposals on 24-hour emergency cover and the requirements imposed on limited service providers (LSPs), as early as next week, following a special meeting held on 6 July.
But deep concerns were raised in some quarters during the virtual meeting, which was scheduled to take place ahead of RCVS Day tomorrow (8 July), when new councillors take up their positions.
Councillor Jo Dyer told colleagues: “I think this change is not in line with our mission statement. I don’t think it’s the decision of a responsible regulator and I don’t think it’s the right thing for animal welfare.”
And newly elected councillor Will Wilkinson argued there was a “real risk that improper practices” could enter the sector without greater oversights being put in place now.
RCVS chief executive Lizzie Lockett insisted the college’s existing complaints procedures would deal with any issues that arose, pointing out that it does not police its current code of conduct. She also suggested that proposed regulatory reforms could also be applied in the area.
But Mr Wilkinson replied: “We’re not going to be able to monitor what’s going on. If the client is getting what they want, they’re probably not going to complain.”
Under the plans, an animal or group of animals would be deemed to be under a vet’s care when the vet accepts the responsibility either “generally, or by undertaking a specific procedure or test, or prescribing a course of treatment”.
Responsibility could be given either by the owner, under law or through some other authority.
Papers published ahead of the meeting said the college’s plans were not proposing a significant change to the rules on 24-hour emergency cover, where vets are required to direct clients to appropriate services if they are unable to provide the cover themselves.
However, they are proposing a requirement for LSPs to provide 24-hour emergency cover that is “proportionate to the service they offer”, though some questions were raised about how an LSP should be defined.
The college’s outgoing president Kate Richards said that although the process of drawing up new guidance had continued since 2016, the need to introduce temporary guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic had enabled important evidence to be collected.
Dr Richards thanked everyone who had been involved in the process and said the proposals were underpinned by legal advice the college had received, which lay member Derek Bray said would be “unwise” for the council to reject.
Fellow lay member Linda Ford said: “We need to proceed as planned and not doing so would put RCVS in a precarious position.”
But Mr Wilkinson, who was attending his first council meeting since succeeding Colin Whiting after his resignation last month, said he was concerned that the documents appeared to imply that no major amendments could be made through the process.
Mr Wilkinson later added: “If we say we’re not going to make substantive change, we’re effectively saying we’re not going to listen to the professions.”
Meanwhile, other members raised concerns about the potential implications of the proposals for efforts to combat antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
Susan Paterson said she was generally supportive of the measures, but suggested they needed more “teeth” on AMR, while Stephen May questioned whether the wording was “robust” enough.
But standards committee chairman Melissa Donald said the proposed guidance was linked to existing AMR advice.
She said: “We are where we are and we need to go forward.”
Lay member Tim Walker said there was a danger of running the consultation during the meeting, while Niall Connell said: “I support the direction of travel and I think we’re in a very good place.”
And VN council-appointed member Matthew Rendle argued that the plans could help to solve a developing problem of capacity in the sector.
He said: “People are really struggling to get veterinary care because they can’t get seen.”
Under the timetable approved by council, a consultation of professionals is due to begin by the end of next week and continue until mid-September, allowing more time for responses during the main summer holiday period.
A report of the responses is then due to be compiled and considered by the college’s standards committee by late October before a final council decision, which is currently expected in November.
A separate public consultation will also be organised as part of the process and the meeting was told that discussions have already taken place with the polling organisation YouGov about how it could be carried out.
