Heatley Phil: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Heatley Phil: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:931] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I will continue with a consideration of Part 3A “Conditions of practice and appeals’. I would like to raise a matter with the Committee as it sits and deliberates on this bill—the matter of when the conditions of practice and appeals are removed. Members will recall that those conditions of practice are all about the Veterinary Council imposing conditions on specific people: how they might practice and whether there are any guidelines as to where they can practise and particular disciplines within veterinary medicine they are restricted to and other areas they are restricted from. A restriction might come about through a recommendation by a complaints assessment committee or it might be a result of a disciplinary hearing or a medical competency assessment. It could come about through all manner of means. It could be some sort of limited discretion or registration provision for a vet perhaps a vet newly out of vet school who is able to practice only in a particular area for a time before he or she gains competence and moves on. That is what this part is about. 
 My concern is simply this: when we move to new clause 55C we see that it discusses when the Veterinary Council may cease to apply the restrictions. So there are conditions around a particular vet practising for all the reasons I have just outlined and the council may move to remove those restrictions. It can do that on the earliest of the following dates as stated in new clause 55C(1): “(a) the date stated in the relevant notice under section 55B(1): (b) the date on which the Council is satisfied that the specified person has completed in relation to the condition the requirement or requirements stated in the relevant notice under section 55B(1): (c) the date on which the Council is satisfied that the specified person is able to comply with the relevant minimum standards of practice without the imposition of the condition.” So in all cases the council can remove the imposition on that particular vet. My concern is simply this—and members will guess what I am about to ask; everyone is leaning forward because they can all guess—how often does the council— 
Hon Member 
: Meet. 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: —meet? Well how often does the council meet? The reality is that the members of that council are dispersed throughout the country. They come together from time to time to release these vets out into the workforce and to remove restrictions on them. They might meet in November but then might not meet in December; they are not like the National Party which is working right to the wire. They might not meet in January. They are not like National Party members who will be out there right throughout January door-knocking and seeing what the people want. People might see me on the beaches but I will not be sunbathing. I will be out there talking to New Zealanders. 
Georgina Beyer 
: You are tempting me now! 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: I will see Georgina Beyer in her bikini on the beaches of the Wairarapa but I will be working. 
But the Veterinary Council might not meet in December and it might not meet in January. We would hope that it would convene in February but the point is simply this: if a veterinary practitioner wants to be released from the restrictions around him or her because he or she has proved competency and if this council which meets in the first week of the month meets in November and the application falls past that time the vet has to wait all through November December and January. That is 3 months before the decision is made. I think that that is quite appalling. I believe that there should be a change made in this legislation to make sure—[ 
Interruption 
] The member Rick Barker who is heckling is busy in Wellington because he has no electorate to service any more.