Jon Ruben
1. The McKelvey report identified serious deficiencies at the RCVS that are not satisfactory for a professional body. What would you change?
As I know nothing about the inner workings of the RCVS, it is difficult for me to defend the current council against the damning report they themselves commissioned. I would accept all their recommendations:
1) Capital Projects - clear guidelines from Council to Treasurer and clear 'milestones' for each stage of a project
2) IT - clear guidelines on the alteration of original costings by the Treasurer
3) The setting up of an internal audit committee and the proper selection of an independent external auditor
4) Formal minutes of reports by executive staff to committee but keep them short please.
5) Limits for authorisation of expenditure by members of staff or committee/council members
6) Co-option of non-elected members by required skills audit rather than old boys/girls network - no it didn't say that but I think it was implied!
2. The RCVS has been accused of being disconnected from its members. What do you think can be done to improve this?
Communication is the key. Personally, I have been impressed by the new look newsletters we receive, compared with the dusty report from the 1970s. Obviously a blog by senior council members would be useful and facebook or 'linked in' pages where Councillors and members could 'talk', and even an online forum regularly attended by council members.
And most importantly of all: frequent (approximately monthly) five to ten line emails (i.e. short) with updates on each committee's work, and links to more detailed information on web pages and a reply address for members' comments.
3. How would you restore trust in the RCVS, if elected?
This would be improved by the two measures above and I would personally dip into the web forums and, if technology permitted, personally send a monthly summary of my involvement in Council by email to all members providing an address
4. How can the RCVS become more transparent in the future and what part would you play in this?
I think I have already answered this, above.
5. After closing its VN awarding body the RCVS introduced a significant "regulatory fee" for student nurses, which has been viewed by some as grossly unfair. What is your opinion?
Given the appalling low pay of many veterinary nurses and, until such a time as a new Veterinary Surgeons Act allows for the setting up of a Royal College of Veterinary Nursing, the RCVS should fund/subsidise VNs registration fees from an increase in the registration fees of practice owners, and in the case of conglomerates, should - if at all legal - extract an extra fee from the owners of these companies.
6. In the current climate of de-regulation and reducing costs, what cuts would you advise in RCVS expenditure and activities?
Sell the London offices with their high rates and costs and get small modern offices in Nottingham (or perhaps any other regional centre).
I also include my thoughts on the following issues:
The cascade
The RCVS, in company with other veterinary organisations such as the BVA, should make it clear to Government that unless the cascade legislation is repealed (at least for companion animals), the RCVS would not discipline any vet for not complying with the cascade.
Practice Standards Scheme
To be abolished in its present form.
Specialists
To allow referral to any veterinary surgeon considered a specialist by the 1st opinion practice without the need for a row of initials after the specialist's name.
Welfare
To allow vets to report animal welfare issues without threats from the disciplinary committee about breaches of client confidentiality.
---
MRCVS.co.uk would like to thank Jon for providing this information and wish him the best of luck in the upcoming election.
The Greyhound Board of Great Britain has published new vaccination guidance, with all greyhounds registered from 1 January, 2027 required to have the L4 leptospirosis vaccination, rather than L2.
