|
|
|
|
APPENDIX VISubmission from the important determinant of the programme structure for subsequent years. In conjunction with the monitoring round of testing each District veterinary Office will undertake a special programme of more frequent testing of herds which are considered to be most at risk from Bovine TB. Check testing of these herds will be allocated by the District Veterinary Office (DVO) generally on the basis of practitioner Availability. The overall programme of testing is scheduled to commence on 11 February 1985 and will be broken down into six testing periods. The initial period will consist of 9 weeks and all subsequent periods will be of six weeks duration. Approval for testing which has been allocated to a veterinary surgeon for completion in a particular period will automatically be revoked on the final day of that period. The reasons for this one (1) to encourage “in time” testing and (2) to enable the DVO, in co-operation with the practitioners and the farmers, to take swift and effective action to avoid shortfalls in meeting testing deadlines in any given area. In keeping with the Government directive on nomination, a veterinary surgeon to whom herds have been allocated for testing cannot transfer any of these herds to a colleague, save in exceptional circumstances and by arrangement with the local DVO. Each DVO will be authorised to adopt a flexible approach in emergency situations. The 1985 provision for disease eradication will enable twice as much testing to be done in 1985 as has been possible in 1984. This should mean that every veterinary surgeon can be fully engaged in testing under the programme to the extent that he or she is available. DVOs are at present in the process of contacting (a) practices and individual veterinary surgeons who have been engaged in disease eradication work in recent years and (b) other members of the profession who envisage participating in the programme. Certain comments made by or through the media about the 1985 disease eradication programme or about how it will be administered have been ill-informed and even misleading. I would suggest, therefore, that if you want clarification on any aspect you should contact your local DVO for further details. Yours sincerely,
R.G. Cullen, Director of Veterinary Services. EXTRACT FROM THE GOVERNMENT NATIONAL PLAN “BUILDING ON REALITY 1985 - 7.36 The Government have to make a fresh on bovine disease, particularly Substantially increased funds will be made available for , including an additional provision for , subject in a number of radical changes in changes include: -farmer nomination to be replaced by direct Department of Agriculture surgeons to carry out all testing and unity day testing) under the bovine TB and programmes; -testing and blood to be paid directly the Department to the veternatly who carries out these operations and who will be personally for their proper execution; -payment of reaction to be made on that removal of the slaughters made within the owner is notified to remove the . -tight including, where -such all cases of detected to disease . -establishment Department of Agriculture of disease 7.37 The November farmers to or
22 January 1985 To the Veterinary Surgeon named in the Address Bovine TB and Brucellosis Eradication Programme Dear Colleague In my letter of 19 December 1984 I gave details of the financial provisions for disease eradication over the next three years. I also referred to the conditions attached by the Government to provisions and explained their purpose. The main conditions, you may recall, were nomination by the Department of Agriculture of the veterinary surgeon carrying out the test and payment direct to that veterinary surgeon of the relevant testing fee. To allay some uncase in the profession as to these conditions would be implemented, I also explained how it was proposed to allocate this year to veterinary surgeons associated with a particular practice these herds which were normally tested by that practice in the past. These proposals were discussed with representatives of the Irish Veterinary Union at a number of meetings in late 1984. Despite the many efforts made to meet various objections raised by them in relation to the proposals, the Union by letter dated 14 December 1984 the Minister that the members would not be prepared to operate the programme on the lines required by the Government, No reason for . Following an taken by Crowly, Chairman of the Annual Health Council representatives of the Department and the IVU again met on 15 January. Wide-ranging discussions under the chairmanship of Dr. Crowley took place over a period of eleven hours but the outcome was a repeat of the Union’s earlier refusal to operate the disease eradication programme on the proposed basis. At that meeting the Department representatives, in a final effort to secure the co-operation of the IVU, offered guarantees as to the position of established practices in the years 1986 and 1987. The Department was also prepared to arrange that veterinary surgeons who considered that they were treated in the allocation of testing could appeal to a special live-man which would comprise two from the Department of Agriculture (one of whom would be a veterinary surgeon), two from the IVU and an independent chairman who would also be a veterinary surgeon. Notwithstanding these concessions, the IVU representatives again rejected the proposals. A major stumbling block appeared to be the efforts by the Department’s representative to provide testing for young veterinary surgeons and increased testing for those practices which for historical reasons are able to participate in the programme only to a very limited extent. Notwithstanding the attitude of the IVU representatives, there can be no question of the disease eradication programme being abandoned. So far as brucellosis is concerned total eradication is in sight and any hold up now could have very adverse consequences. As you will be aware, progress in recent years in relation to bovine TB has been scarcely measurable; we have been merely containing the disease at a relatively low level. It had been expected, however, that the new initiative in 1985 and the following years would have given new impetus to the eradication scheme. Whether this expectation can now be realised remains to be seen but in any event everything possible must be done to prevent any deterioration in the situation. Deterioration in the brucellosis or TB situations would have incalculable damaging implications for the sector and for the economy as a whole. In particular, export trade in beet and dairy products would be placed in jeopardy. In the light of these unacceptable consequences the Minister must now proceed with a programme of testing on the lines laid down by the Government. I am taking this opportunity therefore to ask you to put sectional interests aside and to co-operate it its implementation. Any veterinary surgeon who is prepared to undertake testing for TB and brucellosis can be fully engaged in such work to the extent that he or she is available. If you are prepared to undertake testing under the programme, I would ask complete the enclosed form and forward it to your District Veterinary Office. If you are one of those veterinary surgeons who have already indicated willingness to participate in the programme I would ask that you also complete and forward this form so that we can accommodate you as far as possible regarding volume of testing and geographical area.
R.G. Cullen (Director of Veterinary Services)
7 March 1985 To the Veterinary Surgeon named in the Address Dear Sir/Madam It is obvious to me from discussions with quite a number of veterinary surgeons that there is widespread misunderstanding within the profession of the background to the present dispute between the Irish Veterinary Union and myself, as Minister for Agriculture. Accordingly, I am writing to all veterinary surgeons on the Register so that everyone concerned will have a clear appreciation of the facts. The basic position is that the Government are prepared to spend £85.5 million on bovine disease eradication over the next three years provided certain conditions are met. These include (1) farmer nomination of the veterinary surgeon to be replaced by direct nomination by my Department for testing purposes and (2) the appropriate fee to be paid direct to the veterinary surgeon doing the test. These changes were called for by the Government because of the lack of progress on bovine TB eradication for very many years and because of their conviction that the BTE Scheme is unlikley eve to eradicate TB unless significant modifications are introduced including a greater measure of central control and co-ordination. The changes called for by the Government are, indeed, not the only changes being made but they are the ones which have rise to present difficulties. I would emphasise here once more that they are not negotiable. It was appreciated from the outset that these requirements could initially cause some inconvenience. Mindful of this situation, my Department proposed that, in order to achieve a smooth transition from farmer nomination to nomination by the Department, round testing for TB and brucellosis in 1985 would be offered to those practices which carried out such work in 1983. For each listing period each practice would be asked to indicate in respect of each herd which veterinary surgeon associated with the practice would do the test. Provided that the practice’s proposals were reasonable (i.e. capable of achievement) and were consistent with effective management of the programme, my Department was prepared to allocate testing on the basis of these proposals, the emphasis being on testing being completed as and when required. A similar discipline would be required of herdowners. There was to be a high degree of flexibility built into this arrangement so as to provide for situations where veterinary surgeons, through no fault of their own, would be unable to carry out testing of herds allocated to them within the agreed time schedule. Provision was also to be made for unexpected contingencies which could prevent a veterinary surgeon from carrying out a scheduled test. The test could be re-allocated to a colleague by phoning the District Veterinary Office. It was even envisaged that, in certain emergency situations, a veterinary surgeon could transfer a test to a colleague provided that the DVO was subsequently notified. In addition, a liaison committee was to be set up to deal with complaints by veterinary surgeons of alleged unfair treatment in the allocation of testing. The committee was to have had representatives of the IVU and of my Department, with an independent chairman. During the negotiations between the IVU and my Department the position as regards 1986 and 1987 was also discussed. It was made clear that performance in 1985, particularly as regards meeting testing deadlines, would be taken into account when testing was being allocated in subsequent years. It was also indicated to the IVU that, under the new arrangements, some provision would have to be made for those younger veterinary surgeons who hitherto have been unable to get testing in their own right. However, an undertaking was on offer that in 1986 no practice would have less than 90% of the herds it tested in 1985 or less than 81% of those herds in 1987. These were minimum guarantees; in fact very many practices would find their 1985 positions unchanged throughout the three year period. These are the basic facts about my Department’s approach. It was never contemplated, as has been alleged, that veterinary surgeons would be asked to test far from home base; nor was it ever proposed that every alternate test of a herd would have to be carried out by a different veterinary surgeon or by an official veterinarian. I also feel it necessary to emphasise that round testing in 1985 was to be allocated on the basis of the 1983 full round of testing and not on the basis of the very limited 1984 round as the IVU Executive erroneously presented it to members in connection with the recent ballot. I hope this letter will have helped to clarify the situation for you so that in reflecting on your position regarding participation or non participation in the revised bovine disease eradication programme, you will at least have a clear idea of what is involved and, more important, of what is not involved. The Government have given me a job to do and the money with which to do it. With the full co-operation of the veterinary profession we can lay the foundation for ultimate success in eradicating bovine TB sooner rather than later. I believe we all want to see this accomplished so that we can get on with the many other important jobs which have to be done in the sphere of animal health. Yours sincerely
Austin Deasy Minister for Agriculture
26 March, 1986. To each Veterinary Practitioner participating in the Disease Eradication Schemes. Due to the difficult budgetary situation we will not be in a position to have a further full monitor of the national herd following the ending of the present round on 6 April. It is our objective to resume full round testing again as soon as circumstances permit but, in the meantime, we will be allocating our limited resources on the basis of disease prevalence over the last two years, in a programme to begin on 21 April and continuing until 21 December 1986. Where possible, we will be dividing the testing periods as follows; 21 April - 1 June; 2 June - 13 July; 14 July - 24 August 25 August - 5 October; 6 October - 16 November; 17 November - 21 December and shall aim to have testing for the first period issued to practitioners within the next two to three weeks. As regards procedures - some aspects of which are still being discussed with the Irish Veterinary Union - the intention is that the practitioner/practice who carried out satisfactorily the monitor test herd during the current round should other than where the Department decides to carry out the test with its own Inspectorate, be allocated at least the first test on the herd during the 1986 programme. Subsequent testing will be at the discretion of the DVO’s which have been asked to ensure that the performance of the practitioner practice on the first test is borne in mind in the case of further testing. The Form 24A arrangements continue to apply but with a new deadline for receipt in the DVOs viz. 12.45 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the week of testing. In the event of a form being late, and of the practitioner claiming that it was posted/delivered on time, where material circumstances surrounding the date of posting/receipt cannot to verified, the DVO will be prepared to ascept on the occasions during the programme a written undertaking from the practitioner that he/she had taken all the necessary steps to have the form delivered on time. In relation to brucellosis, the general intention is that listing for blood testing will only be made where the herds are not subject to the Milk Ring Test and where they are being listed for T.B. testing. As regards fees, the Department is aiming to ensure that they are within four weeks of receipt of test reports at DVOs.
__________________________ J.A. Butler. Assistant Secretary.
10 April, 1986 To each Veterinary practitioner participating in the Disease Eradication Schemes Further to the Department’s circular letter of 26 March I wish to draw to your attention certain further changes in relation to the allocation of testing under the 1986 programme for TB and Brucellosis Testing. The over-riding requirement as regards allocation of testing will be the performance of the practitioner/practice in carrying out testing on time. The rules in this regard will be applied strictly. A.It is now open to a practitioner/practice - in general practice in his/her /its own account in the DVO area for at least two years - to notify the District Veterinary Office that he/she/it has the principal responsibility for the care and treatment of bovine animals on a particular holding and to ask that this factor be taken into account for the purpose of allocating testing. The letter should be signed personally by the practitioner (or partner in practice) and be accompanied by a statement by the herdowner concerned confirming the practitioner’s position as clinician. The statement which should be completed in full by the herdowner, should be on the lines of the attached text, copies of which are available from DVOs. Where the testing of the practitioner concerned has been satisfactory and, unless the DVO has conclusive grounds for believing that the notification is not soundly based, it will act on such notification as soon as practicable for the purpose of allocating testing. Any adjustments made will apply for the duration of the 1986 Programme. The arrangements indicated are being introduced in order to reflect the norma evolution of practices and to take account of the position of practitioners in their developing stages. They are not expected to lead to significant changes in the pattern of testing allocations especially since, in the absence of a change of clinician, the basis for allocating testing to practitioners, i.e. the definitive allocations in the 85/86 programme, will not be changed. B.Where testing is being assigned to private practitioners/practices, it is the intention that it be allocated to the practitioner/practice who carried out the first test under the programme provided (a) the testing performance of the practitioner/practice has been fully satisfactory and (b) no change in clinician has been notified which would necessitate and adjustment as provided for at (A) above. Yours sincerely,
(J.A. Butler) Assistant Secretary. to be filled in entirely by the herdowner concerned and accompanied by a letter to be signed personally by the Practitioner formally requesting that DVO take this information into account in the allocation of testing Name and address of Practice _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ Date: ______________________________1986. Dear Mr._____________________, I wish to let you know that the care and treatment of bovine animals on my holding is assigned to your practice until further notice and that it is currently my intention to retain your practice as clinician to my herd for the remainder of 1986 at least. Yours sincerely, Name______________________________ Address__________________________________________________________________________ Herd Number______________________________ |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
