Questions for the RCVS AGM

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Bob Russell — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 10:10:49 GMT

A bit of a tangent perhaps but why was it seen fit to reduce the number of member elected councilors rather than the number of university representatives?

As there are more universities training vets we really do need more representatives from the sharp end of the profession.

Back on topic:

Secrecy breeds paranoia and just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not out to get you!

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Malcolm Ness — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 08:46:05 GMT

I tend to agree with Arlo, though I do recognise that Alastair is to diplomacy what Margaret Thatcher was to Marxism.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"]One could argue, I guess, whether that is over-representation.[/quote]

In much the same way as you could have argued whether the (very) old style of democracy in UK that gave an individual one vote for himself and another for his property. Democracy is absolute, like death or pregnancy.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"]a particular vested interest in the location of the College[/quote]

This is about the integrity of a system - don't let yourself be distracted by specifics. Get the structure right and the integrity of decision-making will inevitably follow.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"] the best interests of the profession[/quote]

... as seen through the lens of their own experience and interest. Consider also that each of the University appointees is a senior staffer typically on around £100k PA plus benefits, yet their institutions (all universities with swingeing fiduciary duties) are happy to lose them to another institution for 30 or more days each year. While I know many of these individuals and most are good folk trying their best and acting with an integrity, they are not necessarily independent people inevitably acting only for the interest of the profession - some, perhaps all are there in their employers' time and at their employers' expense, they all have divided loyalties.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"]Manchester?[/quote]

That is wild speculation and that is only possible because the strategy is secret.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"] I assume the best about people [/quote]

So do I and in my experience almost everyone I have encountered in College (Exec or elected) have been good or exceptional people, but that isn't what this is about. The system, not the people, is bad. Most MPs prior to universal suffrage were good people doing their best but that is no defence for a system that denied the vote to poor men and all women.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"]we can hang out in some posh central London pad[/quote]

I think it highly unlikely that that reflects anybody's stance or motivation. However, the secrecy encourages such ludicrous speculation as well as other perhaps more plausible speculations, but speculations all the same.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"]the elected members outnumber the unelected [/quote]

What, I wonder, would be the reaction if Boris or Keir or Even Ed Davey decided that in future a third of seats in parliament were handed to appointed "MPs" - but don't worry, you people will still get to elect a goodly number of your own?

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223680"] Danny Chambers and Joanne Dyer, both of whom i have met and seen in action[/quote]

I agree completely, and I am immensely grateful to them and the others who give up a lot of time, put in a huge effort and take an awful lot of shit on my behalf. However, as one no longer in the first flush of youth, I have seen many similarly able and enthusiastic councillors go through the same mincer and achieve very much less than they should have done because the system is stacked.

This College remains a membership College. For the time-being at least, we remain a traditional Liberal Profession that is deeply entwined in the law of this land. However, the responsibility of the profession to self-govern is being removed by a system that is continuing to remove responsibility, power and status from its members - a previous Registrar delighted in 'downgrading' the members to 'stakeholders' whenever she spoke and that attitude has stuck. That fact and its consequence are disguised by an inappropriate use of secrecy.

The default position should be open-ness and transparency within the membership. There will be occasions when confidentiality is prudent but the decision to withhold information form the members of a self-governing, liberal profession is one that should be taken only very infrequently and not ever taken lightly. If it is thought necessary to redact minutes or withhold information from the membership, then a named individual should take responsibility for that action - their reasoning should be recorded and a reasonable time-limit put on the secret. It will remain absolutely unacceptable to me that Council might ever be expected to vote on a matter that has been considered in whole, or in part, in secret session.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 07:59:57 GMT

[quote userid="12375" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223682"]Yes, hopelessly naive. [/quote]

Hopelessly cynical

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Alastair Welch — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 07:09:46 GMT

Yes, hopelessly naive.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 06:59:13 GMT

[quote userid="12375" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223676"]I do think that you are giving the RCVS far too much credit.[/quote]

And I think you are not giving them nearly enough Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

[quote userid="12375" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223676"] Yes some of them are elected[/quote]

Slightly over half, which to my mind is more than 'some'

One from each university. One could argue, I guess, whether that is over-representation. I don't know. But I shouldn't think they have a particular vested interest in the location of the College. If anything, you'd think they might argue for somewhere further north. Less of a schlep. 2 appointed veterinary nurses and six appointed lay members. Looking at their profiles, I don't see any reason to suspect they would be motivated by anything other than the best interests of the profession. In my experience, senior vet nurses in particular take their responsibilities to the profession very seriously.

Sure, I guess there would be RCVS employees who might think: "Manchester? Hell no. I'm not moving there" and won't want to lose their jobs. But that happens in any organisation that decides to move. Do they have the power to influence the decision, or would they even try to exercise it if they did? I am hugely sceptical.

Perhaps naively, I assume the best about people until and unless I find out the worst. I don't have any reason to suspect that the estate strategy is being driven by anything other than the best interests of the profession, and in fact I would be utterly gobsmacked if that proved not to be the case. That doesn't rule out error or incompetence (I hasten to add that I am not accusing anyone of that either). But I just do NOT believe that there is a room full of people thinking: "come on, let's stiff practising vets out of some more money so we can hang out in some posh central London pad." In fact, if I was on Council, I would be rather affronted at that suggestion.

Anyway, even if you think I am being naive a) the elected members outnumber the unelected and b) recent years have seen the election of a number of what I would call 'conviction' councillors, notably Danny Chambers and Joanne Dyer, both of whom i have met and seen in action, and the likes of whom I would trust to keep others in check - if that was needed.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Alastair Welch — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 19:44:29 GMT

Arlo,

I do think that you are giving the RCVS far too much credit. Yes some of them are elected, and I'm sure there are decent people amongst them but there are lots of appointees and worse than that there are the civil service. The permanent employees of the College have a vested interest in something close to the status quo and if that involves spending tens of £M of the members hard earned money then so be it.

It may be that a Mayfair base with a helipad is just what we need or indeed a warehouse in Reading but either way the 'Strategy' should be public. I have no doubt that if the wider membership were aware of the eye-watering sums of money we are talking about they would want at least to know about it and likely have a say.

These discussions and decisions should take place in public. As I have pointed out (repeatedly) the votes at Council are just rubber stamps, the decisions are made in committee behind closed doors and these committees are made up of appointees decided on by a very small cabal of influential members of the college. Its not exactly transparent.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Malcolm Ness — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 18:26:33 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223668"]You elect a group of people to take these decisions for you.[/quote]

Decisions are recorded in council, but only part of council is elected by the membership, much is appointed. Considerable power lies elsewhere, for example in the Executive who can exert considerable influence over the President and other officers because they are 'in the know' and can control the pace, and indeed the reality, of change. (Remember 'Yes Minister'.) And then there is the cabal of vet-school appointees who tend to have an agenda of shared, or at least similar interests that are often rather different from the interests of those of the members in practice.

It is not unusual to hear from bemused College councillors that they don't really know where the power lies or precisely who is pulling the strings. Certainly, as in any institution of this kind, the shaping of the organisation, the appointing of Committee chairs and the writing of agendas, strategies and plans can be used to leave the elected councillor with little to do other than vote following the recommendation of the committee that has done all the careful consideration and leg-work. This structure might represent an effective way of getting the College's business done, but it is worrisome.

Notwithstanding the fact that the College has some excellent, hard-working and honourable elected and appointed members and an executive that is, in my experience extremely able and well-intentioned, that goodness is severely undermined in my eyes by the College's defaulting to confidentiality, closed doors and secrecy whenever possible. The exact opposite position should be the norm.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 17:48:05 GMT

Hang on folks. That page just says the place is for sale, which was announced ages ago, as per Ian's post. And that it could be rented for £592,000 per annum, and that the College would agree to rent it back for two years. Presumably to give time to find somewhere else. And that would be offset by investing the £13.5M in the interim.

So far, I am thinking 'nothing to see here'.

The bigger question, it strikes me, is what the plan is once the building is sold. New Mayfair pad complete with helipad? Or a converted warehouse outside Reading. I joke, but of course the serious issue is what the broad strategy is.

I think the other point to make about all this is that these are decisions which have to be passed by your elected Council. There isn't some Bond villain sitting in a penthouse suite stroking a purring cat, and eliminating anyone who disagrees with their dastardly plan to move to Mayfair. You elect a group of people to take these decisions for you. If you don't trust them to do what you elected them to do, then perhaps that process needs to be called into question.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Anthony Todd — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 17:13:00 GMT

[quote userid="3233" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223660"]would seem to confirm the rumour as £13.5 million with a two year lease back at £592,000 per annum[/quote]

Does anyone not agree that this is a ridiculous waste of your money, with absolutely no benefits, except personal egrandessment, for womeone [who [er] isn't actually stumping up the cash.................

Does any one agree that the profession of a Veterinary Surgeon is, in any possible way, going to be enhanced by this arrangement !!??

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Anthony Todd — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 17:04:33 GMT

So easy to do so many things and spend so much when it ain't yours!

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Richard Stephenson — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 16:19:59 GMT

I'm not yet a member of Council so have no inside knowledge of this - but a quick google search

https://www.adsre.co.uk/disposals/belgravia-house.html

would seem to confirm the rumour as £13.5 million with a two year lease back at £592,000 per annum

I am truly puzzled that (if it is true) the RCVS has proceeded without reference to the wider membership especially given the uncertainty in the Covid 19 world of how office work should be conducted in the future. You would think a transparent root and branch review of the estate policy conducted in public meetings would allay fears that a large central office in London is the proposed solution.

As always I see very little point in hiding behind walls of confidentiality what is readily discoverable with one minutes effort on the internet??

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Alastair Welch — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 15:24:04 GMT

Ian,

Thank you for the reply. Whilst I recognise that some elements of commercial negotiations should remain confidential what I am really asking is what is the strategy?

My fear is that the strategy involves selling Belgravia House, adding the proceeds to the excess above the reserves (currently £10.1 M above the reserve level), potentially borrowing more (against the guaranteed income of retention fees) and buying a very expensive property in London. Please tell me this is not the strategy.
When the strategy involves such a large amount of money (compared to the wealth of the organisation), the strategy should, at the very least, be clear to’ the wider membership. My personal view is that such decisions should be subjected to plebiscite of the members but at the very least the issues should be discussed and reported openly.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Malcolm Ness — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 15:08:55 GMT

Thanks for that Ian. I can see why some commercially sensitive details need to be kept confidential (though only temporarily) but Danny indicated that the Strategy was secret. Is that true because to me that seems too much secrecy?

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Ian Holloway — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 14:54:06 GMT

We first reported our plans to sell Belgravia House [link] back in November 2018. The building itself is increasingly unsuitable for our needs, in terms of its restrictive size for our growing team, its out-of-date facilities and the major refurbishment necessary.

Since then, as reported in July 2019 [link], having appointed agents to help secure a best value offer for our current premises, we put out to tender the task of finding a suitable new building. Our external advisors continue to work closely with our Estates Strategy Project Board, which itself updates and advises Council regularly.

These discussions at Council remain confidential due to the commercial sensitivity of the associated issues, especially with regard to the legal and commercial interests of both potential buyers of Belgravia House and sellers of suitable alternative premises.

We will continue to provide further updates on any progress, as and when arrangements are formally confirmed.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Malcolm Ness — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 14:30:20 GMT

Iain, I don't follow your reasoning. Danny said that the "Strategy" was secret and that is what I reacted to - I simply can't see why a strategy should be secret or, indeed, how it is possible to create secret strategies without abusing the rights of members.

If your speculation is correct, why do you see a need for confidentiality?

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Eamon McAllister — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 14:27:26 GMT

I don’t think that there are any circumstances where the RCVS should be acting in secret.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Iain Richards — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 14:25:17 GMT

Is this a temporary measure to give time to find a property that the college can move to without delay of selling Belgravia (ie no chain). The latter seems a reasonable course of action, but not one that needs great confidentiality.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Arlo Guthrie — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 14:01:56 GMT

I think worth being careful not to jump to premature conclusions here. At the risk of being accused of being an 'ist' of some sort, just 'chinese whispers' at the moment.

I would also tend to assume that there is a good reason for secrecy, although it does make me wonder why, whenever the College says something has been done in secret, it does not include one sentence to explain, very generally, why.

Given a good enough reason, I think most people are happy to accept that secrecy may be necessary. But without a reason, conspiracy theories abound.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Malcolm Ness — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:25:15 GMT

[quote userid="3880" url="~/001/nonclinical/f/life-in-practice-discussions/29163/questions-for-the-rcvs-agm/223629"] I’m not at liberty to discuss the estates strategy as it’s confidential[/quote]

The notion that this could properly be confidential in a member-based organisation seems fanciful. Who, and with what authority, made the decision to keep this business secret and why?

(Those questions are put up for any on Council past or present or any of the College Exec. - Danny, Richard, Jo, Lizzie, etc - to answer)

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Bob Russell — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:50:29 GMT

This secrecy nonsense is going to completely bu+ger the RCVS if it is not severely curtailed.

We are paying the organisation to regulate the profession. It is not some private organisation to be manipulated at the whim of a group of shareholders.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

David Shepherd — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:38:16 GMT

Why on Earth is the ‘estates strategy’ confidential - to the point of disposing of a major asset without consulting or even informing the owners? I am a charity trustee, and if we behaved in such a way with the charity’s assets I’m sure the Charity Commission would have something to say. If the rumour is false now is the time to say so, to avoid further speculation.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Alastair Welch — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:30:28 GMT

Danny,

You are of course welcome to ask where I heard this rumour but I wouldn't be so indiscreet as to disclose my source or sources. Most organisations contain individuals with spectrum of views and I suspect that somewhere within Belgravia House there is an individual or individuals who whilst outwardly signed up to the programme inwardly can see the harm the College is doing to the profession.

I can't pretend to understand the tax implications of such a sale (I assume we will lose some of it), but even of we were to retain all £14M I can't see how this could be invested to get the 5% required to cover the rent we are now paying. If the College needs £14M for some project (and that is highly debatable) then I bet we could borrow it on more favourable terms. In any event if the College thinks it needs £14M then perhaps the wider membership should Know why?

If this rumour is anywhere near the mark then this for me just highlights how outrageous it is having the 'estates strategy' as confidential, along with lots of the other discussions which take place behind closed doors. The president recently said that they needed a 'blue sky safe space' to discuss something: what he actually meant was they need the opportunity to stitch up the profession without the disinfection of sunlight.

RE: Questions for the RCVS AGM

Danny Chambers — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:59:50 GMT

Unfortunately I’m not at liberty to discuss the estates strategy as it’s confidential, but out of curiosity, can I ask where you heard this rumour?