Optimism for PSS

RE: Optimism for PSS

Bob Russell — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 14:42:36 GMT

So are we!

The point I am making is that practices that choose not to join should not be subsidising those that do.

RE: Optimism for PSS

Michael Woodhouse — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 12:46:58 GMT

I actually like the way the PSS is going, and we are looking to join once the new system is up and running.

RE: Optimism for PSS

Bob Russell — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 11:24:26 GMT

Front page of Vet Times!

Not sure we can stop the RCVS paying the start up costs. A few of us voted for the council members involved.

The funds are coming from 'general funding'. About half of all practices are not members of the PSS. The half that are should decide whether it is worthwhile. If it is then they should pay all the costs. The PSS should be run outside the RCVS otherwise we go back to the nonsense where 'our' Royal College is supporting half the practices and recommending clients choose those in preference to the other half!

Why does the PSS not have its own website extolling the virtues of its members?

RE: Optimism for PSS

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 11:21:34 GMT

Belgravia House are to donate £68,384 of our money to subsidise the "new PSS" so that PSS practices can have some big advertisements. Which one would have thought they could pay for themselves, but there it is.

But of course PSS is not an RCVS scheme, is it? Belgravia House frequently tell us that. When it suits.

So, er, why are RCVS subsidising this scheme, which isn't an RCVS scheme?

RE: Optimism for PSS

Martin Atkinson — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:43:42 GMT

I haven't heard this but I won't be paying, I cannot see how they can have any legal grounds to enforce it. I resent paying the practice registration fee without another stealth charge on top.