RE: Discussion about new POM-EA medicine category 'premature'

vetsonline — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:15:38 GMT

When is a consultation not a consultation? When it's an informal one?

Just because details of the POM-EA proposal were released as a concept note, surely it does not mean that it should not be commented upon by members of the profession it will most affect.

As Jo Cawthorne pointed out, this "informal consultation" was sent out to key stakeholders, including the BVA – the association that represents the views of the veterinary profession. In fact, the BSAVA claims it has been "working closely [with the BVA], primarily through the BVA Medicines Group, to communicate with the profession and develop a response to these proposals" - proof positive that these key stakeholders realise how important the opinions of practising vets and VNs are in this matter.

Even the concept note itself (available to read in full at www.vetsonline.com) states that it was published as "a first informal step to invite feedback from interested parties on this proposal". If not the veterinary profession, who could be better described as an interested party?

Finally, the call for vets to "get off their backsides and respond" was instigated not by Veterinary Times, but by a council member at the RCVS (another key stakeholder group) who obviously believes the profession should have its say on the subject.

Maybe this particular consultation doesn't exist yet, but when vets and VNs are being asked their opinions by the stakeholders that represent them, the debate can hardly be called "premature".