Blue Jackie: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Blue Jackie: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:955] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I would like to speak to Part 5 “Miscellaneous provisions”— which are numerous. Initially I would like to make a comment about the suggestion that the Hon Pete Hodgson be an appointed member of the Veterinary Council—a veterinarian appointed by the Minister. He would not be able to be so appointed because he has not been practising as a vet and under this new bill he would have to fulfil certain competency requirements and undergo some sort of retraining with supervision. Maybe we could have some suggestions over the course of the evening about who could supervise the Hon Pete Hodgson. 
In Part 5 the first miscellaneous provision is found in clause 79AA which members have discussed. It concerns protection for members of the council and others and states: “Neither the Council nor any committee member committee member employee or agent of the Council is liable for any thing done or omitted to be done in good faith in the performance or intended performance of their functions or duties or the exercise of their powers under this Act.” That is fair enough. The members of the council do need protection but they also need to be accountable. There does need to be some balance in that. 
The next matter I will talk about concerns clause 79 “Approved and prescribed matters to be notified and available for inspection”. Subclause (1) states that matters approved by the council must “(b) be made available so that members of the public may inspect the documents relating to the matter of free of charge.” That is also fair enough. That process needs to be transparent and the public should have access to those documents. Subclause (2) goes on to state: “However a person may be charged a reasonable fee if the person is supplied with a copy of any particulars.” I wonder what a reasonable fee is and who decides what the amount will be. That is an important fact. 
I move on to clause 80 concerning evidence which I think is an important provision. It states that the certificate of the council is to be conclusive evidence and I absolutely agree with that. It must stand up to close scrutiny otherwise what is the point? 
But clause 82 really worries me; “Power of Council to supply evidence for registration overseas” is of real concern because it means that we are giving vets leaving New Zealand a certificate of competency for registration overseas and that is a reflection of the state of our workforce. Not only are vets leaving in droves but so are so many other Kiwis— 
Phil Heatley 
: Taking their qualifications with them. 
Dr JACKIE BLUE 
:—taking their qualifications with them. They see no future in New Zealand and they are packing up and going off to a better life with better salaries and better opportunities. 
The vets themselves as reported in the Veterinary Council news brief from February 2005 recognise that as an issue and they recognise that their numbers in the workforce will fall short. I will read members a paragraph. It is quite important and highlights some parallels with other issues today: “The council will be able to offer limited registration under conditions to individuals whose qualifications don’t meet the recognised standards but whose skills sets are needed in specific areas. It is most likely that those individuals would be employed in sectors such as teaching and research and in areas of specific need. … This category would be used to deal with any emergency disease outbreak”—and that is my point. A flu pandemic will hit New Zealand at some point. It is not a question of if; it is a question of when and we will have a real problem dealing with sick people in their homes and having to invent a new type of primary health care. We will have to call on non-governmental organisations and on professionals who have perhaps been out of the workforce for a while to help. 
The vets are now recognising the same situation with a potential emergency disease outbreak of foot-and-mouth I suspect or something similar. I think it is sad that we are losing our workforce. The vets recognise it; they recognise that we need contingencies for emergency situations and we need to do the same for the flu pandemic when it comes. There is an interesting parallel here because I have been very concerned about the workforce issue in New Zealand particularly with the situation of the breast cancer workforce. It has put our programme under immense pressure. In 2004 we had to send our women over to the Gold Coast for radiotherapy. We do not have to send our pets overseas to see vets at this stage but it could become a problem. We may have to do that—to seek help.