RCVS elections

Re: RCVS elections

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:45:04 GMT

Erm, we're jumping the gun a bit here. This is really a question for the RCVS Forum, which isn't ready yet. I'm going to lock this post, and transfer it across to the RCVS section of the site in due course, so the discussion can continue when the section opens for the 2010 debate.

Re: RCVS elections

J G Wray — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:29:17 GMT

Dear Mr Nell,

[quote user="Adi Nell"]I am standing this year to campaign against red tape.[/quote]

That's a vote-getter

You are aiming to stand for RCVS and have mentioned the PSS and Nurse training. These are influenced by RCVS but neither are compulsory. If you are anti the bureaucracy of these, why not take your practice out of the PSS and away from training nurses?

Health and Safety stuff is unavoidable and the drug stuff lies with vested interest and the VMD. Becoming a RCVS Councillor won't make any difference to these.

[quote user="Adi Nell"]I think the RCVS should formally review over-regulation, and the actively campaign against unnecessary red-tape, whatever its source - even within the RCVS itself, dare I say.[/quote]

What do you think of the new Governance rules at RCVS, an increase in bureaucracy aimed at improving honesty and transparency at RCVS?

JGW

Re: RCVS elections

Richard Stephenson — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:13:59 GMT

Dear Wynne and Laura,

You will be pleased to learn that there will be another 'election forum' this year.

Yours,

Richard Stephenson.

Re: RCVS elections

Noweia — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:29:49 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

I definitely hope it will become a regular and accepted part of the RCVS electoral process.

Wynne

[/quote]

Me too - I found it very helpful last year.

Re: RCVS elections

Adi Nell — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:16:38 GMT

I am standing this year to campaign against red tape. Am I the only one drowning in bureaucracy, or are there other sufferers out there? I've been tracking the time I spend on box-ticking in one form or another, from nurse training to complying with the lovely Practice Standards Scheme, not forgetting health and safety (ionizing radiation regulations, anyone? Or tiger bags?) and having to throw out vast quantities of unused drugs. It's not pretty.... All the hours spent on this mean less time to look after my patients, my clients and my staff. Who pays for all the time I have to be out of the consulting room so that I can make sure the right form goes to the right person by the correct deadline? I think the RCVS should formally review over-regulation, and the actively campaign against unnecessary red-tape, whatever its source - even within the RCVS itself, dare I say.

Re: RCVS elections

Vikki Halliday LLB — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:26:37 GMT

[quote user="Jonathan Wray"] It would be more appropriate for us to vote for you.[/quote]

Mr Wray, I thank you for the vote of confidence, but as you point out subsequently;

[quote user="Jonathan Wray"]Occasionally, one or two kick out and get damn near crucified for doing so.[/quote]

I am currently crucified enough by the clients, the boss and the taxman, so I have doubts whether my sanity could cope with being crucified at the higher escelons of veterinary life!

Regards,

Mrs Halliday

Re: RCVS elections

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:06:20 GMT

PS to above Jonathan In 2001 Roger Windsor wasn't just nearly crucified when he stuck to his guns over FMD, and the supine attitude of the veterinary establishment towards central government interference. He ended up resigning not just from Council, but from RCVS itself. Definitely a principled stand, but very sad that the attitude of the others forced him to take this extreme step

Wynne

Re: RCVS elections

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:59:53 GMT

Malcolm and Jonathan. Many RCVS Councillors turn into establishment apparatchics, but some do retain an independance of thought, and will discuss issues with ordinary practitioners. If the forum doesn't run, I'll question individual candidates on the topics which I think important, but the forum allows everyone to see the answers (or lack of !!!!!!!!!)

I definitely hope it will become a regular and accepted part of the RCVS electoral process.

Wynne

Re: RCVS elections

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:38:26 GMT

[quote user="Richard Stephenson"]The final decision on running an election forum will be made this week - assuming Arlo will have it back!!!![/quote]

Of course I will.

Re: RCVS elections

J G Wray — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:12:21 GMT

Dear Ms Halliday,

RCVS is predominantly male, pale and stale. It would be more appropriate for us to vote for you. You are the future, not us.

Mr Ness is nearly correct in his description of what happens once you get elected to RCVS. They put something in Councillors tea, give them a little red book and they, by and large, conform. Occasionally, one or two kick out and get damn near crucified for doing so.

Last year two young men got voted on despite both admitting on this forum that they didn't really know what RCVS was about, so don't let that stop you, but take your own tea.

Regs

JGW

Re: RCVS elections

Vikki Halliday LLB — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:36:00 GMT

Malcolm,

If you stand for election you have my vote!

Regards,

Vikki

Re: RCVS elections

Malcolm Ness — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:41:14 GMT

It would be an excellent idea.

I have voted in every RCVS election since I graduated. Sadly, I have never yet found enough worthy candidates to expend all of my votes. What's more, several of the folk I voted for subsequently "went native" turning into mealy-mouthed establishment apologists. Uttering phrases like "Its best not to rock the boat" or "XXXX is very experienced in these matters, I am sure the decision is best left to them".

Re: RCVS elections

Richard Stephenson — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:35:58 GMT

Dear Mr. Wray,

Planning is under way at this very moment - I hope that there will be a discussion forum this year - last year it acheived over 20,000 page views and more than 600 replies. Voting figures increase from just under 17% to 18.4% (with a larger electorate) so not a massive improvement but at least in the correct direction!

What was more telling was that voters used more of their votes, with all the elected candidates getting more than 2,000 - the first time that has occurred. In past years only one or two candidates have crossed that threshold - and in some recent years none of the elected candidates got more than 2,000.

The final decision on running an election forum will be made this week - assuming Arlo will have it back!!!!

Yours,

Richard Stephenson.