Jiglu: Farmtalking: Discussion: RE: RE: Vets worried ?

Originally from: Pat Gardiner

Hi Jane

Let me just quote your first few words and comment

"I don't think self-regulation has broken down in the RCVS actually, it only seems to have done so to some of us who had horrendous experiences during FMD and hoped for some retribution which was not forthcoming ."

Retribution has never been an issue. Remedy, discipline and reform is. You are correct despite hundreds of obviously genuine complaints nothing has been forthcoming under the circumstances.

The system has failed. It must be changed, not cosmetic change but real change and immediately. We should never ever have got to the situation where police are being called on vets.

I know, as we all do that there are plenty of honest decent hardworking vets out there, but they have to get on their feet and start hammering the table, until they do they are complicant in wrongdoing.

It is their profession, not mine. If it had been mine, and circumstances had been different, I would have had the entire senior tier removed and replaced.

Sure, it would have got me struck off "for bringing the profession into disrepute."...but they would never have stood up against the onslaught – coming from inside.

Let's be frank, they lack courage and if they won't do it, we have a public duty to make their lives a total misery until they come to the conclusion that the easiest course is reform.

I saw the dead and dying pigs caused by a veterinary cover-up. It is a sight I will never forget and I sight that I will never allow them to forget either....until they get a grip.

I know that vets read this. They need a crisis of conscience. I'm their man. I don't expect ever to be liked or accepted by the RCVS, but worse than me awaits them if they don't sort the situation.

Regards Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: ...
Originally from: ... [...] Sent: 06 March 2004 22:52
To: ...
Subject: [farmtalking] RE: Vets worried ?
I don't think self-regulation has broken down in the RCVS actually, it only seems to have done so to some of us who had horrendous experiences during FMD and hoped for some retribution which was not forthcoming under the circumstances.
I am certainly of the opinion that if it's replaced with a State Licensing system it will prove to be far worse for both the vets and their clients. In that regard the vet should be worried.
Someone will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong, but I guess that 80% of the vets in the UK today are working in Small Animal Practice only. There can be few, if any that are exclusively large animal firms and not too many left that are mixed!
Therein lay the problem during FMD – remember? So many vets from Small Animal work both here and abroad who offered to help but had never seen 'orf' let alone FMD!
I hope they'll pardon me for saying so but it was only the often elderly, nearing retirement, 'old boys' who had been around in 1967/8 and could remember. They not only recognised the disease but also had a more understanding attitude towards the farmers affected.
It's all very well to criticise the vets but they're no different to the rest of us. How many of us have had dreams never realised because the opportunities just never materialised?
There may have been, and no doubt still are, many vets who had dreams of treating farm animals once they qualified but found when they did that the jobs just weren't there, or if they were, they didn't last long.
What are they to do? With wives and children to support they can only go into small animal practice – if they're lucky – or accept a job with the SVS as TB testers, meat inspectors or paper pushers, etc. or as in some cases decide to change their choice of career!
Just because some of us have come across what we consider to be a ‘bad vet’ doesn’t mean they’re all the same. There are plenty of good guys ‘n dolls out there, both old and young and they don’t have to sit on the RCVS councils and committees to prove it!
FMD came as a shock to us all and once the method of control was adopted, urged on and backed up by the PM's science advisors, the ill chosen Anderson team, then the 'dye was cast'.
Sure there were those of us who screamed for vaccination because we knew it 'worked' and we hated the slaughter of healthy animals but we have to admit we also knew they didn't have enough of it at the time and what they had was rapidly running out of date. Our hope that they would speedily manufacture more, order and use it was in vain. Maintaining FMD free status was deemed more important and sadly it still is.
As for the PCR/Smart Cycler machine, beautiful piece of equipment it may be, but validated or not, there just weren't enough of them available at the time anyway, so logistically it's use simply wasn't feasible.
To my mind there’s little point in going over old ground and bemoaning the past when there’s a very easy answer to the whole problem. (And I’ve not changed my mind in this one iota over the past three years!) The only trouble is that so many people don’t agree with me! Well...not yet anyway!
Author wrote:
Interesting stuff, isn't it?
I think the key quote is "This applies to professions across the board
and not just to the veterinary profession." Self regulation has broken
down and something must be done urgently not just to restore order,
but to restore public confidence. As I read it, no disciplinary
procedure would have any authority over the State Veterinary Service
vets and the Privy Council role seems to be unchanged, (I'm open to
correction!.) Effectively that means even for private vets, RCVS
disciplinary procedures when resulting in striking off are all interim
anyway. So really no change on any of the central issues in respect of
recent livestock epidemics. However, whatever the legalities it is
quite clear that the RCVS failed in their duty to speak out on behalf
of animal welfare, a situation that continues in respect of the PMWS
epidemic. They are in the dock on that subject and the latest
revelations about Waugh are going to increase the pressure. They still
haven't got the point and if they think they are going to solve their poor
reputation by a few polite non-critical placemen and women, they are wrong. They could do much by making sure that they take critics on board, but how to ensure that they do it? (No, I'm not applying either.) You won't get any improvement until someone makes it clear in words of one syllable publicly uttered that the present situation will not be tolerated any longer. That has to be either the courts or the government. Circumstances will probably drive the old guard out of office and a new regime in. Those waiting in the wings should be now building bridges with their critics – and they ought to be here on this thread right now. If I was a young progressive vet eager for change, I would be here now and talking to people like you Frances even if they find me still too strong for their taste. Tally Ho! Pat Gardiner Author wrote:
To see what they were debating –
http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/vetsurgeons/letter.htm
Author wrote:
I see the RCVS had an extraordinary meeting on 3rd of this month
.The purpose was to debate the proposed new Veterinary Surgeons
Act. They are absolutely right to be worried ,but reform will come
too late for some of the public who complained about some of their
members and were frozen out. Self regulation notoriously doesn't
work well, for somewhat obvious reasons and having a few overawed
lay members of a committee will not change that. They should have
disciplined the guilty and thrown the rotten apples out of the
barrel. Unfortunately, one suspects that some of these wrong-uns
were quite high up in the system and had undue influence on
events. There is now a new CVS, will a new broom sweep clean or
not ? For the sake of the profession, I sincerelt hope it does.
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: ...
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.613 / Virus Database: 392 – Release Date: 04/03/2004