From the AVA President: Racing issue has AVA at a gallop

Better regulation is one of our top five priorities, but what do we really mean? And what is really achievable?

Veterinarians are regulated by an independent authority administered from within the agriculture or primary industries portfolio in every state and territory (except the ACT, which is covered by Territory and Municipal Services). Each of these veterinary registration boards has at least one non-veterinary representative but always a majority of veterinarians. Despite the boards mostly being appointed by government and their  powers confined to administering the statutory acts, the predominance of veterinarians on the boards  essentially makes us a ‘self-regulated’ profession.

The power vested in each of these veterinary boards varies, but all have the power to start the process of ending a veterinarian’s career in the event of most serious misconduct. The primary function of a board is to protect the public from risk of substandard activities, facilities or misconduct of veterinarians as prescribed under the veterinary act, as well as other relevant acts such as the poisons act.

The mere threat of being investigated by a veterinary board has a significant positive effect on conduct, but there is comfort in the knowledge that they will follow legal procedural fairness – and that adjudication of any complaint is dominated by veterinarians who have a technical understanding of expected standards of competence. Boards also perform many functions other than their punitive role that help guide our profession to better serve the community.

The prospect of a single, national regulator of veterinarians has been discussed for many years, such that some members have expressed exasperation at the lack of progress. National recognition of registration, whereby a veterinarian only needs to be registered in one jurisdiction to practise across Australia, is at least a step closer with four jurisdictions completed, two in agreement but not enacted and two yet to commit.

Harmonisation of the various veterinary acts is a necessary step if we are to achieve a single, national  regulatory framework. The AVA has completed a set of principles that we believe should be fundamental to all veterinary regulation across Australia. We sent these principles to you in the April eLine requesting your feedback.

Racing regulation

Perhaps the most bizarre action in this era of deregulation has been the attempt by Racing NSW (RNSW) to introduce a whole new regulatory regimen for veterinarians. The opportunity for drugs to affect the results of competition and therefore the multimillion dollar gambling industry makes a reasonable argument to examine the integrity of veterinarians. But extended discussion between the AVA and RNSW, which included the offer to have RNSW represented in racing complaint investigations, failed to satisfy their demands.

Late last year RNSW simply announced it would exclude veterinarians without their new licence from providing any veterinary services to any Thoroughbred in training. The terms and conditions of this licence included the requirement that RNSW-licensed veterinarians would submit themselves to ‘the exclusive jurisdiction of RNSW stewards...’ This is clearly in breach of our obligations under the NSW Veterinary Practitioners Act 2003 and is but one of many conflicts.

Despite verbal support from government and the NSW Veterinary Practitioners Board (VPB) that a new licence was unnecessary, nothing at RNSW changed. We were faced with two choices:

1. Let the licence commence so that veterinarians would be in the very awkward position of either submitting to the onerous conditions or withdrawing from racing (and risk being seen as the disruptors to racing)
2. Seek legal redress.

The AVA Board strongly backed the second option, recognising that this threat was critical to some of our members and that a precedent would be a significant threat to the profession as a whole.

Veterinarians already participate in many accreditation schemes that bind them to additional conditions. These schemes include the Accreditation Program for Australian Veterinarians (APAV), AQIS Accredited Veterinarians (AAV), Johne’s Disease market assurance programs and even our own Australian Cattle Veterinarians’ National Cattle Pregnancy Diagnosis scheme. All of these schemes provide for a veterinarian to be excluded for a serious transgression. None of them provide for search and seize powers, punitive fines or interrogation before an inquiry.

Our legal stance was the only action that forced the first postponement of the licence and the start of  negotiations between the NSW VPB and RNSW to agree on a non-licensed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The licence has since been deferred by RNSW on at least five occasions. Unfortunately, these negotiations failed to produce an MOU and on 19 March in the NSW Supreme Court, the judge ruled against us. The licence terms and conditions were not considered in the hearing. At the time of writing, we have the option to appeal the decision. We will decide whether to appeal when the reasons for that decision are provided in writing by the judge.

We are bitterly disappointed in the result of the legal action, particularly given that our search of parliamentary documentation relating to licensing powers in the NSW Thoroughbred Racing Act reveals no intent to capture veterinarians or others providing services to racing. But since the decision, and with your support, we have increased the political pressure again and I remain confident we will not see a RNSW licence imposed. We will continue to support a resolution between the NSW VPB and RNSW for a process that ensures veterinarians are fully accountable, but in a procedurally fair manner. We will also battle to have the racing legislation amended to prevent such a situation arising in the future.

This whole issue has highlighted the value of being a single, united professional body, with the resolve to defend the profession and the resources to back that conviction. This could not have happened even 5 years ago. Something similar will certainly happen again and for this reason we have set up the AVA Fighting Fund to ensure we will always be ready and resourced to deflect unreasonable threats to our future. Search for ‘Fighting Fund’ on our website for more information and to donate to the fund.

Ben Gardiner
President

This article appeared in the May 2014 issue of the Australian Veterinary Journal