Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: Dear Editor That the Veterinary Surgeons Act (VSA) is in need of reform is beyond question. Veterinary nurses deserve proper recognition, whilst the continued lack of regulation of veterinary businesses and veterinary paraprofessionals is untenable. The RCVS has forged a consensus that VSA reform should be built around allied professionals working within a vet-led team. As recently as February 2025, the RCVS defined allied professionals as ‘paraprofessionals who are part of the vet-led team and regulated by the RCVS’[1]. This model is predicated on veterinary surgeons delegating and overseeing specific veterinary acts to veterinary nurses and veterinary paraprofessionals. DEFRA’s consultation on reform of the VSA proposes a fundamentally different model. It introduces an expansive new concept of Allied Veterinary Professionals (AVPs) ‘who work alongside veterinary surgeons to support animal health and welfare’[2]. It seeks to bring a wide range of activities, such as farriery and physiotherapy, which are not, and have never been, veterinary acts into the same regulatory orbit. There is no mention of paraprofessionals, nor any proposals as to the minimum qualifications required for registration as an AVP. In an attempt to accommodate both veterinary and non-veterinary acts in a single regulatory framework, the consultation replaces the concept of the vet-led team with the veterinary team. Instead of veterinary nurses and paraprofessionals undertaking veterinary acts under the instruction of veterinary surgeons, the consultation proposes a model whereby veterinary surgeons are one of a collection of veterinary professionals, each of whom are licenced to work independently across both veterinary and non-veterinary acts. The value of the veterinary surgeon is that they translate foundational knowledge across a broad range of sciences to deliver holistic evidence based care to their patients. Furthermore, veterinary surgeons commit to universal service obligations to provide emergency first aid and pain relief to all animals. The DEFRA consultation does not acknowledge that this value is greater than the sum of each discrete veterinary act and fails to mention the thorny issue of universal service obligations. The empowerment of veterinary nurses and increased delegation to veterinary paraprofessionals working within a vet-led team has the potential to address workforce shortages and reduce the cost of care, without undermining the coherence and value of the services provided by veterinary surgeons. With a modern, fit for purpose, regulatory framework, neither need necessarily work for or even in the same organisation as the delegating veterinary surgeon, hence avoiding any accusations of monopolistic, protectionist or anti-competitive behaviour. For example, a licenced self-employed veterinary phlebotomist could be instructed by a veterinary surgeon to sample a group of sheep for Maedi-Visna serology. The decision as to which sheep to sample and what tests to perform rests with the veterinary surgeon. The phlebotomist takes the samples as a member of the vet-led team. This is materially different to the farrier who may work on the same horse as the veterinary surgeon, but they practice autonomously and independently, albeit in communication with the veterinary surgeon if warranted by the needs of the horse and client. These fundamentally distinct relationships draw on different foundational logic and cannot be managed within the same regulatory model. The RCVS has asked veterinary surgeons to support the proposals in the DEFRA consultation and has expressed a desire to continue to be a Royal College that regulates[3]. It has remained silent on the impact this consultation will have on veterinary leadership and survival of the concept of the vet-led team. The RCVS President has described a future in which veterinary surgeons 'refer' animals to AVPs[4] without acknowledging that when an animal is referred, leadership moves to the receiving professional. The model proposed by the consultation creates insoluble ambiguity as to where responsibility and liability lie. Reform of the VSA is needed and there is much in the DEFRA consultation that the profession can feel positive about. However, to ask veterinary surgeons to support proposals that are fundamentally different to the consensus that RCVS has built over two decades, demands robust justification for this change. The Chief Executive and President of RCVS should explain the rationale for their position as a matter of urgency.
Source: Veterinary Record
DOI: 10.1002/vetr.70411
Language: English
Subfield: Economics and Econometrics
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W7128780868
FWCI:
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: