Re: There is some great news about RCVS

Martin Whiting — Sun, 10 Mar 2013 15:34:37 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

On a different subject, I'm quite interested in what sort of person, and especially what sort of veterinary surgeon, would really want to be on the PIC or the DC.

[/quote]

It would probably be the sort of person who would want to ensure the public can keep their trust in the high standard of the veterinary profession. It certainly doesn't look like a pleasant or thankful job, but without it there is no way of maintaining the highest standards of professionalism from our colleagues to ensure our privileged social contract is not lost.

Re: There is some great news about RCVS

Chris Barker — Sat, 09 Mar 2013 20:42:39 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

Assuming universities chose to create places for every hopeful student willing to part with £9000 per year there could be vet schools at most universities within a decade!

[/quote]

Had an interesting conversation with one Head of Vet School on this subject at Council Supper on Wednesday who corrected some of my preconceptions...

1. There is still a large glut of potential students for new Universities to serve.... The ratio of applicants: available places has fallen as low as 2:1, so in fact there is not a big pool waiting for new Universities to chase

2. Only middle/upper/monied classes can afford to enter vet school .... The proportion of bursaries/assisted students presently at vet school is surprisingly high

3. Intelligent school leavers will look at the financial investment required and compare it to the financial return after qualification and look elsewhere .... This is appears to be true for male applicants but apparently female students think far less of the financial consequences and follow their heart rather than their head in entering the profession!

Chris B

Re: There is some great news about RCVS

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Sat, 09 Mar 2013 12:43:17 GMT

Maybe when there's an overproduction of UK graduates the flood of foreign graduates will dry up? Maybe not, I guess it will come down to who can be hired most cheaply. Anyway, there's no point any veterinary body expressing any further opinion, the universities don't give a toss.

On a different subject, I'm quite interested in what sort of person, and especially what sort of veterinary surgeon, would really want to be on the PIC or the DC.

Re: There is some great news about RCVS

Gerry Henry — Sat, 09 Mar 2013 12:06:45 GMT

With foreign graduates accounting for about 40% of all new registrations the number of vet schools is irrelevant really, its bad news for those coming in.

Re: There is some great news about RCVS

Bob Russell — Sat, 09 Mar 2013 11:20:10 GMT

Many thanks!

The RCVS should have been (and continue to be) very vocal in making it clear to all and sundry that more new veterinary student places are not required and that universities should be strongly discouraged from considering new veterinary schools as a 'cash-cow'.

The RCVS may not have powers to control numbers but they certainly have the right to have a vociferous opinion!

Assuming universities chose to create places for every hopeful student willing to part with £9000 per year there could be vet schools at most universities within a decade!

Re: There is some great news about RCVS

Chris Barker — Sat, 09 Mar 2013 08:26:29 GMT

Personal recollections of the RCVS Council Meeting March 7th 2013 All errors my own....

The agenda called for decisions on some significant changes in the structure of the RCVS and yet the meeting was concluded with some alacrity by lunchtime. This early finish reflected the fact that many of the papers presented were well rehearsed, having appeared in Council members in-boxes in a variety of drafts for many months. And although understandable points of objection were raised by Councillors at regular intervals, the overall feeling of Council was that these changes had to be implemented and given a chance to bed in.

New Vet Schools
President Jacqui Molyneaux reiterated that the RCVS had no remit to hold an opinion on the rights and wrongs of a new veterinary school; as regulator it would just have to ensure that the `output' of any new schools was of sufficient standard. However it may be possible for the College to become involved in a data gathering exercise to illustrate the need or otherwise for such an increased output of graduates

CEO report
Nick Stace offered an update on a range of changes he had instituted within Belgravia House. A de-cluttering exercise had seen the disposal /recycling of unwanted furniture and countless boxes of paper waste; reorganisation of floors in an open-plan configuration was virtually complete and had come in under budget. Restructuring of jobs/responsibilities/personnel had led to a cut in staff numbers. The First Rate Regulator initiative had drawn responses from just under 5000 people – 20% of the profession – and analysis was beginning with a report due in June. Feedback was also being collated following the consultation on the future of the Practice Standards Scheme – a major discussion of the way forward is planned for the June Council meeting – but hints were given that the public had revealed an `expectation' that inspection should be made of all veterinary premises at Core Standards level.

With the Legislative Reform Order secure, adverts for membership of the independent Preliminary Investigation and Disciplinary Committees had attracted 163 applicants (2/3 lay persons, 1/3 vets); transition to the new structure will be complete by July 2015. A Staff Engagement Survey revealed good teamwork and a pride in the RCVS, but concerns about the management of change, the quality of leadership, the working environment and relations between staff and certain members of council. Training is in hand to try and lift the `engagementindex'.

Review of Governance Structure
The committee structure within the RCVS is being redesigned in the wake of the McKelvey report. In essence smaller committees are to be established with greater devolved powers – while this will streamline and shorten the decision making process, it has the risk of concentrating power in fewer hands. Indeed with PIC and DC separated entirely from Council by the LRO there is the prospect of elected Council members having no committee work to occupy them. Bob Partridge raised the matter of instituting individual voting records for Council members – this will better inform the `electorate' of the attitudes of sitting members. Post LRO there is no substantive reason why this should not be introduced but it will have to wait for the completion of the transition period in 2015.
Bob Partridge went on to argue that while the power to elect the Chairman of the main Committees was being handed to Council, the nomination of members of the committees will continue to remain in the hands of a few. Bob is firmly of the view that Council deserved to be trusted with making these nominations, properly informed by a skills matrix. Perhaps weary of the argument, Council offered a few nodding heads but no verbal support for his views.

Mark Elliott argued successfully that Council should retain the right to review delegated decisions; others objected to this, saying it would undermine the
principle of delegation of decisions to Committees, but in a close vote Council decided that the right to review should be retained and a statement to that
effect was added to the relevant paragraph. With this solitary change the review was accepted and the new structure will come into being in the new Council year.

Disclosure of convictions
You may not have noticed, but our new Code of Conduct now requires your disclosure of relevant convictions to the RCVS! The proposals before Council filled in the details of When Who and What should be disclosed. For those of you with a murky past, but already on the Register, you may be relieved to hear that there is no need for you to own up to anything that happened prior to 2006… anything that happened after 2006 has already being reported in to the RCVS by the relevant authorities!

PIC/DC byelaws
These proposals fill in the gaps left by the LRO in its establishing the bare bones of the new independent PIC and DC. An appraisal system is to be
introduced, and a mechanism to remove those members who prove to be unsuitable for purpose! However the proposal outlined is to establish an independent panel of non-Council members to execute the removal – this is not strictly required under the legislation but is proposed as a `good idea', serving to illustrate the proper separation of the new PIC/DC structure from Council. But as with most `good ideas' this could have a significant cost in terms of recruitment to the panel etc and so we must hope that it is not needed with anyregularity

General administration byelaws
Having OK-ed the new committee structure these byelaws were introduced to ease the transition from the old to the new committee structure. It led to an
interesting side discussion on the nature of voting as changes to byelaws require a two thirds majority of those voting…..the status of abstentions was
hotly debated – do these count as `no's as you were not voting `yes….all good stuff…

College budget
Bradley Viner presented a rosy view of the RCVS finances, with income up, expenditure down and a blossoming share portfolio. However income was up due to a one-off registration blip during the Olympics, and expenditure down due to 2-3 cancelled DC hearings and the decision not to spend money on IT infrastructure this year. However the IT bill is simply postponed - the whole of the money invested in the non-functional database is to be written off, and the unavoidable and substantial cost of another bespoke system has yet to materialise.
Once again the matter of the cost of maintaining the database of practice premises was raised. This `non-profit making' venture currently nets an income
of 200K for an expenditure of 90K…… However it was explained to us that the expenditure does not include overheads for the building, which the Treasurer assures us is wholly allowable under Privy Council rules! And the annual costs of £40 per practice are being dropped to £34 and will be held at that level for 4 years. This was simply a continuing defence of the indefensible. Methinks that there will have to be a startling rate of inflation over these four years if the process is to be reduced from profit-making to simple break-even! I am afraid that there remains a streak of dishonesty about this whole matter – the cost of registration is unjustifiably high but there seems little appetite for the majority of Council to move to cut it, and yet this is the only honest course of action.

Sydney University visitation To the relief of all Australians, the course at Sydney University is still recognised by the RCVS…..

Advisory Committee report
Even before the announcement of compulsory dog chipping by DEFRA, and the Dogs Trust PR heist regarding free chips, the data protection problems which arise when you discover a chipped animal in the care of someone who is not the registered owner was troubling the Advisory Committee. Help was sought from theOffice of the Information Commissioner….helpful reply…there was none.
So instead the guidance has been rewritten with the help of a lawyer. It may be legally watertight but it is convoluted and far from user friendly – three short paragraphs have been replaced by nineteen! Advisory will convert the advice into a flow chart which will hopefully provide a greater degree of clarity. But there is clearly much to discuss with DEFRA before compulsory chipping of dogs is introduced!

Other snippets
VN Council hopes to introduce a Private Members Bill to protect the title of `veterinary nurse'
PRC have `solved' the issue of the hiring of College data to the BVA and VDS by removing Members addresses from the published register making the data worthless…..
Loss of earnings payments for those inconvenienced by early finishes/cancellations at DC hearings threaten to become a significant cost for
the RCVS, but one which in all fairness must be carried
Audit and Risk committee is impressed at the progress in establishing a `Risk Register' but is to request more formal access to financial details and plans. Also demanding the drawing up of Standing Financial Instructions and greater clarity on how the Treasurer must fulfil his/her role
Nick Royal has been appointed the new Director of the RCVS Trust
Prof Stuart Reid was elected as the next Junior Vice President

Re: There is some great news about RCVS

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:27:04 GMT