Latest from Horse & Hound in Royal-college-of-veterinary-surgeons

Your ‘once-in-a-generation chance’ to have your say on changes to ‘outdated’ vet regulations

Becky Murray — Sat, 31 Jan 2026 13:31:23 +0000

A consultation on reforms to the “outdated” Veterinary Surgeons Act (VSA) has been described as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” – as vets and the public are urged to respond.

Defra has announced an eight-week consultation on proposed changes to the 1966 Act. These include regulation of veterinary and animal healthcare businesses and allied professionals, protection of the title ’veterinary nurse’, and modernised registration and fitness to practise processes.

The proposals follow the Government’s competition and markets authority (CMA) provisional decision on its investigation into the veterinary services market (news, 30 October) – and last month’s publication of the Government’s animal welfare strategy, which stated work was under way to assess how the CMA’s recommendations, alongside planned reforms to the Act, “can help modernise and strengthen the provision of veterinary care”.

Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons president Tim Parkin said the VSA consultation is a “historic moment for UK animal health and welfare and the veterinary sector”.

“We are so glad that the Government has recognised the need to replace the current outdated legislation with something flexible, forward-facing and future-proofed,” said Professor Parkin.

“It is very important that members of the professions and the public respond to this consultation, because it’s no exaggeration to say that the next few decades of the professions will be influenced by the decisions made over the coming years with regards to the new legislation.

“This really is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to help shape the future of veterinary professions and animal healthcare services, and to introduce a modern framework that’s fit for purpose in the 21st century. At nearly 60 years old, the Act is in urgent need of reform – it’s time for change.”

British Equine Veterinary Association veterinary projects officer Lucy Grieve told H&H reform of the Act is “long overdue”.

“The CMA investigation has resulted in further recommendations, but it is important to note that it was not the sole reason for the proposed reform,” she said.

“Modernising the framework and legalities under which vets operate should bring benefits to all key stakeholders, fundamentally to the animals they are designed to care for and protect.

“The rise in vet fees over inflation may be attributed to a complexity of reasons, but one factor which may need to be considered is that vets were possibly undercharging for services and professional fees for a very long time.”

Take part in the consultation

The CMA, which is due to publish its final decision in March on recommendations including requiring vet businesses to publish price lists and disclose if they are part of larger groups, has “welcomed” the VSA consultation.

“Our vets investigation is ongoing, but we have already set out our strong concern that the current rules are not fit for purpose and need reforming to keep pace with commercial practice and further build pet owner trust in veterinary businesses,” said Martin Coleman, chair of the CMA inquiry group.

A spokesperson for CVS Group, one corporate group that owns small and equine practices, told H&H the organisation “believes reform will help strengthen consumer confidence in the profession” and ensure “enhanced regulation”.

IVC Evidensia spokesperson, another corporate that horses small and large practices, told H&H the group is “pleased to see the Government taking action” – but added it is important that the consultation “reflects the significant progress in clinical standards and consumer expectations for advanced care”.

To stay up to date with all the breaking news from major shows throughout 2026, subscribe to the Horse & Hound website

You may also be interested in:

(Image credit: Future)

‘Major reforms’ planned for small animal vets raise questions and concerns for equine sector

(Image credit: Future)

What does the rise in corporate-owned vet practices mean for horse owners?

(Image credit: Future)

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

#savethevetschool: thousands back campaign as veterinary degree at top university at risk

Becky Murray — Thu, 18 Dec 2025 17:30:20 +0000

Thousands have backed a campaign to save the Cambridge University vet school – following a recommendation that the university “ceases veterinary education”.

The recommendation, made by the university’s council of the school of biological sciences, has been described by staff and students as a “bolt out of the blue”.

“Following careful consideration, the council of the school of the biological sciences has recommended that the university cease veterinary education at Cambridge once the final cohort of students is expected to graduate in 2032,” a spokesperson for the University of Cambridge said.

“The school has also recommended that the admissions process for October 2026 entry proceeds as planned.”

The spokesperson said that the recommendation comes after the general board asked the school council “to consider various options for the sustainable delivery of clinical services”. Research and postgraduate qualifications that do not depend on clinical services would continue.

“All options were explored in depth and weighed up carefully against the school’s strategic vision and plan, their implications for teaching and research, financial impact, and achievable implementation, either within the university or through external partnerships. After careful consideration, it was concluded that there was no viable long-term solution,” said the spokesperson.

“We understand that this is a difficult time for colleagues and students in the veterinary school and are putting in place support structures for both staff and students who may be affected.”

The news follows a challenging 18 months for the vet school; in November 2024 it was given 10 months to make improvements to its veterinary degree after a Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) accreditation visit in May 2024 identified “wide-ranging concerns”. The vet school was given “conditional accreditation” – described by the RCVS as a “final warning” – for its degree as it had met only 27 of the 77 RCVS accreditation standards.

Last month the RCVS reported that a subsequent accreditation visit took place in September 2025 and “while there remained a significant number of standards still to be met, many of the recommendations for improvement had either been achieved, or significant progress had been made towards them”. The conditional accreditation was extended by a year, with a plan in place to “guide how and when the 20 outstanding recommendations would be met”. The next accreditation visit was scheduled for October 2026.

H&H has asked the university if the recommendation to cease education relates to the RCVS conditional accreditation.

Staff and students of Cambridge university’s veterinary department have launched a campaign #savethevetschool, which has been supported by thousands of students, alumni, clients and members of the public.

In a statement on 12 December the veterinary department said “the decision to recommend the closure of what the Times Higher Education Supplement ranks as the best undergraduate veterinary course in the world has come as a bolt out of the blue”.

“Staff, students and supporters of the Queen’s Veterinary School Hospital and department of veterinary medicine at Cambridge University are calling on the university authorities to pause and reconsider a hasty, unjustified and flawed process,” read the statement.

“As well as lacking transparency and proper consultation about such a serious and irreversible move, closing the veterinary medicine course also has much wider implications, which are not being taken into account.”

The statement said that if another pandemic occurs, “those with world-class knowledge of animal to human disease transmission – both vets and researchers – will be of vital importance”, and highlighted the shortage of vets in the UK, stating that the majority of the school’s graduates “are from the UK and go on to work here”.

“When questioned by us yesterday, the university body which made the recommendation was unable to provide clear and compelling justification for it,” read the statement.

“They would not or could not explain if this rush to judgment is based on concerns about the financial sustainability of the school, about the quality of teaching, or about criticisms of the veterinary department raised by the RCVS in 2024.”

The statement added that the staff and students believed the school of biological sciences is acting “precipitately based on a misunderstanding of our finances”.

To stay up to date with all the latest equestrian news, subscribe to the Horse & Hound website

Client expectations are a major concern for vets

Becky Murray — Wed, 25 Dec 2024 20:33:07 +0000

A survey has provided a “snapshot of the current state of the veterinary profession” – as client expectations of vets remain a concern.

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) has published results from this year’s “surveys of the professions”, an exercise carried out every four to five years with vets and veterinary nurses across large and small animals. The aim is to give the RCVS, the wider veterinary world and the public a “comprehensive view” of the industry on key issues.

More than 6,900 vets took part and topics included challenges in the industry, wellbeing, and health. Client expectations/demands, stress levels and affordability of veterinary services were considered the main challenges facing the profession.

Of the survey’s respondents, 34% said they had been on the receiving end of harassment and bullying from clients in the past 12 months, and 17% said that they had a long-term physical or mental health condition that has substantial effects on their everyday activities.

When asked what vets thought the RCVS should “do more of”, themes included better educating the public/clients on the nature of the veterinary profession and work to manage expectations, providing more proactive mental health and wellbeing support, encouraging diversity and inclusion, and “regulating the corporate ownership of practices”.

“The responses we get from these surveys really do go into the foundations on which we will build our next strategic plan, providing the all-important statistical snapshot of the professions, as well as a temperature check of how the professions are feeling generally, and on specific issues,” said RCVS chief executive Lizzie Lockett.

“We look forward now to taking some of the key learnings and suggestions forward to our next strategic plan which we are in the process of finalising and will publish early in 2025.”

To stay up to date with all the breaking news throughout major shows such as London International and more, subscribe to the Horse & Hound website

Vet struck off for dishonest passport application claims he was ‘tricked’

Eleanor Jones — Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:50:28 +0000

A vet who was paid to dishonestly sign a declaration on a horse passport application, showing “blatant or wilful disregard” of the equine passporting system, has been struck off.

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) disciplinary committee has ruled that the actions of Vlad Butnaru, based in Folkestone, Kent, were “fundamentally incompatible with remaining on the register”.

Dr Butnaru faces two charges: the first was that in May 2021, while he was in practice at DRBVM Ltd in Folkestone, he signed a passport and/or passport application for a horse called Best Catch (Joey) and electronically signed a declaration that he “had read the above microchip, which had previously been implanted for the animal”, when the chip had not been inserted into any horse, and he had not read that chip.

The second charge stated that regarding the matters in the first charge, the signed declaration was false, that Dr Butnaru had acted dishonestly and misleadingly, he risked undermining procedures designed to promote animal welfare, and failed to take sufficient steps to ensure that the microchip number recorded for the horse was accurate.

“Dr Butnaru admitted the first charge on all counts, and that the declaration he had signed was false,” an RCVS spokesman said. “He also admitted that his conduct was misleading and that he had failed to take sufficient steps to ensure that the microchip number recorded for the horse was accurate. However, he denied that his conduct had been dishonest and that he had risked undermining a procedure designed to promote animal welfare.”

The RCVS’s case was that the chip could not have been inserted in any animal, as it was “later found sealed complete with its implanter, in its original packaging at the back of the passport issued for Joey”.

The disciplinary committee heard that another vet, Dr Uppal, was asked to check Joey in July 2021, by someone who had recently bought him. This vet saw Dr Butnaru’s declaration, and found the sealed chip in the passport. He scanned the horse and found it had a chip with a different number to the one in, and referred to in, the passport.

“As a result of this finding, and further inconsistencies between the age and markings recorded in the passport and those he noted, Dr Uppal formed the view that either the passport was incorrect or that it did not belong to the horse he was examining,” the RCVS committee report states. “Dr Uppal understood that, due to the inconsistencies between the passport and those found upon the examination of Joey, [the owner] returned the horse to the seller.”

In response to an initial letter from the RCVS, Dr Butnaru said he always checked for microchips, and did so the day the horse was checked for a passport, and that he neither provided a false certificate nor falsely certified that the horse had a particular chip.

In a witness statement last December, Dr Butnaru said it was an “honest mistake”, that he was “very upset this has happened” and that “I believe I was tricked”; he said when he saw the horse, his scanner did not pick up a chip so he told his client he would return with one and implant it. He said the client later told him he had found a chip, on the client’s own scanner, and video-called him to show the scanning and the chip number. Dr Butnaru said he accepted the video call as the client was coughing, and Dr Butnaru was concerned about Covid.

“I realise and accept that I made a serious mistake in the declaration that I made for the horse passport application in this case and I should have made sure that I myself scanned the microchip myself,” Dr Butnaru said in his statement.

“Dr Butnaru said he accepted the declaration he signed was false and misleading, but said that he was not trying to mislead anyone,” the committee report states. “However, he could now accept that it was misleading because the microchip 535 was not in the horse and that by signing the declaration it could be implied that he had scanned the microchip in Joey when he had not in fact done so. He also accepted that he had not done enough checks to identify Joey.

“He said he had learned that it is easy to be cheated and he should not have trusted the WhatsApp video and he said he would not do it this way ever again. He said he had thought it was acceptable to do it this way on this occasion because of Covid and the fact that they had been carrying out remote consultations with small animals during the Covid period.”

The RCVS spokesman said: “In respect of the parts of the charge that Dr Butnaru denied, the committee considered evidence from a number of witnesses, including testimonials as to Dr Butnaru’s good character. Having heard Dr Butnaru’s own evidence and his answers to questions, the committee noted in its decision that, as Dr Butnaru kept introducing new versions of what happened for the first time at the hearing and changed his account as he went along, as well as being evasive when answering questions, he could not be considered to be a reliable witness.

“Therefore, while the committee did not know the true reason why Dr Butnaru was prepared to sign a false declaration on a passport application, it was satisfied that he had made a false declaration dishonestly. The committee also found that Dr Butnaru had failed to take sufficient steps to ensure that the microchip number recorded for the horse was accurate as, if the passport had been issued on a false premise because of misleading information provided by Dr Butnaru, then it could not function as it was meant to which, in the committee’s view, clearly risked undermining procedures designed to protect animal welfare.”

The committee found “no mitigating factors at this stage”, but that aggravating factors were “found to be that Dr Butnaru had participated in premeditated misconduct, made financial gain from his actions as he was paid to make the false declaration, abused his professional position, and showed blatant or wilful disregard of the horse passport system and of the role of the RCVS and the systems that regulate the veterinary profession”.

The committee found that all proven charges amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect. It took into account that Dr Butnaru had no previous disciplinary history, showed “limited insight by admitting to some of the charges”, and “expressions of remorse”, and was provided with a positive testimonial.

Paul Morris, chairing the committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The committee was well aware of the impact and ramifications for Dr Butnaru of any decision to remove him from the register, but had to weigh his interests with those of the public.

“In doing so it took account of the context and circumstances of the case, all matters of personal mitigation, Dr Butnaru’s previous unblemished record and the need to act proportionately. However, the committee was of the view that the need to uphold proper standards of conduct within the veterinary profession, together with the public interest in maintaining confidence in the profession of veterinary surgeons and protecting the welfare of animals, meant that a period of suspension would not be sufficient. His actions were fundamentally incompatible with remaining on the register and thus the only appropriate and proportionate sanction in all the circumstances of this case was that of removal from the register.”

Dr Butnaru had 28 days from being told of his removal from the register to lodge an appeal.

You might also be interested in:

(Image credit: TI MEDIA)

‘It’s a complete Horlicks’: watershed moment as horse ID system is set to change

(Image credit: TI MEDIA)

First digital passport issued to foal as equestrian world embraces technology

(Image credit: TI MEDIA)

Horse & Hound magazine, out every Thursday, is packed with all the latest news and reports, as well as interviews, specials, nostalgia, vet and training advice. Find how you can enjoy the magazine delivered to your door every week, plus options to upgrade your subscription to access our online service that brings you breaking news and reports as well as other benefits.

Vet allowed to return to practice after ‘deep regret’ for former dishonest conduct

Eleanor Jones — Fri, 24 Mar 2023 15:09:21 +0000

A vet who was removed from the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) register for dishonesty in insurance claims for her own horse has been restored.

The RCVS disciplinary committee was “impressed” by Nicola Burrows, and the evidence given and is “satisfied that she will ensure the highest standards of probity and honesty in the future”.

H&H reported in May 2021 that Dr Burrows had been found guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, for creating an inaccurate clinical history for her own horse and then dishonestly attempting to make an insurance claim for the treatment of her horse.

Her adjourned application for restoration was heard by the RCVS committee on 9-10 March.

“In her restoration application, Dr Burrows included continuing professional development (CPD) certificates covering the courses she had completed during the period since her removal from the register,” an RCVS spokesman said. “Also included were letters/informal witness statements from the veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses she had worked with since her removal from the register and who expressed a willingness to employ her again were the committee to permit her name to be restored to the register, as well as character references and reflection statements.”

The committee considered whether Dr Burrows had “accepted the findings of the committee at the original inquiry hearing, the seriousness of those findings, whether she had demonstrated insight into her past conduct, and the protection of the public and the public interest”.

As well as the documents provided to the committee, Dr Burrows made a detailed opening statement to support her application.

The committee’s report of this states: “Removal from the register had been the most traumatic time of her life. However she now realises, with developed insight, that as painful as it was at the time she only had herself to blame for her actions. She understands and accepts that the penalty needed to be severe given the serious breach of trust to the public, to the veterinary profession and the insurance industry that was a direct consequence of her dishonest actions.

“She had taken a considerable amount of time, and required help, to truly accept and understand all of the committee’s findings. She can fully appreciate and completely understand how and why the committee came to their decision and recognises that her conduct, dishonesty and prolonged actions were far removed from what is expected of a veterinary surgeon. She now understands that removal from the register was the only appropriate sanction.

“These statements by her were not easy for her to sayand she is not proud of her previous actions. Instead, she is deeply remorseful and embarrassed. Her level of deception and dishonesty was and is, uncharacteristic and it is hard to believe that she became that person.”

The report states that Dr Burrows said she “deeply regrets” her conduct, and had spent a “considerable amount of time identifying, with insight, how she could start to restore that essential professional trust and integrity”.

After her removal from the register, Dr Burrows worked as a receptionist in a Vets4Pets practice, during which she had to deal with the public and their insurance.

“She stated that as a result of her involvement over the past 18 months in processing insurance claims, she acknowledges the ‘delicate’ relationship between veterinary surgeons, clients and insurers,” the RCVS spokesman said. “Additionally, working as a receptionist, had allowed her to recognise the need for contemporaneous and clear clinical notes. She also highlighted her CPD, which was relevant to insurance, as well as the fact she’d undertaken a professional ethics course to assist her rehabilitation, reflection, and insight.”

The committee took into account witness statements from other staff at the Vets4Pets branch, who all “gave positive reflections on Dr Burrows’ character and assured the committee that they would provide the correct level of support to allow her to return to work safely and that they would have all the necessary safeguarding measures in place to ensure that the public’s and the profession’s interest is always at the forefront”.

Disciplinary committee chair Judith Way said the committee was impressed by the fact “busy professionals chose to give up their time to provide witness statements and give evidence in support of Dr Burrows’ application”.

“All witnesses were clearly supportive of Dr Burrows’ request for restoration to the register,” she said.

“The committee found Dr Burrows to show remorse and she does now accept the findings of dishonesty that were made against her in the original enquiry hearing and stated that her conduct was dishonest. In the committee’s view, the evidence given by Dr Burrows on affirmation was very believable and she now accepts her dishonesty together with the gravity of her dishonesty.

“The committee also formed the view that the steps she has taken to address her dishonesty serve to confirm that she is passionate about the prospect that she be allowed to return to practice. The committee was impressed by Dr Burrows and the evidence given and is now satisfied that she will ensure the highest standards of probity and honesty in the future.

“Having taken all evidence into account, the committee is satisfied that the future welfare of animals under Dr Burrows’ responsibility will be properly protected, and that her future dealings with insurers will be honest in all respects and that the interests of the public will be met.”

Reprimand and formal warning for vet who kicked horse that kicked him

Eleanor Jones — Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:03:45 +0000

A vet who kicked and swore at a horse who had kicked him has been reprimanded and given a formal warning after he made “heartfelt apologies” for his behaviour.

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) disciplinary committee has published its findings and sanctions in relation to equine vet Samuel Hutton, a sole practitioner as Sheffield-based Hutton Equine Limited, and an incident in February 2021.

The charge said that a horse called Angel kicked Mr Hutton, while he was examining her at a livery yard in Sheffield, and that he kicked her back, in the abdomen. Mr Hutton admitted the kick, and made “heartfelt apologies”.

Angel’s owner, Ms A, said she had bought the mare in November 2020 and Mr Hutton had vaccinated her twice. In January 2021, Ms A moved Angel to another livery yard, after which the mare’s behaviour changed and she seemed uncomfortable.

The committee heard Ms A spoke to Mr Hutton and he suggested a five-stage vetting but she thought Angel was “protective of her back legs”, and so might not tolerate the examination. Ms A said another person suggested the mare might be pregnant, so she asked Mr Hutton to test her. She said during the rectal examination, she and Mr Hutton were in the stable, and Mr Hutton’s partner and two others outside.

“Ms A stated that Mr Hutton had administered a sedative to the horse and afterward performed a rectal examination,” the disciplinary panel report states. “They then lifted Angel’s feet, Ms A lifting the front right and back right. Ms A stated that Mr Hutton then lifted Angel’s left hind leg and whilst this was happening, Angel kicked out, striking Mr Hutton on his leg.

“Ms A said that Mr Hutton moved forward and punched Angel’s backside slightly, then stepped back and swore. She stated that he then ran up and kicked Angel once on her belly, using the sole of his shoe. Ms A angrily asked Mr Hutton to leave the stable.”

Mr Gliddon, an expert called by the RCVS, “agreed that attitudes to physical reprimands had changed over time”, the report states.

“In his report he stated that a reprimand administered by a veterinary surgeon that may have been considered acceptable by a significant body of the veterinary profession some decades ago, would no longer be regarded as such now, in his opinion. In re-examination, he stated that, in his opinion, there was not a reasonable body of veterinary opinion which would consider kicking a horse as an acceptable [way to discourage undesirable] behaviour. He said that it would not be good for the welfare of animals. If the general public thought that vets were using kicking as a means of [discouraging undesirable behaviour], its opinion of the profession would not be as high as currently. He agreed that some methods of physical restraint involved discomfort to the animal.”

Mr Hutton said the rectal examination was uneventful, after which Ms A asked if “we” could try picking up Angel’s feet. He said after she had lifted the right feet, he lifted the left hind, held it up for about five seconds, then put it down.

“Mr Hutton stated that he had stepped back when Angel suddenly kicked out with her left leg,” the report states. “He was hit very hard just above the left knee. Mr Hutton said he was shocked and in pain. Mr Hutton said he had pushed himself off Angel, stepped back, steadied himself by putting his hand on the stable wall, and then moved towards Angel and kicked her once using the top side of the toes of the right foot. He said this had occurred a matter of seconds after the horse kick and had been an instinctive action.

“As well as an instinctive reaction, Mr Hutton felt that an immediate reprimand following a serious misdemeanour was something a horse would understand and was appropriate. He stated that Ms A’s reaction had been to reassure the horse and she had not appeared to have been concerned about him.

Apology

“In the hearing, Mr Hutton apologised for the incident with Angel. He said it had happened in the heat of the moment. He wished that he had apologised straight away.”

Mr Hutton did not agree that Ms A had told him to be careful when lifting Angel’s hind feet; he remembered Ms A saying the mare was “not that bad”.

“Mr Hutton said that after the kick he had not punched Angel but had pushed himself away,” the report states. “He apologised that he had sworn. He denied using the sole of his foot to kick Angel. Mr Hutton agreed he should have thought about it before kicking Angel. He said he would not have kicked Angel, if he had thought about it. He did not think that he was acting in self-defence and accepted that after he had stepped back following Angel’s kick, he had put himself in a safe place.”

Mr Tremaine, the expert called by Mr Hutton, said large animals can cause severe injuries with kicks, which “would result in shock, severe pain, rapid assessment of one’s own injuries and possible relief if there were none”.

“Mr Tremaine stated that the kick had been an inappropriate action,” the report states. “However, he stated, the single lapse of professionalism, even if irrational, was not serious professional misconduct. He did not condone or defend physical reprimand in the form of a kick, but he accepted the rationale behind physical reprimands as a behaviour-modifying tool in a situation such as led to Mr Hutton’s response. He felt that Mr Hutton may have been insufficiently warned by Ms A about Angel’s behaviour.”

The committee heard that there was no evidence of Mr Hutton having kicked other animals, nor that this was his instinctive reaction.

“The committee bore in mind that the events had occurred suddenly and unexpectedly,” the report states. “The committee took into account Mr Hutton’s previous good character as supporting his credibility when assessing his evidence.”

The committee found that Mr Hutton had pushed himself away from Angel rather than punching her, and that the kick came “after a gap in time, albeit brief”.

“In the last two years, he said he had learned to be more controlled.”

The committee found Mr Hutton had made a conscious decision to kick the horse, although noting his description of his state of mind, and that he had been in pain. It accepted that the kick was an “isolated incident” and took into account testimonials provided, which “indicated that Mr Hutton is capable of dealing with horses, including those with difficult temperaments, very well”.

Committee chair Judith Way said: “The committee determined that taking all circumstances and its findings into account, this conduct was a single, but serious failure on the part of Mr Hutton and found the facts proved amounted to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.”

In determining sanction, the committee heard from character witnesses, who said Mr Hutton had an “excellent approach to horse welfare”, “never lost his cool”, even handling challenging horses, and was “pleasant, straightforward and truthful”. The committee also considered testimonials from 41 character witnesses.

The committee heard there was “no actual harm” to animal or human, and no financial gain, and found that Mr Hutton had since “sought appropriate training” and “demonstrated insight” by acknowledging his inappropriate action. He had an “unblemished” record, and the committee considered it relevant that, at the time he had been kicked, Mr Hutton had been concerned about a previous injury to his other leg, which “played on his mind when Angel kicked him”.

The committee found that “in light of Mr Hutton’s admissions, heartfelt apologies, developing insight and the testimonial evidence, that he is very unlikely to repeat his past misconduct”.

“It was clear that this had been a singular aberration by an otherwise competent and caring veterinary surgeon of long standing,” the report states.

The committee issued a reprimand and a formal warning.

“It has determined that this would be proportionate and sufficient to provide adequate protection for animals and maintain public confidence in the profession,” Mrs Way said.

Mr Hutton declined to comment further when approached by H&H.

You might also be interested in:

(Image credit: Future)

‘An urgent need for change’: calls for new veterinary law continue

Becky Murray — Wed, 09 Nov 2022 17:03:07 +0000

Urgent changes are needed to the “outdated” Veterinary Surgeons Act say veterinary professionals – as calls for new legislation continue.

On 25 October the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) met MPs, peers and stakeholders at the House of Lords to discuss the need to replace the Act with new legislation. It is hoped any replacement would include paraprofessionals, such as physios and equine dental technicians, becoming regulated under the RCVS umbrella, and the RCVS held a publication consultation for feedback on the topic last year (news, 25 February 2021).

The meeting focused on the “importance of a vet-led team” and it was discussed how the profession had changed since the Act was brought into force in 1966.

Lord Trees, a vet and former RCVS president, said the Act is “no longer fit for purpose” and there is an “urgent need for change”.

“The regulation of the veterinary professions is of utmost importance to animal welfare and all members of the veterinary team must be able to be held accountable for their actions, both for the protection of the animals under their care, and in terms of the wider public interest,” he said.

“The UK is proud of its world-leading approach to public health and animal welfare and, if we are to continue to uphold and champion our animal health and welfare standards, it is essential that we work and evolve together to create a Veterinary Surgeons Act which is not only fit for purpose now but will continue to serve us effectively for years to come.”

British Equine Veterinary Association (BEVA) projects officer Lucy Grieve told H&H BEVA commends the work being done by the RCVS in continuing to lobby for a new Act.

“While it remains a slow process, new legislation could provide greater protection for owners when allied professionals carry out work on their horses. At present there is no regulation for musculoskeletal therapists, equine dental technicians, or others, which means it is difficult for anyone to know who to choose, how qualified they are and whether they are accountable should something go wrong,” she said.

“New legislation could help ensure that only appropriately trained and regulated individuals are allowed to provide healthcare services to horses. Without set standards and clarity, the welfare of horses is put at risk.”

The Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Animal Therapy (ACPAT) attended the RCVS meeting and a spokesman told H&H the organisation is advocating for “specific changes and considerations with welfare at the forefront”.

“It is essential that all parties work together to provide optimal care for our patients. ACPAT believes animals should be provided with the same level of care as is offered within human medicine; within human medicine physiotherapists are an integral part of the multidisciplinary team and a close working relationship usually exists between the medical team and healthcare allied professionals,” said the spokesman.

“This ensures a holistic approach to patient care that aims to optimise wellbeing and outcome. This multidisciplinary approach also offers great benefit to our veterinary patients with collaboration between professionals helping to provide a full care package.”

An RCVS spokesman told H&H the society will continue to work with Defra and other stakeholders, and has followed up with MPs and peers who attended the meeting to have “more in-depth conversations about the campaign”. But the spokesman added that the parliamentary process is “out of the RCVS’s hands”.

“For new legislation to be passed, it is very much dependent on current priorities within Defra, the Government’s overall agenda, when parliamentary time can be secured and current competing bills within the Defra and animal welfare sphere,” he said.

A Defra spokesman told H&H the department is “aware of the views of the veterinary profession and the many potential benefits associated with updating the Act”.

“The department is currently unable to provide a timescale as to when any reforms might take place. When reforms are taken forward, all of the proposals will be subject to a public consultation,” he said.

Brexit ‘disaster’ and Covid make vet-shortage situation worse

Becky Murray — Tue, 10 May 2022 17:32:29 +0000

Vet shortages in the UK remain a concern as a “disastrous” Brexit and challenges from Covid add more pressure.

The topic was recently debated in the House of Lords, during which it was asked what discussions had taken place between the Government and members of the veterinary profession about the availability of qualified vet personnel following Brexit.

In June 2019, H&H reported that the migration advisory committee, a public body that advises the Home Office on immigration issues, had recommended vets be restored to the Government’s shortage occupation list, following a joint submission from the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) and the British Veterinary Association (BVA) (news, 6 June 2019).

During the debate, Lord Wigley reported that since Brexit the number of EU-registered vets coming to work in the UK had fallen by 68%, from more than 1,132 in 2019 to 364 in 2021.

“Is this not yet another example of the total disaster that Brexit has been for the UK?” he asked.

Defra parliamentary under-secretary of state Lord Benyon said Government officials are in “regular contact” with the veterinary profession and Defra is working with stakeholders to understand reasons for the shortage and develop “potential solutions”.

Lord Trees said reasons for the current shortage are “complex” but involve the “three Rs” – recruitment, retention and encouraging returners back to work after career breaks. He asked Lord Benyon to press the Government to raise core funding for vet students in the UK, which would “displace the need to take overseas students” and “immediately increase very substantially” the number of UK students undergoing vet training.

An RCVS spokesman told H&H workforce shortages are a “key challenge” facing the profession, which have been “exacerbated significantly” by the pandemic, Brexit and an increase in demand for veterinary services.

The number of vets joining the RCVS register declined from 2,782 in 2019 to 2,061 in 2021 and there has been an increase in vets leaving the register’s UK-practising category since 2018, either by leaving the register or moving to another category. As a result, the net number of vets joining the UK-practising category – the total number joining minus the number who have left – has fallen from 1,180 in 2019 to 269 in 2021.

“There has been a decrease in new UK-practising registrants from overseas, particularly from the EU, over the past four years. In 2018, 53% of new registrants were EU-qualified, but in 2021 this was 19%. This reduction in new registrants from the EU explains much of the fall in overall numbers of new registrants,” said the RCVS spokesman.

“There is no silver bullet for solving the workforce crisis and the ongoing impacts of Covid and Brexit. There have been recent developments that will increase the number of UK veterinary graduates, with four new vet schools on the horizon.

“However, we agree with Lord Trees that there will need to be significant investment by the Government in UK veterinary education if we are to ensure domestic capacity and resilience.”

British Equine Veterinary Association (BEVA) president Huw Griffiths told H&H the organisation is aligned with the RCVS and the BVA in identifying potential shortfalls of veterinary provision, and is leading on the sector-specific challenges involving equine vets and “therefore equine welfare”.

“Manpower can be relocated in the short-term but globally a long-term strategy is required to ensure adequate provision of care for our equine patients,” he said, adding that BEVA acknowledges the “three Rs” as key areas for focus and strategic improvement.

BEVA will launch a recruitment and retention survey next month for its membership, to build on the work of Renate Weller, who has researched factors affecting this area. Mr Griffiths added that BEVA will also be working with Amy Grice, a “world leader” in the understanding of the generations of equine vets, who has undertaken studies on the topic and will attend the BEVA congress in September.

“We are wholeheartedly committed to supporting our membership, enabling them to continue to provide world-class care for equines. The future will inevitably be different, it is our role to be malleable, and provide support and resources that reflect the needs of the professionals of the future,” added Mr Griffiths.

H&H vet expert Karen Coumbe, who works for Bell Equine, told H&H that although the horse world may have been “a little protected” from vet shortages compared to small-animal vet practice, this is changing.

“There are alarming statistics showing vets are not staying in the profession as long as they used to. There are many reasons for that, plus there aren’t the same number of vets coming over from overseas. And there are now more female vets, so more vets take time out of the workplace with parental leave,” she said.

“I’ve been very lucky, but generally the view is the public have higher expectations than previously, so if there aren’t enough vets to go round, then those who are available become less effective and burnt out. This results in a perfect storm of job dissatisfaction from vets and their clients.”

British equestrians step up for Ukraine with new appeal

Becky Murray — Wed, 09 Mar 2022 18:04:05 +0000

Equestrian organisations have come together to launch the British Equestrians for Ukraine appeal, to aid the developing equine crisis in the country.

The appeal has been set up by British Equestrian (BEF), World Horse Welfare, the British Equestrian Trade Association (BETA) and the British Horse Society, with the support of member bodies across the industry, to help facilitate a supply chain to meet the immediate need for goods on the ground in Ukraine. Money will also be raised to help buy supplies and cover the costs associated with transport.

“This is a dire situation, and alongside the immediate humanitarian crisis, we must do everything we can to prevent the unnecessary suffering of all equines and help those who care for them,” said BEF chief executive Jim Eyre.

“We’re fortunate that our equestrian community is blessed with so many willing to help those in need. However, it’s apparent that careful coordination is required to make sure urgent goods get to those in need through the correct channels. We hope that we can help facilitate that while urgently raising funds for the emergency requirements and beyond. I’d like to thank all those involved in getting the fund and export effort launched, particularly Alec Lochore, Alice Fox-Pitt, Roly Owers, James Hick and Claire Williams.”

Financial contributions can be made to the appeal via the British Equestrians for Ukraine fund on the World Horse Welfare website. Donations will allow the group to work with trusted local partners including the Ukraine and Polish federations and recognised charities to provide emergency support. UK taxpayers can sign up to Gift Aid, which means the fund will receive an extra 25p from every £1 donated, at no extra cost.

World Horse Welfare chief executive Roly Owers said the tragedy unfolding in Ukraine is “utterly heartbreaking”, adding there has been “such a desire” from across Britain to help Ukraine’s horses and those who own or care for them.

“This fund aims to do just that and, along with the BHS, we have donated to the appeal, and would encourage others to do the same,” he said.

“Without doubt there will be huge challenges to effectively target funds where they are most needed, so we will strive to work through a network of trusted local partners in what is clearly such an unsettled and rapidly evolving situation.”

A spokesman for the group for the appeal said it is also working with leading equestrian brands and BETA members to coordinate offers of the urgently required goods and then matching them with planned haulage trips to the Polish logistics hub established by the Ukrainian and Polish equestrian federations.

“This way we can ensure lorries are leaving British shores full, with the right supplies and correct exportation documentation to expedite the goods getting into Poland and on to Ukraine,” he said.

BETA executive director Claire Williams said what had been achieved in such a short time showed what can be done by working together.

“Shipments of hay and bedding are already on their way, but the logistics due to Brexit are challenging,” she said. “Feed companies with distributors and stock on the continent are stepping up to assist while others who are experienced exporters are committing supplies to be sent over either through shared loads or direct with their usual hauliers. Other companies who are not in a position to send products have also pledged cash donations to the new fund.”

Financial donations can be made at:

Equine: British Equestrians for Ukraine Fund

Humanitarian: Disasters Emergency Committee

Companies can donate small packaged haylage/forage, hard feed, and shavings in packs weighing less than 20kg and should contact info@beta-uk.org, which can help with the logistics. Any product supplied needs to be accompanied by export documentation and should not require export health certificates.

In the veterinary world, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) said the organisation is “determined” to offer as much help and support as it can to Ukrainian veterinary colleagues who are fleeing the criss and seeking refuge in the UK.

“Our financial support scheme for refugees that we launched in 2020 and expanded last October is therefore immediately available for Ukrainian veterinary surgeons with refugee status, but holding non-recognised qualifications, who are looking for the chance to rebuild their lives and professional careers in the UK,” said an RCVS spokesman.

The scheme enables UK-based vets with refused status to take the RCVS statutory examination for membership for free, provides financial support for travel and accommodation to help them attend exams and free access to RCVS library resources, and provides free membership to associations including the British Equine Veterinary Association.

The RCVS has also made enquiries with the Ukrainian Institute and Federation of Veterinarians of Europe as to whether coordinated efforts are being planned to provide veterinary support for animals that are being brought across the Ukrainian border into neighbouring EU countries, and will publish further details if and when these become available.

Equestrian retailer Foster Equestrian Ltd has announced it will donate all proceeds from purchases of Flex-On composite magnetic inserts. 50% will go to the Red Cross, and 50% to the Ukrainian Equestrian Federation Charity Foundation.

Leading vet who fabricated Home Office letter is struck off

Eleanor Jones — Sat, 17 Jul 2021 10:02:16 +0000

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons disciplinary committee has announced its findings on charges against Sue Dyson. H&H finds out more

DR SUE DYSON said she has no recollection of writing a letter that led to her being struck off the veterinary register, stating she would never knowingly behave dishonestly.

The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) disciplinary committee found that Dr Dyson was guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect, after a hearing on 9 July.

The former head of clinical orthopaedics at the Animal Health Trust (AHT) was charged in relation to correspondence about a study she led into the effects of excess rider weight on horses.

The committee heard the study paper was sent to a journal for publication. Editor Karen Overall sent it to be peer-reviewed by Matthew Parker, who returned it to the authors for revision as he was concerned by the lack of a Home Office licence.

Some research involving animals must have such licences, to protect animals, but the AHT’s clinical research ethics committee had not seen this project as of experimental nature, so had not advised that it should be referred to a Home Office inspector.

Ms Overall sent Dr Parker’s comments to paper co-author Andrew Hemmings, and Dr Dyson replied to say a former Home Office inspector was on the AHT ethical committee, and two current licence holders, who all agreed with advice Dr Dyson had sought from a current inspector, that Home Office approval was not needed.

Ms Overall replied to ask for a letter from the Home Office, to which Dr Dyson replied with a letter signed by a “Dr JC Butler”, stating that he/she was a Home Office inspector whose advice had been sought on the project by Dr Dyson, and whose opinion was that a Home Office licence was not needed.

Dr Parker investigated and was told the Home Office had no record of employing a Dr JC Butler as an inspector.

Dr Dyson later wrote to the Home Office: “I do not know what drove me to send Dr J Butler’s letter. It is a decision I will eternally regret.

“I am an inherently honest person and I have questioned this every day. I was under a huge amount of pressure. One of our dogs had to be humanely destroyed. Work pressure was enormous, with huge economic targets for the clinic and a somewhat uncertain future… I can only claim temporary insanity, based on mitigating circumstances.”

Dr Dyson added that the team was “astonished” to hear it was considered that Home Office licensing was needed, but that she was “fully aware that I acted completely inappropriately”. “My normal logical, careful, rational self who works strictly by the rule book, taking no risks, seemed to have temporarily disappeared… I humbly ask that this act of madness could be overlooked.”

Evidence relating to Dr Dyson’s health was heard in private, but correspondence in which she spoke of her “extreme remorse, guilt and regret”, and the incident occurring while she was in a “complete mental fog” was submitted.

She told the committee: “I fully appreciate the importance of regulation of research, and that the fabricated letter could have the effect of undermining the system of such regulation and I deeply regret this… I would never knowingly have done anything to tarnish the reputation of the AHT or the veterinary profession.”

She added: “When learning of the letter, I was deeply shocked and distraught. I could not understand how I could possibly have written such a letter, a situation which was in itself is extremely frightening.

“It was only when, several months later, I sought counselling for my ongoing distress that I began to be aware that there may be a psychological explanation for these seemingly reconcilable facts – in other words, an explanation of how I could have written the letter without at the time being dishonest or having any intention to mislead.”

The committee report states that members took into account that there was no harm or risk of harm to animal or human, Dr Dyson’s previous good character and “long, distinguished and unblemished career”. They also noted pressures that may have affected her behaviour, the “significant number of positive references and testimonials” – noting that the testimonials provided were “universally positive and demonstrated that Dr Dyson had acted completely out of character” – and her “lifelong commitment to equine welfare and the veterinary profession”.

But the committee also found Dr Dyson’s evidence “lacked credibility and was not reliable”, and felt she “exhibited a complete lack of humility and failed to demonstrate any genuine remorse or insight into her predicament”. Members also found that although it was out of character, she had knowingly acted dishonestly.

In sanctioning, the committee took in aggravating factors including breach of trust, Dr Dyson’s position and “blatant and wilful disregard for the systems that regulate the veterinary profession and animal experimentation and are designed to protect and promote the welfare of animals”.

“The committee determined that it was important that a clear message be sent that this sort of behaviour is wholly inappropriate and not to be tolerated,” the report states. “It brings discredit upon Dr Dyson and discredit upon the profession.”

Dr Dyson had 28 days to appeal the decision.

You might also be interested in…