RCVS governance reform plan is ‘flawed’,  BVNA says

Veterinary nursing leaders have described elements of the proposed reforms to RCVS governance as “deeply flawed” and warned they risk reducing public recognition of the profession.

Senior college figures are likely to re-examine the issue this autumn, following the completion of a consultation exercise last month. But while it backs scrapping the current council election system, the BVNA called for nurses to be seen as of “equal merit” in governance matters as it became the latest organisation within the sector to publicly voice its concerns.

Closer alignment

College leaders have consistently maintained that their proposed changes are necessary to bring its procedures into closer alignment with other regulatory bodies and help to secure long-sought veterinary legislative reform.

In its published consultation response, the BVNA supported the move to an appointment-based system for both the RCVS council and VN council, saying its concern about a lack of opportunity for younger professionals had been addressed. It further endorsed proposals to remove  Veterinary Schools Council representation from the council and to separate chairing the council from the role of college president.

But it also called for both councils to have just 12 members each, saying it was “unclear” about the reasons for retaining a 24-member council, which the college argued recognised “the complex nature of the profession”.

‘Dated concept’

While the association accepted the idea in relation to clinical matters, it argued that the college’s overall reform package was shaped by what it described as the “dated concept” of the vet-led model.

The group said: “The BVNA feels that applying the ‘vet-led team’ model to all other aspects of the veterinary nursing profession without question – in this instance, such as governance, strategy and the development of policy – is deeply flawed. This approach presents a missed opportunity to capture veterinary nurses’ existing capabilities to govern, plus to further enhance and develop the veterinary nursing profession in future.”

It continued: “We believe that to future-proof the RCVS governance composition, veterinary nurses must be considered of equal merit and competence to be able to develop governance policies. While development of an independent regulator for veterinary nurses may be aspirational, we do also see possible remedy to this via the existing RCVS council.”

Allied professions

Another major area of concern relates to the aspiration for representation of allied professions if and when the RCVS is granted regulatory oversight for them.

The proposals said flexibility should be “built into future governance composition so that the proportion of allied professional members can be increased over time”.

Although such changes would see the number of vets on council reduced, it is envisaged that they would retain a majority of seats among its professional membership.

But the BVNA said it was concerned that including nurses among the group of allied professionals raised “a further possible risk of diminished public recognition of the veterinary nursing role”.

‘Backward step’

The group added: “Veterinary nursing is long established as a regulated profession by the RCVS, and we feel it is a backward step not to recognise it as such.”

The association said it would also “welcome responsibility for governance, policy, voting rights and decision making relevant to the veterinary nursing profession” to be fully delegated to VN council if vets retained their professional majority on RCVS council.

The college has not responded directly to the BVNA’s comments, but previously stressed that all submissions would be reviewed by its council, which is scheduled to meet next on 11 September.