The RCVS has announcing the candidates standing in the 2019 RCVS Council elections.

There are nine candidates standing in this year’s RCVS Council election, including five existing Council members eligible for re-election and four candidates not currently on Council. They are: 

• Dr Linda Belton MRCVS

• Dr Niall Connell MRCVS

• Mr John C Davies MRCVS

• Dr Joanna (Jo) Dyer MRCVS

• Professor Timothy (Tim) Greet FRCVS

• Professor John Innes FRCVS

• Dr Thomas (Tom) Lonsdale MRCVS

• Dr Katherine (Kate) Richards MRCVS

• Mr Peter Robinson MRCVS

Following the changes made to the College’s governance arrangements last year, after a Legislative Reform Order changing the size and composition of Council was passed by Parliament, there will be only three elected places available for the candidates, as opposed to six in the years prior to the governance changes.

Ballot papers and candidates' details are due to be posted and emailed to all veterinary surgeons eligible to vote during the week commencing 25 March, and all votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday 26 April 2019. 

In order to give the electorate a better idea of why each candidate is standing and ask them for their views on particular issues, this year the College is again inviting members of the profession to 'Quiz the candidates' by putting their questions directly to the candidates. Each candidate will be invited to choose two questions to answer from all those received, and produce a video recording of their answers.

Recordings will be published on the RCVS website and YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos) on the week the election commences.

The biographies and statements for each candidate in the RCVS Council election can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote19. 

Vets should email their question (NB only one per person) to vetvote19@rcvs.org.uk or send it to the College’s Twitter account @theRCVS using the hashtag #vetvote19 by midday on Monday 4 March 2019.

Lucy Evans and Jamie Hollis, who work in the RCVS Professional Conduct Department, will join RCVS Trust Director Cherry Bushell to raise funds in the British 10K London Run on 12 July.

None of the three runners have run any kind of race since their school sports days - and are appealing for support as they aim to raise at least £300 each for the Trust. 

To sponsor a runner, you can log onto http://www.justgiving.com/rcvstrust and, if you are a UK tax-payer, this also means the Trust gets your tax back. Or, if you prefer to send a cheque, sponsorship forms are available from info@rcvstrust.org.uk or 020 7202 0743.

Lucy said: "The RCVS Trust is a great charity which supports veterinary education and has specialist library and information services for vets and VNs to use. Small charities like the Trust can get overlooked in big fundraising events so I'm glad to be able to help out - even if the thought of running 10K is a bit daunting!"

The race will be broadcast through the British 10K London Run website: http://www.thebritish10klondon.co.uk/.

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed an application to be restored to the Register of Veterinary Surgeons from a former Kent-based veterinary surgeon, Warwick Seymour-Hamilton.

Mr Seymour-Hamilton was originally removed from the Register in June 1994 for failing to maintain his equipment and facilities such that it evidenced a total disregard of basic hygiene and care for animals, thereby bringing the profession into disrepute.

The restoration hearing on Friday 18 March was Mr Seymour-Hamilton’s fourth application for restoration, with previous applications being submitted but refused in July 1995, June 2010 and January 2015. However, as the Committee made its decision on the merits of the case before it, those previous applications were not admitted as relevant to its decision.

Mr Seymour-Hamilton told the Committee that he currently works as a herbalist and naturopath for humans and wished to be restored to the Register so he could include animals in his research. He had completed a course in herbal and naturopathic medicine at the College of Naturopathic Medicine in Dublin in 2010, and told the Committee that he believed that being restored to the Register would lend credence to his endeavours to secure funding and other support. He stated that he did not intend to work again in a veterinary practice.

However, the Committee rejected his application on a number of grounds, including the impact on animal welfare should Mr Seymour-Hamilton be restored to the Register; the length of time he had been off the Register and the fact that he was therefore not up-to-date with contemporary veterinary practice and professional conduct; and that his efforts to keep up-to-date in terms of knowledge, skills and developments in practice were insufficient.

Judith Webb, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee is concerned about the length of time that has passed since he last practised and the paucity of the evidence he has provided to establish that, if permitted to return to practice, he would be able to attain the professional standards required of a modern veterinary practitioner, either as regards surgical capabilities/competence or as regards his knowledge of currently available veterinary medicines."

She added: "This Committee’s obligations and duties are to see that the interests of animal welfare are properly protected by ensuring that only those who are properly trained, knowledgeable and experienced are permitted to treat animals and that public confidence in the standards of the profession are maintained. The risks attendant on a restoration of this applicant to the Register are, in the judgement of this Committee, plain and obvious. Accordingly, this application is refused."

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons has refused to release the McKelvey Report in full, despite Freedom of Information requests made by VetSurgeon.org and others.

According to the College, it had always been the intention of RCVS Officers that the full report, which considered the building works in the Lower Ground Floor of the RCVS offices in Belgravia House, and the implementation of a new database, would be published.

However, on the advice of solicitors (Penningtons), only the recommendations of the Report were published initially, in November.

This publication followed discussion of the full report (one sentence was redacted on legal advice) by RCVS Council on 3 November.

Freedom of Information requests for the full report were then received by the College, so further, external senior legal advice was sought.

This advice, from Counsel, confirmed the original view from solicitors that it would be inappropriate to publish the report in full because it includes personal data, which ought not to be made public, under the Data Protection Act.

The College claims the meat of the report is in the recommendations, which account for approximately 50% of the report, and which are being taken forward by Officers and RCVS Council, with plans to put an Audit and Risk Committee in place taking priority.

The recommendations of the report, which were adopted by Council, were published online on 11 November and are available to download from the 'Related documents' box, above right.

A quick survey of VetSurgeon members¹ has found that of those that didn't vote in the 2011 council elections, 37.9% 'did not believe that voting in the RCVS elections will have any impact on my working life'

However, as Wynne Richards pointed out, decisions made by the RCVS, or which have involved the RCVS have had a seismic impact on the profession over the years, things like:

• Corporate practice
• Lay people being allowed to own practices
• Increased responsibility for Veterinary Nurses (and, indeed, the ability to call them 'Nurses')
• Introduction of Certificates
• Introduction of Diplomas
• Practices being allowed to advertise

... and so on, and so on.

So perhaps the issue is not whether or not the College is relevant to the working lives of its members. Clearly it is. More to the point, the College and its Councillors need to find ways to engage more with the profession and better demonstrate how the decisions it takes on the issues of the day will impact on its members.

This message is further hammered home by the 26% of voters who didn't vote because they: 'considered the candidates' manifestos / forum posts, but did not feel that any of the candidates deserved my vote'. Again, if the councillors had concentrated on explaining why their work would make a difference, perhaps that number could have been improved.

Of the remainder, 21% 'forgot', 8.7% 'didn't have the time to consider who to vote for, and vote', 4.9% gave other reasons. Again, all things which might be improved if members felt that the RCVS was relevant to their working lives.

1% 'weren't aware that the elections were taking place'.

One wonders if that 1% knows that Clement Attlee is no longer the Prime Minister.

^1. VetSurgeon Poll 6th May - 8th August 2011. 103 respondents.

Ceredigion veterinary surgeon Robert Alun Merfyn Evans has been suspended from the Register for six months by the RCVS Disciplinary Committee after he admitted to misconduct relating to tuberculin testing for cattle he owned and failing to register the births and deaths of cattle.

Mr Evans appeared before the Committee on the 11th February, when he admitted the two heads of charge of misconduct against him.

The first head of charge related to the fact that, between 24 June and 29 June 2013, he deliberately failed to bring to attention of Wyn Lewis MRCVS, an Official Veterinarian (OV) and fellow director of Mr Evans’ practice in Cardigan, the cattle on his farm requiring intradermal comparative tuberculin tests; that he tested certain of the cattle himself despite not being the OV for those tests and having a conflict of interest; and that he provided inaccurate and incomplete information to his practice for the completion of a report on the testing to be sent to the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency (AHVLA). This misconduct was then repeated the following year between 19 June and 1 August 2014.

The second head of charge against Mr Evans related to breaches of the Cattle Identification (Wales) Regulations 2007 between 4 July 2005 and 20 June 2014, namely the fact that he failed to register the birth of five calves and the death of nine cows. These were accepted as being specimen charges reflecting a much larger total number of breaches over the whole nine year period.

Mr Evans’ misconduct first came to light when a late return was sent to the AHVLA in August 2014 regarding the TB testing of 51 live animals on his farm in June 2014. When the report was scrutinised the AHVLA noticed that 26 animals shown on the return as dead were still registered, while 20 animals that were tested were not registered. When the AHVLA investigated, Mr Evans immediately admitted that he had misled Mr Lewis on two occasions and carried out his own testing despite not being the OV.

The Committee heard that he did this because he did not want it to be found out that he had unregistered cattle on his farm. Regarding the unregistered cattle, the Committee heard that this stemmed from a mistake made by Mr Evans in 2005 or 2006 whereby he mislaid a batch of around nine bovine passport application forms sent to him to register the birth of calves on his farm, a legal requirement for the purposes of animal health, disease control and safeguarding the food chain.

As a result of poor IT skills and being profoundly deaf, Mr Evans felt unable to seek support online or by telephone, was too embarrassed to tell others and, furthermore, felt that it was impossible to correct his mistake without being in breach of the law. So, for a period of nine or 10 years, he failed to register the birth of calves on his farm. His failure to register the deaths of cattle, was also caused by administrative failings. His breaches of the cattle registration regulations were subject to criminal proceedings and on 14 October 2015 he plead guilty at Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire Magistrates Court  to 14 offences for which he was given a conditional discharge for 18 months and ordered to pay costs of £1,000.

The Committee considered that a suspension from the Register would be in line with the seriousness of the charges against Mr Evans. Professor Alistair Barr, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: "The Committee agrees that the lengthy period over which these offences took place, his betrayal of his colleague, and the undermining of the reputation of the profession and of the system of disease control, taken together with his dishonesty, make it impossible to impose a lesser sanction than suspension.

"The Committee finds that the respondent, who is a man of good character, has fully accepted his guilt, and has real insight into the seriousness of his conduct. He cooperated fully with the investigations and with the County Council who prosecuted him in the Magistrates [Court], and with the College. He made an open and frank admission about his misconduct from the outset.

"The course of conduct on which he embarked and which has led to these charges was the result of a simple mistake at a time of considerable stress to him. He was not guilty of deliberate misconduct at the outset but… what started as an innocent mistake took on a life of its own and led him to deliberate and dishonest misconduct because he did not know how to get himself out of the predicament he was in."

Professor Barr also said that there was no financial gain in Mr Evans’ actions and that animal welfare had not been compromised as the cattle were well cared for and in good health and that Mr Evans’ actions in carrying out the tuberculin tests on the unregistered cattle himself demonstrated that he was concerned about identifying any disease in his herd.

He added: “In all the circumstances the Committee has decided a proportionate sanction is that the respondent’s registration should be suspended for a period of six months.”

The Committee’s full findings and decision are available on the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary).

The RCVS Officers will be heading to Somerset, home ground of President Bob Moore, on Thursday 22 May for RCVS Question Time.

The Shrubbery Hotel in Ilminster is the venue for the final Regional Question Time of Bob Moore’s Presidential year, where he looks forward to seeing lots of familiar faces for a lively debate.

Veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and others involved in the profession are all welcome to attend the meeting, which kicks off at 6:30pm with a relaxing drink, a bite to eat and a chance to catch up with colleagues, followed by Question Time at 7:15pm. The meeting will finish at approximately 10:00pm.

Bob Moore will be chairing the meeting and the panel will be made up of the Officer team and Veterinary Nurses Council Chairman Andrea Jeffery, who will be answering your questions and concerns regarding the veterinary profession.

Hot topics expected to be raised on the night include the RCVS Practice Standards Scheme, a new Veterinary Surgeons Act, RCVS modular certificate, 24-hour cover, the Professional Development Phase and the non-statutory Register for veterinary nurses.

To book your place contact Fiona Clark at the RCVS on 020 7202 0773 or f.clark@rcvs.org.uk before 9 May 2008, or download an invitation at http://www.rcvs.org.uk/ and post it to the address supplied. All veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses living within reasonable travelling distance of the meeting venue will be sent a personal invitation.

If you are unable to attend the meeting, but have a question you would like to raise, please do write in.

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed a case against a Nottinghamshire veterinary surgeon, having found not proven the charge that he had caused, allowed or failed to prevent a potential breach of the Rules of Racing of the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB).

During the re-scheduled, three-day hearing, the Committee heard that Dr Gary Samuel was on duty on 10 October 2009 as the GBGB licensed track veterinary surgeon at Nottingham Greyhound Stadium. When the trainer came to collect her dog for the race, she discovered a biscuit in his kennel in the paddock area, in potential contravention of the rules of the GBGB, which do not allow greyhounds access to any food, drink or other substance after weighing in, prior to a race. She reported this discovery to the paddock steward. The dog was withdrawn from the race, so there was no prospect of prize money. The trainer, despite her unblemished record, was put at risk of disciplinary action by the GBGB, which could have resulted in the loss of her training licence and livelihood. Following the events of 10 October, the GBGB held a disciplinary hearing, at which Dr Samuel was disqualified indefinitely from holding a GBGB licence and fined £2,500, and the matter was referred to the College.

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee confirmed that it should not be bound by the GBGB decision, and that the charges laid against Dr Samuel must be resolved on the basis of the evidence before it. Both Counsel for Dr Samuel and the College urged the Committee to have close regard of CCTV footage from 10 October, which showed Kennel 21 where the dog had been placed and the biscuit found. From evidence given by the paddock steward and the trainer, the Committee accepted that the kennel was clean when the dog entered at 5.30pm, so the biscuit must have been introduced between 5.30pm and 9pm, when the trainer collected him for the race.

The footage available to the Committee from Nottingham Race Track was only four-and-a-half minutes long. The Committee was concerned that there were almost three-and-a-half hours of footage that it had not been shown and that, in addition, witnesses were not able to state that they had viewed the remainder of the footage. In those circumstances, the Committee considered that the footage available must be of the best quality to allow it to reach a sure conclusion as to what exactly Dr Samuel may have been doing in his position close to Kennel 21. From the quality of the footage available, the Committee was not able to be sure.

Speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, Vice-Chairman Professor Sheila Crispin said: "The fact remains that the Committee cannot be sure that the Respondent caused the biscuit to enter Kennel 21, [so] finds the charge against the Respondent not proved."

Dr Samuel therefore remains on the RCVS Register and is entitled to practise.

The RCVS has announced that renewal fees will increase by 4%.

The 4% increase was approved by the Privy Council and the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. 

Dr Tshidi Gardiner, RCVS Treasurer, said: “As with last year, RCVS Council recognises that we are living in difficult economic times, and have tried to keep the fee increase to a minimum.

"However, it is important that we increase fees in line with inflation, as well as take into account additional related costs, to ensure we are fulfilling our regulatory remit to the best of our abilities and meet our strategic priorities.”

Veterinary surgeons need to pay their annual renewal by 1st April and will be sent their fee notices within the first two weeks of March.

Anyone who has not paid their fee by 1st May will incur a higher fee charge of £36, with non-payment by 1st June risking removal from the Register and ineligibility to practise.

As part of the annual renewal process, all individual vets will also need to log into their online MyAccount to confirm their registration and contact details and declare any convictions. 

Anyone who expects to encounter any difficulties in paying their fees should contact the RCVS Finance Team on finance@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0722.

The RCVS has announced that voting is now open for the 2016 Council elections. 

Ballot papers with candidate details, biographies and manifestos have been posted to all veterinary surgeons this week.

Eight candidates are standing in the RCVS Council election this year, with the six who receive the most votes joining Council at RCVS Day on Friday 15 July 2016 for a four-year term. The candidates are: 

• Mr Christopher Barker MRCVS
• Ms Amanda Boag MRCVS
• Dr Melissa Donald MRCVS
• Miss Lucie Goodwin MRCVS
• Mr Thomas Lonsdale MRCVS
• Professor Stephen May FRCVS
• Dr Cheryl Scudamore FRCVS
• Dr Christopher (Kit) Sturgess MRCVS

Each candidate in both elections has produced a short video in which they answer two questions which they have selected from those submitted to the RCVS in advance by members of the professions. The videos can be viewed at: www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote16 along with their biographies, manifesto statements and contact details. 

Bradley Viner, RCVS President, said: "Last year the candidate videos had over 3,500 views and we hope to increase that this year as it is a very direct and democratic way of finding out more about each candidate and their views. I would urge each member of the profession, whether vets or veterinary nurses, to make a vote for their preferred candidates as they really can make a difference when it comes to the future direction of the College."

All votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday 29 April 2016. Online votes for RCVS Council candidates can be made at www.ersvotes.com/vetvote16.

Any veterinary surgeon who has not received a ballot paper should contact Ian Holloway, RCVS Communications Manager, on 020 7202 0727 or i.holloway@rcvs.org.uk. 

This week, the RCVS will be sending every veterinary surgeon its Survey of the Profession, designed amongst other things to help the College and other organisations prioritise the issues they tackle and the support they offer.

The survey is conducted every four to five years and asks vets to answer questions about a variety of subjects including demographic data (for example, socio-economic background, educational attainment, race/ethnicity, disability), work-related data (for example, employment status, location of workplace, type of workplace, hours of work, position in practice) and information about professional achievement (for example, hours of continuing professional development (CPD) undertaken and extra qualifications earned).

The survey, which is conducted on the College’s behalf by the Institute for Employment Studies, also ask respondents about their views on different aspects of their profession, including career plans, challenges facing the profession, and wellbeing. 

This year, the survey also asks for your view of the RCVS, including its values, how it should communicate, and what it should prioritise in future years.

Lizzie Lockett, RCVS CEO (pictured right), said: "The results of the Surveys form a very important ‘snapshot’ of the profession at a given point in time, but they also prove useful for years to come in terms of how the College develops its regulatory and educational policy, the areas it chooses to focus on and the issues it chooses to tackle. 

"The ensuing reports are also used by a myriad of other individuals, such as those in academia, government and representative bodies, as well as journalists. It’s therefore really important that we have as accurate a picture as possible. So although completing the Surveys is entirely voluntary, we strongly encourage members of the professions to take the time to complete them. It will, ultimately, help the development of appropriate and supportive policies for your profession."

In addition to the main survey, there will be an additional survey for MsRCVS who practise overseas. This survey aims to better understand why they continue to retain their MRCVS status, what this status means in the countries in which they work, global attitudes towards the RCVS and how the College could improve its communication with them.

The RCVS is seeking the views of veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and members of the public about proposals for a new Royal Charter which would clarify and underpin the role of the College and give it formal recognition as regulator of the veterinary nursing profession.

The new Charter, approved at a meeting of RCVS Council in November, would replace the 1967 Supplemental Charter, with the most far reaching change being a proposal to make veterinary nursing a formally regulated profession on a similar footing to veterinary surgeons. Veterinary nurses would become associates of the College and have the post-nominal letters RVN. The List and the Register of Veterinary Nurses would also be effectively combined, meaning that the 1,100 listed veterinary nurses would join the 10,500 already on the Register.

Under the proposals registered veterinary nurses would continue to need to fulfil certain responsibilities, including abiding by the Code of Professional Conduct and completing an average of 15 hours a year of continuing professional development, and would be subject to RCVS disciplinary procedures.

What's new is that individuals struck off from the Register for serious professional misconduct would no longer be able to give medical treatment or carry out minor surgery under veterinary direction.

As well as changes to the regulation of veterinary nursing, the proposed Charter would also more clearly state the role and remit of the RCVS, for example, in advancing standards through the promotion of continuing professional development and the Practice Standards Scheme.

Professor Stephen May, a member of RCVS Council who led the Legislation Working Party that developed the new Charter proposals, said: "The proposed new Charter represents an historic opportunity to affirm the role of the RCVS, and to provide a modern framework for the future regulation of the professions. I call on veterinary surgeons and nurses, together with other interested stakeholders, to read the consultation documents and support our proposals."

Speaking about the need for change, RCVS President Neil Smith added: "The consultation paper explains why it is time to replace the 1967 Charter with a new version which sets out the role of the College. The present Charter doesn't explain what objects the RCVS should set out to achieve, and it is silent about veterinary nurses. The remit of the College should include being the regulator for the veterinary nursing profession, and we want a new Charter to recognise registered veterinary nurses.

"We hope that the new Charter will provide a solid basis for the work of the College for years to come. We would urge members of the professions and the public to let us know what they think and help us to make sure that we have got it right."

The consultation paper, which contains further details about the proposed Charter, is available to download at www.rcvs.org.uk/consultations. Those who wish to have their say must respond to b.myring@rcvs.org.uk with their comments by Friday 7 February 2014.

The RCVS will also be organising a meeting and a webinar during the consultation period for those who wish to ask questions about the proposals. Those interested in attending a meeting should email b.myring@rcvs.org.uk. The webinar will be held early in 2014 - further details will be on www.rcvs.org.uk in due course.