----- Original Message -----
From: ...

Originally from: <...>
To: <...>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: [farmtalking] RE: Vets warn government

Yes Coleen – I well remember this story – how the vet you mention told you this and said he wasn't going to co-operate with MAFF, which was very commendable – but if I remember correctly, he was unwilling to have you tell me his name so that I could have spoken to him and perhaps have it reported to the RCVS or published in the media and on the web to 'shame' MAFF.

Of course that was his choice and he's entitled to it, but I guess we both can imagine how much more effective it might have been if MAFF's disgraceful desire to bribe the veterinary profession had been made public!

By the same token we have to consider that although the RCVS has so far failed to discipline any vet about whom they received a complaint following FMD – in fact they received very few, as far as I know, it was less than fifty yet over 10,000 farms were victims of the slaughter policy. These figures excuse nothing but are food for thought

As one vet has said to me,

"If we had all 'downed tools' and refused to participate in the slaughter, don't you think the Govt would still have done it?"

I had to agree that they probably would and then he added,

"No doubt using the army to supervise the killing, would you have wanted that?"

Of course I had to admit I certainly would not.

As I've said so many times before – I will never forget the traumas of 2001 but at the same time I think it's futile to seek retribution we have to look to the future.

Nothing can ever bring the animals back and if we allow mistrust, fear and hatred to consume our lives it will take over and we will be unable to concentrate on what is really important.

I do understand your aprehension but I'm equally certain you wouldn't hesitate to call a vet if one of your animals, (or knowing your generous heart, anyone else's!) – needed treatment!

Take care! – Jane

Author wrote:
To be honest Jane I am afraid these days of Vets. I fear that information
is no longer between client and vet – and it is all because of 2001.We

were

told of Vets being contacted by MAFF as it was then, and being told to

ring

around their clients and ask 'if anyone was hiding any animals'. One

really

good Vet refused (yes there are some) it was he that told us this story.
For each call they were paid £18. For £18 they did the dirty.
Yes I like others on this board have to use Vets, but there is my mind
anyway, a huge difference between using and trustring. I wish with all my
heart I could forget what they did.
I wish that more of the Vets who know who did what, would speak out and
condemn these people, I really think is that these Vets will rise again
Jane if and when they are needed. They have never been brought to account
along with all the other people who did unspeakable acts.
Coleen
----- Original Message -----
From: <...>
To: <...>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 10:35 PM
Subject: [farmtalking] RE: Vets warn government
I fully understand and sympathise with what some of you are saying and in
many ways am inclined to agree with you but...
I do think that above all we have to keep a sense of proportion here.
Some of you may remember that in the past the way vets are self regulated

by

the RCVS has been explained here and elsewhere. The alternative, a State
Licensing system could and almost certainly would be far worse, both for

us

and the veterinary profession.
There is no doubt that the RCVS has much to do to put it's own house in
order in many respects, nevertheless it would seem from this report that
some of them are on our side and are trying to do this wouldn't it?
I'm sure most of you would agree that there are some very good vets out
there and I doubt if any of you would not hesitate to call your vet if

your

animals were in trouble. To damn them all is both unfair and unreasonable
and is hardly likely to persuade them to our way of thinking and put

matters

right.
I have not for one minute forgotten the conduct of some members of the
profession during 2001 which was quite unforgivable, but we should also
remember the vets who supported our cause and continue to do so.

Author wrote:
Isn't the boot on the other foot ? Isn't it the Government warning vets

?

If the RCVS will not put its own house in order, it will, apparently, have
it done for them. For a vet to say that "The integrity and validity of a
certificate signed by a Veterinary surgeon has to be regarded as

fundamental

" sounds very good but, in actual fact, is a travesty of what really is
going on. The guilty are going unpunished , transgressers are still free

to

practice their trade. The value of a signature appended by a vet is in
serious decline. Why would it be regarded as "fundamental" when we know

they

falsify blood tests and false certificates despite denial were most
certainly signed during FMD ?Have they finally realised the danger their
profession are in ? By collaborating with Defra to profess that no vet was
guilty of any wrongdoing during the holocaust of 2001 in a futile attempt

to

stave off swinging change, they have surrendered their collective

integrity.

They cannot be trusted to regulate themselves, sympathy is in short supply
in this particular household. If 2 members of the State Veterinary Service
had not signed a paper stating falsely that my sheep had FMD,they could

not

have taken and slaughtered them. They have much to account for and much to
atone for. Unless or until, they humble themselves to do so, their decline
will continue.

Frances

--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking
To leave the group, email: ...

—If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/farmtalking

To leave the group, email: ...