2017 Council Elections

RE: 2017 Council Elections

J G Wray — Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:25:00 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

Ah, democracy in action..............................................

Makes me laugh at you lot with all your agitation for working hours and loads of political correctness and we can't comment on any post 'cos it might upset the poster .

[/quote]

Steady there's tone policing in force now. I am reminded of this from Family Guy to the tune of "I've got a little list" from the Mikado - spoiler warning Family Guy is a little rude:

Stewie: Now, I have no doubt that perhaps there may exist some mild discontent amongst some of you about the recent changes I have implemented. Lest you be considering any sort of uprising, I should warn you I am quite prepared to make an example of any undesirable elements. And don't think I don't know who you are!

As someday it may happen that a victim must be found

I've got a little list, I've got a little list

Of society offenders who might well be underground

And who never would be missed, who never would be missed

There's the white kid with the baggy clothes who's talking like he's black

The girl you date who doesn't get the jokes in “Caddyshack”

The Asian guy who cuts in front of every single line

And Britney Spears for accidentally showing her vagine

And Bill O'Reilly's ineffective dermatologist

They'd none of them be missed, they'd none of them be missed

Secret Service Men: He's got them on the list

He's got them on the list

And they'd none of them be missed

They'd none of them be missed

Stewie: There's the guy behind the news reporter waving like a fool

And Senator Bill Frist, I've got him on the list

And the fat kid smiling warmly while he's peeing in the pool

He never would be missed, he never would be missed

There's the foul-smelling boy who comes to school in camouflage

And every bleeding member of the cast of “Entourage”

And while we're on the subject, HBO deserves a whack

For ending The Sopranos with a f***ing cut to black!

And guys who when you shake their hand just bump you with their fist

I don't think they'd be missed. I'm sure they'd not be missed

Secret Service Men: He's got them on the list

He's got them on the list

And they'd none of them be missed

They'd none of them be missed

Stewie: There's the guy who sits beside you and keeps farting on the plane

And Shakira's lyricist. I've got him on the list

And the smarty on Thanksgiving who says, "It's the trip-toe-fane!" (tryptophan)

He never would be missed, he never would be missed

There's the blonde who tells you loudly with a voice just like a knife

[falsetto] "You know, someone should do a sitcom based around my life!"

[normal voice] The guy who watched "The Simpsons" back in 1994

And won't admit the damn thing isn't funny anymore

Stewie and Secret Service Men: And anyone

And every one...

Who's ever...

Made me pissed!

Secret Service Men: Made me pissed!

Made me really really pissed!

Stewie: I've got them on the list

They'd none of them be missed

Secret Service Men: They'd be none, they'd be...

They'd be none, they'd be none of them be missed

Secret Service Men: He's got them on the list

He's got them on the list

And they'd none of them be missed...

Stewie: They'd none

Secret Service Men: None of them...

Of...

None of them...

Them...

None of them

Stewie & Secret Service Men: Be...

Missed!

Basso Profundo Secret Service Man: None of them be missed!

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Danny Chambers — Sun, 26 Feb 2017 19:14:06 GMT

Here's a thread I started to enable everyone to discuss with me any issues or concerns regarding RCVS elections.

https://www.vetsurgeon.org/uk/general/f/6/t/25454.aspx

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Anthony Todd — Sun, 26 Feb 2017 18:39:18 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

Truthfully, couldn't care less.

Will it make a difference to anything?

[/quote]

Ah, democracy in action..............................................

Makes me laugh at you lot with all your agitation for working hours and loads of political correctness and we can't comment on any post 'cos it might upset the poster .

Yet you lot can't be assed to take a bit of time and vote for candidates that might help the profession rather than advance the candidates own prestige, reinforce the status quo, or rock the boat [not in all cases]

and it's the same year after year after year.....

Every one who has ever posted on here should vote 'cos it means they are active, sentient and concerned, at least about something!

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Sarah Keir — Sun, 26 Feb 2017 17:54:43 GMT

Is this statement on the RCVS election page new? I don't remember seeing it in previous years.

"Please note: Under the RCVS Election Scheme, as approved by the Privy Council, the RCVS Registrar shall not be required to circulate an election statement which they consider to be defamatory (or otherwise unlawful), or factually misleading and may, when the statement cannot be agreed with the candidate, either edit the election statement or decide not to circulate it."

RE: 2017 Council Elections

James Laidlaw — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 23:16:49 GMT

At the risk of flogging a dead horse, does the fact that a lot of what Tom Lonsdale states directly clashes with the code of conduct section 6.5 "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" and that these statements are presented on the RCVS website concern anyone?

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Beats — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:16:55 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]

[quote user="Danny Chambers"]With the exception of some of the extreme viewpoints, I would imagine that voting for a candidate who was single issue may mean that something is actually achieved in that area? As opposed to the people who don't make it clear exactly that their vision is.[/quote]

You can have the most benign agenda and the largest vote, but if the Committees don't want you then you're just making up the numbers. See earlier posts

[/quote]

As low as the turnout may be, it is the most significant opinion poll conducted by the RCVS where a poll of vets on an issue of your choosing can be made.

By standing as a single-issue candidate, there is no lack of clarity on the opinion of the vets that have voted.

In the event that a significant proportion of vets that chose to vote selected a "single-issue" candidate, that would provide an excellent survey of the profession on the issue of their choosing, at no personal financial cost, with which to argue their case.

In this respect, it is quite irrelevant if they get elected or not, or if they get to serve on a committee if they do.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Dinu Catilina — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:44:14 GMT

[quote user="Francisco Gomez"]The implications mean not only loss of regulations but also the loss of a legal framework for permanent residency of EU nationals vets working in the UK. Meaning, if PR (permanent residence) is not obtained now and passed through parliament without ties with Brexit, there is no certainty of rights until the negotiations finish, and probably none either if they fail.[/quote]

Well, even though this affects me as well I can't see how this should be something for RCVS to fix. RCVS promotes itself as a regulator of the profession not looking after the members of the profession.

Sad but true.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

J G Wray — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:59:12 GMT

You can have the most benign agenda and the largest vote, but if the Committees don't want you then you're just making up the numbers. See earlier posts

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Danny Chambers — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:42:13 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

Certainly a couple of obvious single-issue candidates there, and a couple who really ought to be kept off

[/quote]

With the exception of some of the extreme viewpoints, I would imagine that voting for a candidate who was single issue may mean that something is actually achieved in that area? As opposed to the people who don't make it clear exactly that their vision is.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

grumpyoldman — Sat, 11 Feb 2017 23:46:15 GMT

There are some corporate "employees" which always makes me nervous, some younger people who seem to think older people need EBM shoved down their throats. And three others who maybe worth looking at, although post election will probably get lost in the red tape of it all.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

rhmrcvs — Sat, 11 Feb 2017 22:23:45 GMT

Do you think think candidate may have a vested interest. Employed by vets now , large proportion of their vets are European grads.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Iain Richards — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 18:04:50 GMT

JW's assessment broadly fits with mine. While the vote is fairly run, this is not a democratic election. The folk who get elected should be on council to serve the overall best interests of the profession, ensuring standards are maintained and we remain a self-governing profession. Chris Barker's words need heeding, our choices are potentially more important now than they have been. I'll vote as I have done every year and vote for those whom I respect and who I feel respect our profession.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Francisco Gomez — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 15:36:07 GMT

I have looked at the candidates and only 2 have the courage to discuss the implications of Brexit. One of them is Dave Leicester.

The implications mean not only loss of regulations but also the loss of a legal framework for permanent residency of EU nationals vets working in the UK. Meaning, if PR (permanent residence) is not obtained now and passed through parliament without ties with Brexit, there is no certainty of rights until the negotiations finish, and probably none either if they fail.

Do any of the candidates have plan of how to approach this? Or are they happy to just take the hit of necessary vets exiting the country and making it less attractive for those who are thinking about it?

A preemptive answer: Yes I know both parties want to deal with this as soon as possible. But the 'deal' would be off if there's no deal in a few years time. 'No deal is better than a bad deal'

above cropped from http://www.vetfutures.org.uk/download/factsheets/rcvsfacts2014.pdf

RE: 2017 Council Elections

J G Wray — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:59:26 GMT

RCVS Elections are not authentic in the sense that they are authentically democratic, leading to the election of someone who has a duty to represent those who voted for them. Instead their purpose is to populate the elected spaces on Council. Once there, the elected are reminded that all that stuff is behind them and they are in place to act in the interests of RCVS and the public.

There are three constant characteristics of those who stand for election

1. An offer of altruism.

2. A request for trust from the voters

3. A search for personal fulfilment.

The candidates have the chutzpah to solicit votes on one basis, and then comply with RCVS process after election. Amazing.

An offer of altruism is a warming thing admirable and appealing in others and inauthentic. You could argue that it is better to be an inauthentic Mother Theresa rather than an authentic Anders Brejvik, but my point is that RCVS changes the authenticity of the altruism once part of RCVS Council. It becomes all about RCVS first and the public as well.

A request for trust from the voters is something more substantial, but seems to hold little sway over those elected once there. Some Councillors spend a decade on Council, asking for re election more than once and come away with only work for the RCVS to show for it. All that solicitation of trust at election time from the profession sidelined until it is needed again for re election.

Then there's the search for personal fulfilment. Some make this plain at the outset with wildly obvious agenda, perhaps articulated through a foghorn, others are more subtle. The personal ambition may be in tune with the profession and appealing, but it is none the less selfish. Service on Council is selfish in this respect.

The current President is an example. He was clear in his last election and in his Presidential address that he saw the good that veterinary services could do in poor and underdeveloped countries. He has now become part of the Global Branding of RCVS bringing RCVS' standards to these countries - you gotta admire the cojones for taking the Old Colonial Power's standards to India along with the CE of RCVS - . His view has changed from bringing education to services to standards, but that's his personal journey, his self fulfilment.

You do not get elected by telling the electorate there's something in it for you, so don't expect this truth to figure large.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Bob Russell — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:40:53 GMT

There seem to be some interesting candidates and a common theme the welfare of vets especially those in practice. Will have a good peruse!

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:33:03 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="J G Wray"]It's my profession, but your site. Am I allowed to comment?[/quote]

Uh? I see it as your site as much as it is mine; you don't have to ask me! 'Course you can.[/quote]

Oh god - just realised what I think you mean by 'comment'

Be nice

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Clive Ansell — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:47:09 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

Council elections are not the same as voting in government elections, where I would argue that the number of voters affords us the luxury of The Monster Raving Loony Party.

In a small profession like this, I don't think it helps voter engagement (and therefore democracy) to have anything other than serious candidates committed to serving their profession across a range of issues, and geographically able to do so properly.

[/quote]

Very different to government elections. Even without Dr Lonsdale there are still 15 serious candidates for a maximum of 6 votes, so can do so on merit. Whereas in a general election it is one vote, and often a tactical or protest vote to try and get the conservatives booted out.

It's similar to a general election, in that one will spend time researching candidates and will ultimately vote - but will it really make a difference to those of us day to day at the coal face?

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 12:21:06 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]It's my profession, but your site. Am I allowed to comment?[/quote]

Uh? I see it as your site as much as it is mine; you don't have to ask me! 'Course you can.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

J G Wray — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 12:13:01 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]In a small profession like this, I don't think it helps voter engagement (and therefore democracy) to have anything other than serious candidates committed to serving their profession across a range of issues, and geographically able to do so properly. [/quote]

It's my profession, but your site. Am I allowed to comment?

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 11:38:57 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]Just out of curiosity, why the comment about 'There are 15 candidates contesting six places in the RCVS Council; 16 if you include the perennial Dr Lonsdale.'?

We all know he's a single issue candidate, but he's by no means the only single issue candidate, and as a point of professional courtesy, he's stood for council and so he's a candidate. It just seems needlessly petty to make the distinction, when i'm sure several of the 16 candidates have a similarly low chance of making it in. [/quote]

[quote user="Sarah Keir"]It is supposed to be democracy so should be considered such.[/quote]

I don't mean to be petty; it is a serious point.

A successful democracy requires that the voters engage. I ask you, given the difficulty that the College and Council has in overcoming:

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]Truthfully, couldn't care less.[/quote]

How exactly does it serve democracy to have people standing who are:

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]so far away, he may as well live on Mars and that he spouts B******s.[/quote]

Council elections are not the same as voting in government elections, where I would argue that the number of voters affords us the luxury of The Monster Raving Loony Party.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Clare Tapsfield-Wright — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:44:13 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]

Just out of curiosity, why the comment about 'There are 15 candidates contesting six places in the RCVS Council; 16 if you include the perennial Dr Lonsdale.'?

[/quote]

I think some, me included, find it incredibly difficult to take him seriously. Given he practices in Australia, how is he going to deal with RCVS business and attend council meetings? Serious question.

[/quote]

Absolutely, I'm not saying he's a serious candidate, but he's still a candidate. Maybe I'm just a fan of taking the high road and reading too much into things. :)

[/quote]also please please don't make a protest vote , that is how we end up with unintended consequences like Trump. One source of ill informed hot air being elected is enough

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Clare Tapsfield-Wright — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:40:11 GMT

Chris Barker

they must be barking not to have you on as many committees as you have time for , you're a top bloke , I can vouch for that.

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Clive Ansell — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:36:50 GMT

[quote user="Sarah Keir"]It is supposed to be democracy so should be considered such. I am with Mark on this - he is a candidate so cannot be dismissed. As bad as saying someone wouldn't vote because they can't change anything - what if a sufficient proportion decided to do this? Where would the decromatic would be?[/quote]

I entirely agree, he is a legitimate candidate, deserves equal respect and should in no way be dismissed.

Given it is a democracy, I have the right to state that I don't take him seriously, because he is so far away, he may as well live on Mars and that he spouts B******s.

Although I said in my previous post that I couldn't really care less, and asked what difference it would make; I have always looked at the candidates, and I have always cast my votes, every year. I may not vote for 6, but I will vote for at least 3 this year.

On the subject of democracy, what % voted last year? and how many of you can remember who you voted for and who was elected last year?

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Sarah Keir — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:27:58 GMT

It is supposed to be democracy so should be considered such. I am with Mark on this - he is a candidate so cannot be dismissed. As bad as saying someone wouldn't vote because they can't change anything - what if a sufficient proportion decided to do this? Where would the decromatic would be?

RE: 2017 Council Elections

Mark Hedberg — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:45:42 GMT

[quote user="Clive Ansell"]

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]

Just out of curiosity, why the comment about 'There are 15 candidates contesting six places in the RCVS Council; 16 if you include the perennial Dr Lonsdale.'?

[/quote]

Absolutely, I'm not saying he's a serious candidate, but he's still a candidate. Maybe I'm just a fan of taking the high road and reading too much into things. :)