Urging vets to 'get off their backsides and respond to a VMD consultation' on the introduction of a new POM-EA category (Vet Times, 19th October) is premature.
Contrary to the report, the VMD has not yet launched a formal consultation.
Jo Cawthorne from the VMD said: "In fact, we've only launched an informal consultation on a concept note amongst a small group of key stakeholders from the RCVS, BVA, RPSGB, AMTRA, AHDA and NOAH, in order to decide whether this is a viable idea and merits a formal consultation."
She added: "There is no need for vets to respond to a consultation which doesn't yet exist. If there is a formal consultation, it will be announced formally on our website and everyone will be given the opportunity to respond."
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
This is a totally crazy idea, and the sooner we all start lobbying the better. I thought the idea was to try to increase veterinary surveillance on farms !!!!!
Wynne
And of course, it would be most unlike any quango to slip major changes to legislation or regulations in through the back door. for instance by deciding that, due to a lack of response to an informal consultation, a formal one was not required? Or is that just the cynic in me trying to get out again?
Dexter, I spoke with Jo Cawthorne myself, and I'm convinced that there is nothing so underhand going on. She seemed genuinely irked that matters had 'come out' in this way and I believe that what she said could be taken at face value.
Maybe so, Arlo, but why irked? Was it a secret? Don't they want a response from the profession? Are the VMD embarrassed about the concept? As an "industry led initiative" the VMD must have been discussing it for some time with other "stakeholders", why not the profession? Why are we the last to know?
Maybe irked was a bad choice of words. I don't mean she sounded pissed off, or like she was hiding something.
She basically said to me that it was just an initial discussion to find out whether a formal consultation is called for.
Why not include everyone from the outset? Well, I don't want to put words in someone else's mouth, but I would have thought that in some cases, it's worth having a pre-consultation consultation to see whether it's worth going to all the time and expense of a full consultation (and, of course, asking people to give up their time to respond). I mean, if the small initial group all say it's a rubbish idea from the outset, then it will potentially save everyone a lot of time.
But what do I know?!
Perhaps I'm just paranoid!