Your data on MRCVSonline
The nature of the services provided by Vision Media means that we might obtain certain information about you.
Please read our Data Protection and Privacy Policy for details.

In addition, (with your consent) some parts of our website may store a 'cookie' in your browser for the purposes of
functionality or performance monitoring.
Click here to manage your settings.
If you would like to forward this story on to a friend, simply fill in the form below and click send.

Your friend's email:
Your email:
Your name:
 
 
Send Cancel
Parliament debates RSPCA's role as prosecutor
For the first time MPs hold a debate on the charity

The RSPCA has been at the centre of a rising furore over funds spent on prosecutions, and in particular those spent on prosecuting members of the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire. Conservative MP Simon Hart has sponsored the first ever debate in the House of Commons on the RSPCA's role as prosecutor.

The debate, which took place yesterday, saw a range of opposing views on the charity's work. Mr Hart, former head of the Countryside Alliance, has questioned why the RSPCA carried out private prosecutions, whereas other charities relied upon the police. He said: "All of this has a cost to the taxpayer due to the beneficial tax relief that all charities benefit from."

The charity says it carries out the prosecutions itself as many of the cases they pass to the Crown Prosecution Service do no make it to court.

During the debate Mr Hart reportedly focused largely on cases where the RSPCA has taken court action against elderly or vulnerable pet owners. Speaking of the hunt however he said he is "not here to defend people who breach the law," though critics accused him of trying to reopen the debate on fox-hunting. Labour MP Paul Murphy said: "All we have here today is the malice and spite of the pro-hunting lobby. The ban must be strengthened and reinforced."

Debate in the House of Commons yesterday was heated, with some MPs suggesting the RSPCA should hand over evidence from its investigations to the CPS, rather than pursuing prosecutions privately. Referring to the Heythrop Hunt case, former solicitor-general Sir Edward Garnier said: "Were a prosecution of that nature brought by the CPS…there would have been a far greater grip on the management of that case."

Other MPs however, claimed that the society was right to prosecute anyone guilty of animal cruelty - whether an individual pet owner or a fox hunt. Shadow Attorney General Emily Thornberry said: "Can we trust the RSPCA? The truth is that the vast majority of the public think we can." Cheryl Gillian, MP for Chesham and Amersham added: "I am second to none in my admiration of the RSPCA."

An RSPCA spokesman noted after the debate that "today's debate in Westminster Hall…only served to show how much cross-party support there is for the RSPCA from politicians. We take our responsibilities as a prosecuting body extremely seriously and will continue to do so. We are as committed to our mission, to promoting compassion to all creatures and prevent cruelty, as ever."

Become a member or log in to add this story to your CPD history

Vets launch new podcast for pet owners

News Story 1
 Two independent vets have launched a podcast to help owners strengthen their bond with pets. Dr Maggie Roberts and Dr Vanessa Howie, who have worked in both veterinary practice and major charities, are keen to use their experience to enable people to give pets a better life.

The venture, called Vets Talking Pets, provides advice and information on a range of topics, including how to select a suitable pet, where to obtain them and how to get the best out of your vet. Maggie and Vanessa will also discuss sensitive subjects, including end-of-life care, raw food diets and the cost of veterinary care.

The podcast can be found on all the usual podcast sites, including Podbean, Apple, Amazon Music and YouTube. 

Click here for more...
News Shorts
VMD issues guidance on AVM-GSL packaging

The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) has shared advice on its requirements for medicines considered AVM-GSL.

The guidance explains the information that should be on the outer package, and sets out the typical maximum pack size for an AVM-GSL product. It also describes the user-friendly language, structure and phrases required on packaging and product leaflets.

AVM-GSL products do not require discussion between the purchaser and a veterinary professional. This means that clear product information is needed to support sales choices.

The information will be useful for submitting new products to the AVM-GSL category and lowering the distribution category of products from NFA-VPS to AVM-GSL.

The VMD's guidance can be accessed here.