In previous years, candidates were only asked to provide manifestos, which often contained information that wasn't especially relevant to whether or not they should be elected to Council.
Now, they are asked to share their reasons for wanting to be elected, what they can bring to Council and what experience they have.
That should make it much easier for voters to pick the right candidates, which is no bad thing because there are 20 vets standing this year, a record since electronic records began in 1997 and 1 more than the previous best in 2014.
This year’s candidates are:
Louise Allum MRCVSSam Bescoby MRCVSAndrew Clemence MRCVSTshidi Gardiner MRCVSReginald Godwin MRCVSPaddy Gordon MRCVS Danielle Greenberg MRCVSGerard Henry MRCVSRichard Hillman MRCVSBenjamin Kennedy MRCVSDarren Partridge MRCVSMartin Peaty MRCVSAlison Price MRCVSPeter Robinson MRCVSJennifer Simmons MRCVSSadie Spencer MRCVS Mary Thomas MRCVSWilliam Wilkinson MRCVSLara Wilson MRCVS
and the inevitable Tom Lonsdale MRCVS.
The full biographies and election statements for each candidate are available to read at www.rcvs.org.uk/vetvote25.
The four candidates who get the most votes will take up their four-year terms on RCVS Council at the College’s Annual General Meeting on Friday 4 July 2025.
Simon Wiklund, Assistant Registrar and Returning Officer for both elections, said: “We are glad to see such a large number of veterinary professionals putting themselves forward as candidates for this year’s elections.
"It is worth noting that any future governance changes, including RCVS and VN Councils becoming all-appointed bodies, are contingent on new legislation and, until that happens, we will continue to hold our annual elections.
“You may have also noticed some differences with this year’s elections, particularly in terms of the candidate statements.
"This is thanks to a change to our election scheme, which provides greater flexibility about how we run our elections, and the information that we can ask the candidates to submit.
“This means that, rather than asking candidates for a broad manifesto statement, we’ve asked them to answer key questions that are relevant to the role of a Council member, including what skills and experiences they can bring to the table.”
Ahead of the elections, RCVS will be running its ‘Quiz the candidates’ initiative in which veterinary surgeons can submit questions to the candidates standing in their respective elections, in order to better understand them and their views.
However, due to the additional information now included in each of their statements, this year candidates will only answer one question of their choice each.
Before submitting questions to the candidates, please note the RCVS will only accept one question per person. Offensive, defamatory and inaccurate questions will be rejected by the Returning Officer and not be passed on to candidates.
Veterinary surgeons can submit a question to the RCVS Council candidates by emailing vetvote25@rcvs.org.uk.
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
Ah yes, silly me. Well we'll just have to agree to disagree. It's not a job IMHO, if elected I owe no allegiance to my 'employer' the RCVS. The position is more akin to say a Parish Councillor, done more in the spirit of service than anything else and basically non-remunerated. The candidate statement allows the candidate to introduce and develop an idea; this sad little tick box questionnaire is so typical of the College today.
Gerry Henry I didn't say the RCVS was the employer. I just meant it's a task to be done. And when I want to ask someone to do a job or a task, I want to know how capable they are. And not in some mishy mushy parish councillor sort of way. Particularly for a job as important as this. I want to know what their credentials are, what experience they have, and what they think they are bringing to the table. In years gone by, it is also true to say that candidates often used manifestos to share opinions or ideas which were not relevant to the task, and indeed sometimes suggested a lack of understanding about the remit of a Councillor. I'm not thinking 'silly you' by any stretch, but we will have to disagree. I think the Parish Councillor comparison is an apt one, and I think the modern world demands something a bit more professional than that.