Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-79)
MR BOB
MOORE, PROFESSOR
SHEILA CRISPIN,
MS ANDREA
JEFFERY AND
MS JANE
HERN
18 FEBRUARY 2008
Q60 Dr Strang: You envisage this
operating still within the broad framework of the Royal College;
is that right?
Ms Hern: We are not envisaging
that necessarily. We feel it is slightly invidious of us to start
laying down the law for a whole raft of other people; we are just
concentrating on veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses at
the moment.
Q61 Dr Strang: If one takes it as
given that in the new scheme of things, whenever that comes into
place, these different groups should be regulated—
Ms Hern: It would make sense to
regulate the team together. I think that principle would still
apply, as it does to veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses.
Q62 Dr Strang: I have been asked
to ask you whether the RCVS have a view about whether farriers
ought to be brought under the RCVS umbrella, since they are rather
a specialised group.
Ms Hern: We have not courted that,
but we understand that they might be interested in coming into
the same statutory framework, if only because they need new legislation
too, and they feel that it might be useful to get on the bandwagon,
as it were.
Q63 Dr Strang: That is the view of
the farriers, you reckon?
Ms Hern: In general terms. I do
not know that they have got a formal proposal, but I know they
have been considering it.
Q64 David Taylor: There are about
2,500 farriers, but there just seems to be a bit of a divided
view amongst those. We have had a joint submission from the Worshipful
Company, the National Association and the Farriers Registration
Council[1],
and they want to keep the registration of farriers separately,
certainly; but the registration process for farriers they argue
could be brought under the umbrella of a multi-disciplinary committee
of the RCVS. Do you think that is possible, desirable, likely?
Ms Hern: It is certainly possible.
Q65 David Taylor: However, others
would argue against it. Why do you think there is this strong
divide in the 2,500 group of farriers? One half thinks that disciplinary
processes should be almost a shoeing for any new legislation,
and the others would resist to the last—
Ms Hern: They have had their statutory
independence for some while. I can imagine that they would be
loath to lose that entirely. I do not know—I am not that
close—
Q66 David Taylor: Do you have existing
communications with the bodies that I have mentioned on any scale—the
farrier representation bodies?
Mr Moore: We have done.
Ms Hern: Informally, yes.
Q67 David Taylor: Formal and informal?
Ms Hern: Yes.
Mr Moore: Yes. In the run-up to
the preparation of the various options that we were considering,
we certainly had conversations with them formally and informally.
Q68 David Taylor: Can I ask one other
sweep of questions that I did not get a chance to ask before,
which will only take us back slightly, Chairman? Jane Hern said
that the position had not arisen in relation to an unrepresentative
nature of the RCVS. Do you actually track the background of or
the practices of the members of the RCVS at any one time to see
what proportion are covering predominantly small companion animals,
what proportion of exotic, or what proportion of large animals?
The profession has altered dramatically, has it not, over a 40-year
period, and Mr Moore said that he had been in the profession at
that time; but the big animal vets have dominated the RCVS at
one time. Do they still? Do you track?
Mr Moore: We carried out a manpower
survey, and we have done it a number of times. The most recent
one was 2005, when we sent out to every member who is registered
with us and asked them what their work involvement is. I do not
have all the numbers in my head, but—
Q69 David Taylor: It does not matter,
but it is whether the RCVS Council is broadly comparable to that
which you are collecting from the exercise you have just described.
Ms Hern: We have not done a statistical
comparison.
Q70 David Taylor: Reasonably close?
Ms Hern: I would say so, yes.
Q71 Chairman: To get this in perspective,
we are talking about disciplinary matters and complaints from
customers. Just give us a flavour of how many disciplinary matters
a year you have to deal with, and how many complaints from outwith
the profession you have to respond to.
Ms Hern: In the last two or three
years the numbers of complaints that we have registered have been
in the realms of 500 to 700. The number of cases that come through
to the Disciplinary Committee—we had one year when there
were eight or ten, but it would probably be more likely to be
four or five a year. You can see from the number of complaints
that get registered through to the final end game that an awful
lot get dealt with along the way.
Q72 Chairman: Can you put that in
context as to the proportion that represents of customer visits—the
people employing a vet? Is there any way of getting a proportion?
Ms Hern: Yes, but you have to
start working out how many clients a vet would see on an average
day.
Q73 Chairman: I appreciate it is
a very difficult question, but I just wanted to know whether it
is 1% of customers who are complaining every year—just to
get some kind of idea.
Mr Moore: It is not even 1% of
them—it is the number of consultations, basically, that
you are asking about, and it will not be 1% of the number of consultations.
I do not have any realistic idea of the number as a percentage
of the total consultations.
David Taylor: Could you write back to
us with that information?
Q74 Chairman: What about the people
who complain about nurses, Ms Jeffrey? How many complaints about
your members do you get?
Ms Jeffrey: Very, very few; but
that is because currently it is the veterinary surgeon where the
buck stops. If you think 1991 Schedule 3 changed with the Veterinary
Surgeons Act, veterinary nurses were allowed to treat under veterinary
direction so the complaint—
Ms Hern: We have only just introduced
the new register for veterinary nurses and we have not introduced
the disciplinary part of the self-regulation scheme, so we are
not at the moment dealing formally with the complaints about nurses.
Q75 Mr Gray: Can I ask you about
what sounds like an astonishing pair of figures, namely that there
are 600 or 700 complaints in the year, but only a tiny handful
comes to the Disciplinary Committee. Does that mean that the vast
bulk of complaints are frivolous or wrongly placed? Presumably,
these are people whose animals have been injured and died, and
their immediate instinct is to blame the vet. Is that what it
is?
Mr Moore: Of the complaints that
we get, you have to remember that the only complaint that the
Royal College can deal with is against a veterinary surgeon for
professional misconduct. We do not deal with complaints about
what might be negligence or may or may not be negligence. We do
not decide on that and we do not deal with any complaints about
fees. We do not deal with any complaints about bad debts. There
is a whole range of complaints that come in. I would say that
40% of the complaints fall outside of the remit of the Royal College.
I have not counted that to be 40%, but I read every complaint
that comes in.
Q76 Chairman: It would be helpful
and very useful in the light of our earlier exchanges if you could
jot down some of these figures, because Mr Drew wants to pursue
this as a line of inquiry. I think the Committee would genuinely
find it interesting in terms of what it is that you can respond
to by way of complaint, and perhaps the flavour of what you cannot.
I was quite surprised when you said to Mr Moore that you could
do anything about fees, whereas with lawyers you can complain
about fees, for example. It would be very useful to know of the
things that people write to you about and what you can do and
you cannot do, and to put it into a numerical context.
Mr Moore: The Professional Conduct
Department keeps very good records about all the complaints that
come in, and I am sure we can pull something out for you.
Chairman: Good, that would be extremely
helpful. Thank you.
Q77 Mr Drew: Can I be clear, because
I have one case that has been plaguing me for some years where
someone has complained about a dog that was euthanased without
their permission: what is the ultimate you can do? I understood
you could write a complaint to the Privy Council: is that true?
Mr Moore: Ms Hern will correct
me if I am wrong. You first of all complain to the Royal College;
and if you do not like the decision that the Royal College gives
you—is it the Privy Council or judicial review? You have
to ask for one or the other.
Ms Hern: It depends. The appeal
from the Disciplinary Committee is to the judicial committee of
the Privy Council; but if you wanted to challenge a decision of,
for example, the Preliminary Investigation Committee or even registration
decisions, that would be a question of judicial review.
Q78 Mr Drew: Who decides which route
you go along? Is that the complainant or—
Ms Hern: No, the complainant lodges
the complaint, and if the Preliminary Investigation Committee
decides that it is a sufficiently serious case to be referred
to the Disciplinary Committee, then it is pursued by the College,
and the complainant in effect is just a witness of fact, if you
like. The right of appeal to the Privy Council is that of the
respondent veterinary surgeon, not even of the College, let alone
the complainant.
Q79 Mr Drew: So to defend their position.
Ms Hern: Yes, if—
1 Ev ... [Vet 36] Back
| 
