View all veterinary jobs
The Veterinary Nurses Council of the RCVS is seeking nominations from veterinary surgeons and VNs for its Golden Jubilee award by 8 May 2012.
The award recognises an exceptional contribution made to the veterinary nursing profession and/or a positive contribution to animal welfare. The Golden Jubilee award was inaugurated to mark the 50th anniversary of veterinary nurse training, in 2011, and the first award was presented to Jean Turner in 2011 for her lifetime contribution to veterinary nursing.
Liz Branscombe, Chairman of the VN Council said: "This is a prestigious award and a great opportunity to recognise someone who has made a positive impact on our profession.
"VN Council feels strongly that the award should be accessible to a wide spectrum of individuals, so nominees could come from veterinary nurses or veterinary surgeons involved in clinical practice, research, teaching or politics - in fact, any aspect of veterinary nursing."
Both veterinary surgeons and VNs are eligible to make nominations, or to be nominated for the Golden Jubilee award; nominations should be received by 8 May 2012. More information, together with the nomination form, can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/jubileeaward.
The award will be presented at RCVS Day on 6 July 2012.
Dr Crawford sent the email to his client, Mrs X, on 15 July 2014, the day on which Mrs X’s horse was due for insemination using horse semen supplied from a horse in Germany. However, the semen had arrived without the Intra Trade Certificate, a requirement for intra-EU inseminations, and so Dr Crawford proceeded to contact the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) for alternative authorisation.
Just after 4:30pm on that day, Mrs X received a text from Dr Crawford advising her that he had received authorisation from the AHVLA, and would forward to Mrs X the AHVLA authorisation email. It later transpired that that the email had in fact been fabricated by Dr Crawford using an email that he had previously received from the AHVLA regarding another matter.
Dr Crawford faced the following charges:
Fabricating an e-mail purporting to be from the veterinary officer at the AVHLA, authorising use of semen from a horse for insemination, when in fact he had not received such authorisation.
Dishonesty in relation to the e-mail described above.
His conduct gave rise to spread of infectious disease which had the potential to affect equine animal health and welfare in the region.
Dr Crawford admitted the first two charges, but denied that his actions had given rise to the risk of disease.
The Committee found the first two charges proved, and moved on to determine the facts of the third charge. They took into account that Dr Crawford had received verbal confirmation that the semen was safe, and that the health papers had been stamped accordingly. He had not, however, seen a copy of this certificate and so there was no guarantee that the semen was safe to use at the time he sent the fabricated email. On consideration of the facts, the Committee found this charge proved, as Mrs X’s mare could have been infected and subsequently could have adversely affected equine animal health and welfare in the region.
They also found that his entire course of action had fallen far short of what is expected of a veterinary surgeon, and that it amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.
When determining sanction, the Committee took into account a number of aggravating factors, namely the risk of injury to animals, an element of pre-meditation, a disregard for the role of the AHVLA, impersonating a fellow veterinary surgeon, and intending to deceive a veterinary surgeon as well as a member of the public.
It did also, however, take into account the mitigating factors – that there was no injury to the animal, and that it was a single isolated incident from which Dr Crawford did not stand to make any financial gain.
The Committee therefore decided to order the Registrar to suspend Dr Crawford’s registration for 12 months.
Ian Green, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee did consider whether to remove Dr Crawford from the Register. However, in light of the significant mitigation in this case, the fact that this was an isolated incident in an otherwise unblemished career, together with his acceptance from the outset that he had been dishonest and his assurance that he would never behave in this way again, the Committee decided that in all the circumstances to remove him from the Register would be disproportionate."
Dr Crawford can lodge an appeal with the Privy Council within 28 days of being notified of the Disciplinary Committee's decision.
At the start of the hearing the RCVS applied for it to take place in the absence of Mr Dobson, who had failed to respond when informed about the hearing. The application was granted by the DC on the basis that Mr Dobson, by refusing to respond to communications from the College – including by letter, telephone and email – had voluntarily waived his right to attend.
There were three sets of charges against Mr Dobson. The first charge was in June 2018, while he was not on the Register of Veterinary Surgeons, Mr Dobson had carried out an equine pre-purchase examination (PPE) and used the postnominals MRCVS to sign the associated PPE certificate and covering letter.
The Committee found this charge proven after it was presented with evidence of the certificate and covering letter alongside the fact that Mr Dobson had been removed from the Register on 1 June 2018 for non-payment of the annual renewal fee needed to remain on the RCVS Register. He was only restored to the Register upon paying his outstanding fee in late November 2018.
The second charge was that Mr Dobson did not have any professional indemnity insurance (or PII) or other equivalent arrangements in between June 2018 and August 2020. He also failed to provide adequate details of his PII when requested by the RCVS.
The Committee was presented with evidence that Mr Dobson had failed to confirm that he had PII arrangements or other equivalent arrangements in place prior to August 2020 and that he had failed to respond to numerous requests for evidence from the College. On this basis the Committee found the charges proven.
The third and final charge was that Mr Dobson had failed to respond to numerous requests from the RCVS, including: failing to provide written comments on concerns relating to the equine PPE; failing to provide written comments on the concern that he had carried out the PPE and used the postnominals MRCVS while not on the Register; failing to provide details of his continuing professional development (CPD) for the previous three years; and failing to provide copies of his Day Book and/or Controlled Drugs Register. All elements of this charge were found proven when the Committee was presented with evidence of numerous attempts to contact him that went unacknowledged and unanswered.
Regarding the first charge, the Committee recognised that Mr Dobson had not intentionally allowed his registration with the College to expire and that it was down to administrative error. However, it also considered that he had not responded to or taken action upon receiving numerous reminders to pay his fees. It considered that Mr Dobson had therefore acted recklessly in not only allowing his registration to expire but in continuing to practise veterinary surgery while not registered, a criminal act in contravention of the Veterinary Surgeons Act. The Committee therefore found that the first charge amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee also found that the remaining charges constituted serious professional misconduct.
Cerys Jones, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf said: "The respondent demonstrated a pattern of behaviour in not responding, which was sustained and persistent. He asked for extensions of time but did not make good on his assurances that he would provide information. Due to the length of time during which the respondent failed to comply with the requests, as well as the proliferation of issues in respect of which he did not comply, the Committee was of the view that he demonstrated a wilful disregard of the role of the RCVS and the regulatory processes. This was particularly serious in light of the reliance which the RCVS places upon its members to cooperate with providing it with information relating to their professional practice which is relevant to the RCVS’s regulation of the profession.
"There was no harm caused to animals or the public, and the Committee acknowledged that practice circumstances have been made more difficult in general by the Covid-19 pandemic. However… the respondent’s failures to comply were serious and undermined the functions of the RCVS. The Committee was satisfied that the respondent’s failures fell so far below what was expected as to amount to serious professional misconduct."
Having found that all the charges amounted to serious professional misconduct the Committee then considered the most appropriate sanction for Mr Dobson. In terms of aggravating factors, the Committee considered Mr Dobson’s recklessness in failing to renew his registration and practising while it was lapsed, his pattern of not responding to the RCVS, the fact that financial gain was obtained as a result of misconduct, a wilful disregard to the RCVS and regulation, and limited evidence of insight. In mitigation the Committee considered Mr Dobson’s previous good character, a long and otherwise unblemished career, the fact that no animals were harmed and increased demands on time and processes due to Covid-19.
However, taking all of the information into account, the Committee decided that removal from the Register was the appropriate and proportionate sanction due to the sustained and prolonged nature of the misconduct.
Cerys Jones said: “The respondent demonstrated a wilful disregard of the role of the RCVS and the regulatory processes by way of his disgraceful conduct. In addition, his lack of engagement with the hearing process indicates to the Committee that he is not engaging with his regulator and, along with the limited insight and lack of remediation with respect to the disgraceful conduct, this demonstrates a lack of insight into the seriousness of his actions or their consequences.”
The Statutory Membership Examination must be taken by all individuals educated outside of the UK whose veterinary qualification is not recognised by the RCVS. Passing the exam allows them to join the UK Register, and practice as a veterinary surgeon in the UK.
The exam has existed in its current format for over 30 years, and the review was implemented to ensure the examination remains fit for purpose, and sits in line with international best-practice and the College’s current Day-one Competences.
The College says the review was also designed to make sure it is using the most appropriate means of assessment methods, to best prepare candidates for success, and to ensure candidates can work in the UK to the best of their ability.
The written examination will now consist of two parts; a clinical Multiple Choice Question (MCQ) paper (in a single best answer clinical vignette format) and an open book examination, which will be used to ascertain the candidate’s knowledge of the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct.
The Clinical, Practical Examination will now exist in the form of a multi-dimensional Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). This examination is set to measure a range of clinical, technical and professional skills including clinical reasoning, communication, professionalism, and ethical awareness. Following a tender process, Glasgow Veterinary School has been awarded the contract to host the OSCE examination for five years from 2019 to 2023.
RCVS Examinations Manager, Victoria Hedges, said: "The review of the Statutory Membership Examination has provided us with the opportunity to ensure that we continue to test the skills and knowledge needed to work effectively in a veterinary practice in the UK in a robust manner, and bring it in line with the final year examinations delivered at UK vet schools. In designing the examination, the RCVS has considered international best practice, in addition to approaches to regulatory examinations within both the veterinary and medical sectors."
A comprehensive handbook regarding this new examination will be available on the Statutory Membership Examination section of the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/statutory-membership-exam) shortly.
If you have any questions, please get in contact with Examinations Manager, Victoria Hedges: v.hedges@rcvs.org.uk
The RCVS is calling for its members to nominate veterinary surgeons and non-veterinary surgeons who merit the award of Honorary Associateship or Honorary Fellowship.
Honorary Associates are awarded annually to people, not necessarily vets, by reason of their special eminence in, or special service to, the veterinary profession. Council has agreed that these should only be people ineligible for election as Honorary Fellows.
Honorary Fellowships can be awarded to up to three veterinary surgeons in any year for their service to, or special eminence in, the cause of veterinary science. Nominees for Honorary Fellowships must be members of the RCVS and have been a member, or held a registrable qualification, for at least 20 years.
Nominations must be received by the President, Mr Peter Jinman, by Friday 3 September 2010. Members can obtain nomination forms from the RCVS Executive Office (0207 202 0761 or executiveoffice@rcvs.org.uk).
All nominations need to include the particular reasons why the honour/award should be conferred, along with supporting statements from two referees, at least one of whom must not be a working colleague of the person nominated.
Nominations will be considered at the meeting of the Nominations Committee on 14 October, and awards made at RCVS Day on 1 July 2011. Details of Honorary Fellowship and Honorary Associateship award holders can be found in the Register of Veterinary Surgeons, with the addition since 2 July 2010 of Dr Tony Lawrence and Professor Martin Shirley (Honorary Associates), and Professor Elizabeth Simpson and Professor Peter Roeder (Honorary Fellowships).
Vets who want to stand as election candidates must submit their nomination forms by 5pm on Wednesday 31st January 2024.
There are places for three elected candidates on Council.
This year, the RCVS has put together downloadable information packs for prospective candidates.
The pack explains the role of an RCVS Council member and the candidate nomination process, and contains the candidate nomination and candidate information forms.
The RCVS Council pack is available to download from rcvs.org.uk/vncouncil24.
Eleanor Ferguson, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for both elections, said: “RCVS-registered veterinary surgeons of all backgrounds, at all career stages, and with all levels of experience are eligible to stand in the elections.
"So, if you want to help shape the future of veterinary regulation and our Royal College initiatives and activities, please consider standing in next year’s elections.”
Veterinary surgeons who are interested in standing for RCVS Council and who have any further queries should contact Dawn Wiggins, RCVS Council Secretary, on d.wiggins@rcvs.org.uk
The survey was held between the 1st and 5th May and was sent to the 3,139 UK veterinary practices for which the RCVS holds a unique email address. In total it gathered 251 responses (a response rate of 8%) compared to the 532 responses to the initial survey conducted between 3rd and 7th April (a response rate of 17%).
The main changes compared to last month's survey were:
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO, said: "This latest survey has identified some positive trends in terms of a slight uptick in business, including turnover, and fewer incidences of staff having to take time off with COVID or COVID-like symptoms.
“I am glad to see that the framework we published in April has, so far as we can see, provided veterinary professionals with greater guidance and reassurance regarding the fact that if it is feasible to do something safely under social distancing guidelines, then they can go ahead, if they choose to.
"We left plenty of scope for veterinary professionals to use their clinical judgement as to what services actually offer, depending on their facilities, level of staffing, availability of protective equipment, local disease pressures and so on.
"However, it is also clear that we are, by no means, out of the woods and that veterinary businesses are still struggling financially, with some of them reporting a very acute impact of the coronavirus and the associated restrictions on their businesses.
“We will continue to monitor the situation via these regular surveys, with the next one planned for early June. I would urge as many practices as possible to continue to complete them, so that we can build up a stronger evidence-base on how veterinary businesses have been affected. This information is not only vital for our own policy decisions but also allows us to present a stronger case to the Government and other public bodies where we wish to influence the decisions they make that will impact the veterinary professions and businesses.”
The survey results can be read in full at www.rcvs.org.uk/coronavirus-resources.
Each charge related to fraudulent pet insurance claims that Mr Johnston had made for the treatment of animals when he was in practice in Banbridge, County Down, two of which were fictitious, and where he had arranged for the insurance claims to be diverted and paid into a personal bank account, rather than the practice’s bank account.
At an initial hearing, which concluded on April 2022, Mr Johnston had admitted all the charges against him as well as admitting that his conduct was dishonest and amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee was satisfied that his conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct, with Committee Chair Paul Morris saying: “The Committee has no hesitation in concluding that the respondent’s dishonest conduct will have severely undermined the confidence of the public in the veterinary profession and, further, that his conduct fell far short of the standards and conduct properly to be expected of a member of the veterinary profession.
"The Committee is satisfied that this conduct by the respondent brought the profession into disrepute.”
The proceedings were then adjourned to allow a psychiatric report and other mitigation to be prepared.
At its resumed hearing in November 2022 the Committee considered what sanction to impose in relation to Dr Johnston’s actions.
At this point, the Committee decided to postpone its decision on sanction for a period of two years on the condition that Dr Johnston enter into undertakings to the Committee including refraining from any form of gambling, subjecting himself to a close regime of support and supervision, and repaying some of the sums he had defrauded.
The hearing reconvened in October 2024 to decide on an appropriate sanction.
The Committee noted that Mr Johnston had complied with the undertakings and provided the Committee with the interim reports required of him.
He also continued with the therapeutic interventions and programmes specified, as well as implemented measures designed to minimise the risk of a relapse into gambling.
The Committee also noted that reports from the gambling support services, to which Mr Johnston had signed up, all spoke positively about his involvements and confirmed the progress he had achieved in managing his addiction.
The Committee also took into account a psychiatric report as well as evidence under oath from Mr Johnston’s wife who confirmed his compliance with the undertakings.
As a result, the Committee was satisfied that the prospects of a repeat of the conduct which led to the charges laid against Dr Johnston were now greatly reduced.
The Committee said it was less impressed with the evidence provided by Mr Johnston.
While he had largely complied with the letter of the undertakings he gave in 2022, it remained troubled by his apparent unwillingness or inability, on account of lack of effort, to fulfil the assurances previously given that he was in the process of changing his name to Johnston, from Fegan, on official documentation in order to be consistent with his legal name, when he had not done so.
The only formal name change in place was on the RCVS Register, and he had failed to alter his name on his driver’s licence, on his registration with the Veterinary Council of Ireland, his passport, bank accounts, and one of his email addresses.
As a result, the Committee did not find Dr Johnston to be an entirely satisfactory witness.
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Having made the progress that he has over the period since the commission of the charges found proved in 2019, the Committee considers that the imposition of a sanction of suspension on top of the period of postponement would be excessive, in the particular circumstances of this case.
“For the same reasons, as stated above, it is considered that it would be excessive now to impose a sanction of removal from the register.
“That process of reasoning has driven the Committee to the conclusion that the sanction of a reprimand and warning as to future conduct is what the facts and circumstances of this case call for.
"That is because the respondent can be under no illusion about the outcome were he to appear again before this Committee.
"A failure to take advantage of the exceptional course adopted by this Committee on this occasion would be regarded as a serious aggravating factor were he to appear before the Committee at any time in the future.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings
Vet Futures, the joint initiative by the RCVS and BVA to stimulate debate about the future of the profession, is running an essay competition with a prize of an all-expenses-paid trip to the London Vet Show (London Olympia, 19th-20th November).
To win, you need to submit an essay of 1000 words or less which outlines an idea that will transform the veterinary/veterinary nursing profession by 2030. The College suggests that entrants might might look at a new business model, a new approach to education, a technological innovation or perhaps a way that the working lives of those in the practice team could be improved.
Anyone with an interest in the veterinary profession can enter the competition, including veterinary surgeons, nurses, practice managers and students.
The entries will be judged by the Vet Futures Project Board, which includes the Presidents and Chief Executives of both the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and the British Veterinary Association.
Entries will be anonymised then scored on a range of criteria, including originality, potential impact for the future and realistic prospects of change. The winning entry will be placed in a time capsule, to be opened by the veterinary profession in 2030.
The closing date for entries is midnight on Monday 31 August 2015, and the winner will be notified on Monday 7 September 2015.
The full rules and details of how entries can be submitted can be found on www.vetfutures.org.uk/essaycomp.
Fifteen candidates stood in the 2026 election and 6,289 veterinary surgeons (15.8% of those eligible) cast a vote.
Voter turnout compares with 19% in 2025, 19.7% in 2024, 16.7% in 2023 and 18.6% in 2022.
The winning candidates were: Ian Battersby FRCVS with 2,205 votes, Neil Smith FRCVS with 1,620 votes and Lara Wilson MRCVS with 1,598 votes.
Their four-year terms will start at the RCVS Annual General Meeting on Friday, 3 July.
Clare Paget, RCVS Registrar and Returning Officer for the election, said: "Thank you to all of this year's candidates for taking the time and effort to put themselves forward for the election, and to all those who voted as well."
"We look forward to welcoming our three new Council members later this year."
www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote26
At the roundtable, Liz Barton MRCVS, Head of Communications at Vet.CT, spoke about the application of AI in clinical practice, including in preventative medicine, diagnostics, treatment and prognostics.
Liz highlighted how the use of AI tools in clinical practice for tasks such as pattern recognition had led to many unforeseen and unexpected benefits, for example by picking up things that humans may not.
Dr P-J Noble, Senior Lecturer in Small Animal Science at the University of Liverpool, explained how AI tools had proven useful in processing, assessing and annotating qualitative data gathered through the university's Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network (SAVSNET) once they were programmed to recognise certain patterns, saving lots of research time and costs.
Dr Chris Trace MRCVS, Head of Digital Learning at the University of Surrey, spoke about AI use in higher education and how it has already started to be used beneficially both as a teaching and learning aid, as well as for assessment and feedback.
In the afternoon session, groups of delegates were asked to discuss practical questions over AI use in the veterinary professions and how it might be regulated.
There were discussions on how to help vet and VN students make the most of AI in learning and assessment, responsible use of AI in clinical settings, the risks of not using AI, how veterinary professionals can work with animal owners and keepers to ensure the safe and productive use of AI, and whether AI-led devices should be regulated.
Lizzie said: “This was a really positive and exciting event that involved a heady mix of trepidation over the risks and implications of AI now and into the future, and optimism over the beneficial impact it could have for education, diagnosis, treatment and patient outcomes.
"The discussions have certainly given us at the College a lot of food for thought on how we can put in place guardrails and guidelines on the appropriate use of AI in the veterinary sector.
“This is an area of technology that is evolving so rapidly that it would not be effective for us to put in place specific guidance for the use of AI tools, but instead we will be looking at how we can regulate the use of AI in the round and ensure our principles are sufficiently future-proofed to keep up with the pace of change.
“Any regulation will start with first principles, such as transparency and honesty around the use of AI in veterinary practice, the minimisation of potential risks, and the continuing importance of professional accountability for decision-making, even where such decisions may have been heavily influenced by the use of AI tools and AI-generated data.”
The input gathered from the roundtable will now be considered by a range of RCVS committees over the coming months.
A full report of the event will be published this summer.
Professor Sandy Trees has been invested as the new President of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons during RCVS Day, held on 3rd July.
Sandy is an Edinburgh graduate, qualifying from the Dick Vet in 1969. After graduation, he undertook a mixture of research posts at home and overseas, plus a spell in general practice, before completing his PhD in 1976, also at Edinburgh. He then spent some time in the animal health industry before moving into academia in the early 1980s, starting as a lecturer in veterinary parasitology in Liverpool University's Faculty of Veterinary Science, based in the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine. He was awarded a personal chair in veterinary parasitology and became Head of the Parasite and Vector Biology Division in 1994. Sandy held the post of Dean of Faculty from 2001 until 2008, and still teaches BVSc, MSc and PhD students.
Sandy's broad veterinary political experience includes spells on the BVA's Veterinary Policy Group and Education Group, President of the Association of Veterinary Teachers and Research Workers, Vice-President of the European College of Veterinary Parasitology and Chairman of the Heads of Veterinary Schools. Serving on RCVS Council since 2000 as one of the Liverpool veterinary faculty's appointed members, Sandy has been a member of the Education Policy and Specialisation, Planning and Resources, and Preliminary Investigation Committees.
RCVS Day also brought other changes to the RCVS Officer team: Jill Nute, outgoing President, became Senior Vice-President, Peter Jinman took up the role of Junior Vice-President, and Dr Jerry Davies was confirmed as Treasurer for another year.
Dr Bob Moore stood down as Senior Vice-President, with Jill Nute commenting that: "Bob has been an extremely valued member of the Officer Team and I would like to express my grateful thanks for the unstinting support he has given me during my term as President."
Retiring Council members included David Harding, Nigel Swayne and Brian Jennings, a Privy Council appointee.
As part of the AGM, newly-elected Council members Chris Tufnell and Chris Gray were welcomed. It was also announced that Professor Stephen May had been appointed for a further year by the Royal Veterinary College, Professor Stuart Reid had been appointed for a further four-year term by the University of Glasgow, and likewise Caroline Freedman by the University of Edinburgh. Dr Frank Taylor, whose role as Head of Bristol Veterinary School is due to conclude at the end of the month, will stay on Council until a successor is appointed.
The President then made her outgoing address, in which she described how she had been keen during her presidential year to ensure that the College is "open, approachable, accountable and transparent," citing the work of the Corporate Governance Group as a good example of activities to this end: "Under the guidance of Sir Anthony Holland, Chairman of the Group, we have robust procedures in place for managing conflicts of interest and have put in place arrangements to keep corporate governance under regular review," she said.
Discussing the activities of the College during the year, she made mention of work with the Veterinary Medicines Directorate to produce the Register of Veterinary Practice Premises and with the Office of Fair Trading regarding monitoring the reintroduction of prescription charges. She also touched on the review of the Practice Standards Scheme and the work of the 24/7 Working Party. She conceded that the College faced a challenge with regards to out-of-hours cover, which the majority of vets questioned in a recent survey would like to maintain: "The question is, how can this be achieved within the law [Working Time Regulations] and without a hike in charges that might, perversely, have a negative effect on animal welfare by reducing take-up of veterinary services?" she asked.
Finally, Jill paid tribute to the hard work of College and Trust staff, Council members and her fellow Officers: "One thing you learn as President is that you are just part of the bigger picture and things can only be achieved with the support and collaboration of those across the profession."
Incoming President Sandy Trees described Jill Nute as having "presided over the College with utter fairness and even handedness, working incredibly hard for the interests of the College and its members, certainly delivering on your aim for openness and accessibility". He looked forward to his own presidency with "honour, excitement and trepidation".
Richard was elected to RCVS Council in 2020, having previously served as an elected member from 2008 to 2016.
Over the years, he has also been a significant and valued contributor to VetSurgeon.org, and his insight will be missed.
RCVS President Mandisa Greene said: “We thank Richard for his service to the RCVS over the past year and in his previous terms. We particularly thank him for his contribution to a number of committees he has served on during both his periods on Council including the Disciplinary, Finance & Resources and Preliminary Investigation Committees. We wish him all the best for the future.”
Professor Stephen May has now taken up the remainder of Richard’s term on Council, to July 2024, as he received the next largest amount of votes in the 2020 RCVS Council election.
Two vacancies have arisen for veterinary surgeons to join the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' Veterinary Nurses Council.
The positions, which are open to veterinary surgeons not currently serving on RCVS Council, would be particularly well suited to those veterinary surgeons who have an interest in the nursing profession and some experience of working with nurses. However, applicants need not necessarily be politically involved with the profession at this point.
VN Council Chairman Liz Branscombe said: "Veterinary nurses play a vital role in the practice team and, with the opening of the non-statutory Register in 2007, the VN profession is now recognising its responsibilities in terms of maintaining professional standards, skills and competence.
"Now, more than ever, it is important that vets from all sectors of the profession take the time to get involved with the regulation and development of the role of the veterinary nurse."
Applications are invited from all veterinary surgeons, although those with some experience of working with veterinary nurses would be most relevant.
The four-year posts will require an annual time commitment of approximately six to ten days.
For an application pack, please contact Annette Amato, Deputy Head of Veterinary Nursing, on 020 7202 0713 or a.amato@rcvs.org.uk. The deadline for the receipt by RCVS of completed application packs is 30 April 2011.
The RCVS has announced the results of the 2015 RCVS Council and Veterinary Nurses (VN) Council elections.
Turnouts in both elections rose this year, with 4,838 veterinary surgeons (18.1%) and 1,379 veterinary nurses (11%) voting, which compares to 4,137 (16.1%) and 1,157 (10%) in 2014. The College says these represent the highest numbers of vets and VNs ever to vote in RCVS elections, noting however that there are more vets and veterinary nurses on the Registers. Average turnouts over the past ten years are 17.4% (4051 veterinary voters) and 9% (833 VN voters).
Current members Niall Connell and Lynne Hill were returned to two of the six available seats on RCVS Council, with 2,575 votes and 1,889 votes respectively (the four other current members of Council eligible for re-election will all be retiring this year). Peter Robinson (2,308 votes) was elected again, having previously served on Council in 2013/14.
Joining Council for the first time will be Timothy Greet (2,550 votes), Joanna Dyer (2,383 votes) and Katherine Richards (1,905 votes).
Disappointing news, however, for the RMB brigade this year: Tom Lonsdale scored 374 votes, down 13.5% on 2014, despite the increasing number of voters.
The two available places on VN Council were taken by new member Lucy Bellwood (914 votes) and existing member and Vice-Chair, Elizabeth Cox (630 votes).
Turnouts in both elections rose this year, with 4,838 veterinary surgeons (18.1%) and 1,379 veterinary nurses (11%) voting, which compares to 4,137 (16.1%) and 1,157 (10%) in 2014. These represent the highest numbers of vets and VNs ever to vote in RCVS elections, although there are increasing numbers of vets and veterinary nurses on the Registers. Average turnouts over the past ten years are 17.4% (4051 veterinary voters) and 9% (833 VN voters).
RCVS Registrar Gordon Hockey, said: "My sincere thanks to all those who stood for election this year and to all those who voted, and many congratulations to the successful candidates. Once again we have an excellent mix of people joining Council, who will be able to bring a diverse range of skills and experience to Council discussions and activities. I very much look forward to welcoming them to Council at our AGM in July."
Chair of VN Council Kathy Kissick, said: "It's encouraging that voter numbers have risen slightly in this year's election, especially in such an auspicious year where the introduction of the new Royal Charter for the RCVS means that we are now formally regulated by the College and recognised as true professionals in our own right. My congratulations to both Lucy and Liz on their success."
In addition to their usual written biographies and manifesto statements, all candidates produced a 'Quiz the candidates' video this year, where they answered questions put to them directly by fellow members of the professions. Still available to watch via the RCVS website and YouTube channel, the 11 RCVS Council candidate videos have been viewed 2,967 times, and the three VN Council candidate videos 509 times.
Once again veterinary surgeons and VNs could cast their votes by post or online, with the former remaining the more popular method. A higher proportion of veterinary surgeons (30%) voted online than did veterinary nurses (23%).
The 2015 RCVS and VN Council elections were run on behalf of the RCVS by Electoral Reform Services.
The Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) has launched a consultation on reforming the governance arrangements of the RCVS.
The consultation follows a period of discussions between the RCVS and Defra about how the College might best modernise Council.
The consultation gives the public and profession the opportunity to have their say on what reforms would best prepare the College for the future. It discusses the appropriate size and composition of Council, including the proportion of elected members, how veterinary schools should be represented, increasing lay membership, and ensuring appropriate veterinary nurse representation. It also examines how flexibility can be built into the reforms in case of future changes, such as the possibility of new categories of associate. Responses to the consultation will inform the College’s work with Defra to determine the precise details of any new governance arrangements.
The College says any reform should meet its unique requirements as a Royal College that regulates and the criteria already agreed by the College: Council’s decision-making role would be strengthened, for instance, by increasing the number of Council meetings per year. This would reduce or remove the need for a separate Operational Board in order that the CEO reports directly to Council.
Any reforms also need to ensure that Council has sufficient members to populate the College’s committees and Presidential team, and follow the government’s five principles of better regulation, by being proportionate, consistent, accountable, transparent and targeted.
RCVS President Bradley Viner (pictured top right) said “I am delighted that Defra is consulting on RCVS governance and the minister has the full backing of RCVS Council in so doing. This consultation is an opportunity to hear the voice of the profession and the public about an appropriate structure and oversight of the RCVS, reflecting the uniqueness of being a Royal College that regulates. Consulting on this important issue is in keeping with our desire to become first rate in what we do, building on other measures to modernise and improve the workings of the College.”
From this summer, all new veterinary graduates have had to be enrolled on the VetGDP when they start their first job as a qualified vet. This means that veterinary practices and other workplaces wishing to employ new veterinary graduates will need to become, or be working towards becoming, an RCVS-Approved Graduate Development Practice or Workplace. To date, over 1,800 VetGDP Advisers around the UK have registered for the training to help develop their new graduate colleagues.
All new veterinary graduates and their VetGDP Advisers will be able to use the new e-portfolio platform to record and monitor the graduate’s progress as they work through the programme.
Dr Linda Prescott-Clements (pictured right), RCVS Director of Education, said: “We recognise how important it is to support new veterinary graduates as much as possible during their first job as a fully-qualified veterinary surgeon. The transition from study to work can be a daunting one, and we wanted to create a resource that would help new graduates record and reflect on their journey through the programme and provide a space for the VetGDP Adviser to monitor and support their graduate as they progress.
“We believe the VetGDP programme will have a positive impact on graduates’ development and their confidence during their first role. The new e-portfolio will be a key resource for employers to help them support the professional development of the newest cohort of veterinary professionals.”
The RCVS will be holding two online workshops to provide VetGDP Advisers and veterinary graduates with support and advice about using the e-portfolio. The workshop dates and times are:
Further information and the online booking form can be found at https://www.rcvs.org.uk/vetgdpworkshops.
Some graduates may have completed forms to record their activities and progress as part of the VetGDP platform launch interim measures provided earlier this summer. Anyone who has manually completed any forms is encouraged to get in touch with the VetGDP team by emailing vetgdp@rcvs.org.uk who will be able to help transfer the data onto the e-portfolio if required.
Further information about becoming an RCVS-Approved Graduate Development Practice or Workplace can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/vetgdp
The survey is the second stage of a three stage review recommended to RCVS Council by the College’s Standards Committee in 2019, after it looked at the implications of new technologies for both animal welfare and veterinary regulation.
The main areas under consideration include the provision of 24/7 emergency cover and the interpretation and application of an animal being under the care of a veterinary surgeon. The review also encompasses remote consulting.
In stage one of the review, the RCVS commissioned a research agency to conduct a series of focus group discussions with veterinary professionals working in a variety of roles and sectors. The information gleaned from the discussions was then used to develop the questions for this survey.
The survey will ask veterinary professionals to reflect on what, for them, should underpin good regulations and guidelines for practice.
It will then ask respondents how these principles should be applied in particular situations relating to 24/7 emergency cover and 'under care' before inviting their views on how they would like regulations on these two areas to deal with any tensions between different desirable regulatory aims.
The survey results will be used to help produce any changes to the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct and its supporting guidance concerning ‘under care’ and the provision of 24/7 emergency cover, which will then be put out for full public consultation later this year.
Chair of the RCVS Standards Committee, Dr Melissa Donald, said: “This review addresses fundamental questions about how we should continue to interpret ‘under care’ in a profession, and a society, that is largely unrecognisable to the one that first defined the term, and, at the same time, how we can continue to provide 24/7 emergency cover for those animals under our care.
“The original Vet Futures report also emphasised the impact that technological advances may have on the veterinary professions, so we must ensure we have in place a regulatory framework that gives consideration to these potential changes whilst ensuring animal health and welfare remain at its heart.
“These are challenging but hugely important questions on which we are hoping to receive as much feedback as possible. I do understand the huge pressures my vet and vet nurse colleagues continue to work under at the moment, so would like to thank them in advance for taking a little time out of their busy days to send us their views.”
The survey will open on Wednesday, 19th May 2021 for all UK-based veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses.
All responses will be used and reported anonymously, so respondents will not be identified.
The survey will be open for four weeks, closing at 5pm on Wednesday, 16 June 2021.
It should take 15-20 minutes to complete, but can be returned to and completed in stages if preferred.
Further background information about the Under Care Review is available at www.rcvs.org.uk/undercare.
By becoming a Stonewall Diversity Champion, the RCVS joins over 750 other organisations who are striving to create workplaces that are equal, inclusive and accepting.
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS Deputy CEO and Director of the Mind Matters Initiative, said: "We are delighted to be working with Stonewall and will benefit greatly from its expertise and energy. These may not be easy issues to tackle but we hope that this tie-up with Stonewall will, in itself, send a positive message of our intent to take the issues seriously and make the RCVS, and the veterinary profession at large, as inclusive as possible.
"There are three aspects to the work we plan: first, to ensure the RCVS is a welcoming and accepting employer by integrating inclusion and diversity into all aspects of our organisation; second, to review our policies and procedures around areas such as registration, to make sure that they take account of the diversity within the veterinary profession; and, finally, through our Mind Matters Initiative, we aim to work with our partners to develop inclusive workplaces throughout the veterinary profession. The ability to be oneself in the workplace has a big impact on mental health and wellbeing so it’s a core issue for Mind Matters."
The College says that the move to link up with Stonewall came about as a result of discussions with Mat Hennessey, President of the British Veterinary Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender group, who said: "We are extremely excited about the collaboration between the RCVS and Stonewall, and feel this positive move to culture equality and inclusivity will benefit the profession as a whole. Stonewall is the largest LGBT+ charity in the UK and Europe and thus has a wealth of knowledge and resources relating to LGBT+ issues. We look forward to continuing to work with both parties during this important venture."
Abby Crawford, Public Sector Client Manager at Stonewall, said: "We know that LGBT staff can face specific barriers in the workplace and it’s great that the RCVS has taken a strong commitment to LGBT equality in this way. We look forward to working with them to create more inclusive environments for their staff and service users – working towards a world where all lesbian, gay, bi and trans people are accepted without exception."
Applications are now open for new members to join the RCVS Preliminary Investigation and Disciplinary Committees.
This is the first time that non-Council members have been able to sit on these two key committees, and follows the approval of a Legislative Reform Order (LRO) to the Veterinary Surgeons Act, which comes into force on 6 April 2013.
Under the new legislation, the two statutory committees will move through a transition period until they completely comprise independently-appointed non-Council members, by July 2015.
This move will provide regulation in line with modern practice, by ensuring that the same group of people is not responsible for setting the rules, investigating complaints and adjudication, and by bringing lay people formally into the Preliminary Investigation Committee.
The LRO will also allow the RCVS to increase the pool of people available to investigate complaints and sit on disciplinary hearings, reducing the workload on the individual Committee members whose primary appointment is to RCVS Council.
This first recruitment phase seeks:
RCVS President, Jacqui Molyneux said: "It's exciting that we can now seek to appoint non-Council members to the two committees involved in our disciplinary system - a breakthrough that has taken a long time to achieve.
"We are interested to hear from veterinary surgeons and lay people who are keen to contribute to the public good and support us in our regulatory role. It's an excellent opportunity to be part of the next chapter of the RCVS, as we become a more modern and effective regulator."
The recruitment process is being handled by Thewlis Graham Associates and details can be found at www.thewlisgraham.com. The selection committee will comprise Sir Michael Buckley, Christopher Laurence MBE QVRM TD BVSc MRCVS and Dr Joan Martin MA FCOT.
The closing deadline for applications is 5pm on Monday 4 March 2013.
The Disciplinary Committee made its decision last Friday, following an adjournment of the case, which was initially heard in May of this year.
There were three heads of charge against Mr Hough:
The Committee found the majority of the first head of charge not proven, with the exception of the charges that Mr Hough failed to provide and ensure adequate overnight care for Mya and that it was inappropriate and unreasonable for him to plan for the wound management to be undertaken by Mya’s owners following the second procedure on 21 May 2014.
Regarding the second head of charge, the Committee found it proven that Mr Hough did fail to provide information about post-operative care and out-of-hours cover details to Mya’s owners. However it found Mr Hough’s failure to communicate with the owners regarding treatment options and to provide them with adequate information as to Mya’s post-operative condition not proven.
The third head of charge in its entirety was admitted and found proven.
The Committee also found that those charges that were found proven amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect with the exception of Mr Hough’s failure to provide and/or ensure adequate overnight care and his failure to failure to provide out-of-hours details to Mya’s owners.
In deciding on an appropriate sanction, the Committee expressed significant concerns over Mr Hough’s treatment of Mya, in particular his "failure to devise and implement proper and sufficient procedures to ensure that this dog was not released to owners unless it was safe for her to be released and... that the owners were fully advised as to what was required of them."
The Committee felt that Mr Hough had given "insufficient attention" to Mya’s post-operative care but did accept that the conduct represented a single incident. During the course of the hearing the Committee also heard mitigating evidence given on behalf of Mr Hough, with a number of written testimonials as well as witness evidence in support of his clinical expertise and surgical skills.
The Committee accepted that Mr Hough had taken to heart the lessons to be learnt from the charges against him and had implemented a number of written protocols to prevent recurrence of the shortcomings in his treatment of Mya. Furthermore, the Committee also found that Mr Hough had demonstrated insight into the conduct found against him and that he had apologised for the disparaging remarks he made about other veterinary practitioners.
Alistair Barr, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "In short, the Committee is persuaded that Mr Hough has made a good start in putting in place systems to ensure that the interests and welfare of the animals treated at his practice surgeries are not discharged from care until they are fully ready to be discharged and that the owners of such animals will, in future, be fully informed of what might be asked and required of them when their animals are returned into their care after surgery."
He added: "There are no other areas of [Mr Hough’s] professional practices which appear to the Committee to call for improvements. Accordingly, the Committee is persuaded on this evidence that there is reason to believe that the lessons which Mr Hough needed to learn have been learnt and concludes, therefore, that the sanction of a formal and solemn reprimand adequately meets the needs of the public interest in, and requirements of, this particular case. Mya did make a full recovery from her extensive surgery but she and her owners deserved better post-surgery advice and support."
The webinar, ‘Dealing with Difficult Situations’ will take place on Tuesday 7th December at 7.15pm and will feature veterinary surgeons who themselves recently joined the Register giving examples of challenging situations they faced, how they dealt with them, what they learned and how it changed the way they practise.
Gemma Kingswell, RCVS Head of Legal Services (Standards), said: "We recognise that starting in your first job as a veterinary surgeon is very exciting, but that the first few months in practice can be daunting too as you encounter challenging situations for the first time.
“This webinar aims not only to provide some practical guidance on how to deal with difficult situations in a pragmatic way should they arise, but also provide some reassurance that you are not alone in facing them.
"The webinar will also explore how the speakers have reflected on the difficult circumstances they have encountered in order to build up the knowledge, confidence and resilience to deal with similar situations in the future.”
Among those sharing the situations they’ve encountered are: Izzy Hocking, Hannah Prestwood and Bolu Eso.
They will be covering topics including the provision of pragmatic care, how to have difficult conversations with clients and how to handle client confidentiality.
Gemma will then explore the scenarios further in relation to the Code of Professional Conduct and what it says about how best to handle such difficult situations.
To sign up to the webinar visit: www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/events/difficult-situations.
Those who are interested in attending can also submit questions about the Code and supporting guidance in advance via the Eventbrite registration page.
There will also be opportunities to ask questions throughout the event.
For those who aren’t able to make it on the day, a recording of the webinar will be made available shortly afterwards via the RCVS website.
She said: “My theme will be focussed on recruitment and particularly widening participation, as one of the three themes of the RCVS Workforce Action Plan.
"I want to get out during my presidential year and talk to school children and teachers, especially head teachers at their conferences, to make them aware of the opportunities that are available to a veterinary science graduate.
“I want to continue to work with the Veterinary Schools Council’s Widening Participation Vet Schools Network to make school children from all backgrounds aware, whether they are from a large, single-sex private school, or a mixed-faith inner-city comprehensive, that veterinary science is accessible to them.
“A veterinary science degree equips graduates with the appropriate skillset to follow a myriad of different career paths.
"For example, in clinical practice caring for people’s beloved pets or working with farmers to produce high-welfare food in an economical and sustainable way. Not to mention groundbreaking research into human and animal diseases, public health to help safeguard food security, the pharmaceutical industry to develop new and innovative treatments, and the armed forces to maintain the health and welfare of military working animals. I could go on.
“As professions, and this means not just veterinary surgeons but veterinary nurses, we need to get out there and sell ourselves to the wider public.
"We have made a start, but we need to become more inclusive and diverse.
"We need to do some myth-busting about the real requirements needed to be a vet or vet nurse.
"There is no doubt you do need to have good A levels to study veterinary medicine, but, beyond that, bright students from any background can join our professions.
"You can be a veterinary surgeon or veterinary nurse if you are black or white; Muslim or Christian; and from any socioeconomic background.”
Sue's speech is available to read in full at www.rcvs.org.uk/features.
Mr Ghinescu faced three charges:
Mr Ghinescu admitted the facts of charges 1 and 2 but denied that this rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary surgeon, although Dr Ghinescu has had the status of a non-practising Member of the RCVS since May 2021.
Regarding Charge 3, Mr Ghinescu said that the failure to declare the conviction had been a genuine misunderstanding about whether he needed to declare a driving conviction as part of his annual renewal.
The Committee found that while his position was ‘plainly unreasonable of him and wrong’, it could not be sure beyond all reasonable doubt that his mistaken beliefs were genuine or not – therefore it found it not proven that he had been dishonest.
Nevertheless, it found that Mr Ghinescu had been misleading by failing to declare his convictions, even if unintentionally.
Having found Charges 1, 2 and part of Charge 3 proven, the Committee considered Mr Ghinescu’s fitness to practise, taking into account the part of the Code of Professional Conduct that says veterinary surgeons ‘must not engage in any activity or behaviour that would be likely to bring the profession into disrepute or undermine public confidence in the profession.’
It found that the convictions outlined in Charges 1 and 2 rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary surgeon and that whilst Charge 3 demonstrated carelessness, it did not amount to serious professional misconduct.
Mitigating factors included having had no previous disciplinary history with the RCVS, admissions at both court and to the College and developing insight into his behaviour, with an acceptance he had acted shamefully and had no mitigation for his behaviour.
Hilary Lloyd, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee was of the view that the nature and seriousness of Mr Ghinescu’s behaviour, which led to the convictions, particularly the assault on his wife, was fundamentally incompatible with being registered as a veterinary surgeon.
"They are clearly serious offences as reflected in the prison sentence Mr Ghinescu was required to serve.
“There were two separate assaults on [his wife], one in the car and then a prolonged attack in the house, involving repeated punches to the face and kicks to the body, followed by threats to kill.
"The Committee considered this to be disgraceful conduct of the most grievous and reprehensible kind.
“The conduct represented a serious departure from professional standards; it was inexplicable, abhorrent behaviour, resulting in injuries to his wife.
"In light of these conclusions, the Committee decided that the only appropriate and proportionate sanction in this case was removal from the Register.”
Mr Ghinescu has 28 days from being informed of his removal from the Register to appeal the Committee’s decision.
www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
The College says that the course is suitable for veterinary surgeons who:
The course does not offer clinical training, but the College says it will help vets identify areas for improvement and support them in building confidence and competence.
It also offers guidance on wellbeing and mentorship.
The snappily job titled Tash Goodwin Roberts, RCVS Projects Implementation Manager in the Advancement of the Professions Team, said: "As part of our commitment to supporting the workforce ambitions this is a course that can support not just the returning vets but also offers insight to those who will be supporting them.
"Vets who have taken career breaks have often gained a huge wealth of skills which, combined with their veterinary training, makes them assets to their new teams and the professions.
“The course covers key topics to bring vets up to date with many of the professional aspects of working as a vet and also includes a range of additional content to support their journey, such as practical tips for returning, important recent updates on prescribing, as well as reflective practice and lifelong learning.
"The course also contains video interviews with vets who have already returned, offering valuable insights into how they approached their journey.
The course takes around three hours to complete.
https://academy.rcvs.org.uk