Worth Richard: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Worth Richard: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:963] 
Dr RICHARD WORTH (National) 
: 
 The opportunity to comment on this particular stage in the parliamentary process of the Veterinarians Bill is simply not one to be ignored. Along with other members of the Committee I am sure I have just listened with great sadness to a story from a leading member of the National Party in connection with the death of Sally on State Highway 1. On one view of it such are issues that should not detain the Committee but on another view they are incredibly important because the care and welfare of animals touch us all so deeply. I do not think Dr Cullen has a heart that bleeds in any realistic way but I offer to other members apart from him the sadness that assails one when confronted with the death of a loved pet. 
The Veterinarians Bill is of course supported by National but not without a measure of reservation. In the short time available to me I would like to detail some of the reservations that National members have expressed to me about this legislation. It is important legislation in the context of the aspirations that veterinarians have for this legislation which will govern their rules of conduct and discipline. It is interesting just to pause for a moment to reflect on the amount of legislation that has come through Parliament in the last period from occupational groupings that have sought to establish protections around their particular professions industries or trades. I reflect on the position of legislation in respect of lawyers and conveyancers. That legislation has languished because the Government is fearful of advancing it to a conclusion. What is the next step in that process? It is the Committee stage. But I am sure we will move on from that stage tonight in relation to the Veterinarians Bill in order to see this important legislation passed. 
The bill is structured in a way that would appeal to most veterinarians because of the logic and symmetry that lies behind the work that Parliamentary Counsel has done. The bill deals most appropriately with the preliminary provisions moving from issues of registration and practising certificates to complaints disciplinary hearings and issues touching the Veterinary Council of New Zealand and then to a raft of miscellaneous provisions that seem to be so important in the setting up of disciplinary structures. 
In the short time that remains available I would like to talk about the important provisions in Part 3 contained in clause 32 “Evidence and privilege”. For many people that might be a clause that would pass them by but it should not. It should not because of the critical importance of those provisions; under the heading “Evidence and privilege” the significant issues are laid out for consideration by the Committee. It is there stated: “(1) For the purposes of this Part every person has the same privileges as a witness in a court of law in relation to—(a) providing documents things”—and that is the word I want to come back to in a moment—“or information to the Council in relation to a disciplinary hearing or a medical or competence assessment;”. In the next paragraph another issue relates to the giving of evidence or answering of questions at a disciplinary hearing. I raise the question for consideration by the Minister the Hon Jim Anderton who with pen poised and listening intently I see is about to make a substantial contribution. In relation to disciplinary proceedings the significant issue is about why professional privilege should be permitted. After all are not disciplinary proceedings about getting to the truth? Why is it necessary I ask the Minister for legal professional privilege to be attached to those issues? I sense from the Minister’s thinking silence that he is about to offer a considered contribution to this debate on what is I believe a truly important matter.