VETERINARY SURGEONS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19417, 27 August 1926, Page 14

VETERINARY SURGEONS

REGISTRATION PROVISIONB. OPPOSITION TO PROPOSALS. A LONG DEBATE ENSUES. [by telegraph.—press association.] WELLINGTON. Thursday. The House went into Committee on the Veterinary Surgeons' Bill to-night. Mr. H. E. Holland, Leader of the, Opposition, urged that men who had been practising for years .as veterinary surgeons, but who had passed no examination should bo allowed to go on practising. They could be registered as "existing practitioners." The compulsory examination should bo imposed only on those entering the profession after the passing of ihe Act. That was a provision of the English law and might very well be incorporated in this bill. Mr. W. S. Glenn (Rangitikei) and Mr. G. W. Forbes, Leader of the National Party, put in a plea for men who were practising in country districts and who had been of great service to the farmers even though they had not the qualifications imposed .by tho bill. Those men who had the qualifications required could describe themselves as registered veterinary surgeons, while those who had not those qualifications could be known simply as veterinary surgeons. The Hon. 0. J, Ilawken, Minister of Agriculture, said the bill did not prohibit anyone from practising as a veterinary surgeon. All that it did was to prohibit those who had not the required qualifications from using the title of veterinary surgeon?. Tho question had been looked at from every angle arid he believed the only sound' way of dealing with the problem was to register only those who had the necessary qualifications. Recognition o! Study. Mr. H. S. S. Kyle (Riccarton) said the bill was designed to savo New Zealand from the pitfalls into which England and Victoria fell. It did not prevent anyone from practising;, but to allow anyone who had not the qualifications to call himself .a veterinary surgeon was preposterous. To qualify for the degree of j veterinary surgeon required years of i Study aiid those who gave themselves up to that study were entitled to some protection. Mr. H. T. Armstrong, (Christchurch East) said justification of the bill was not to protect qualified raeu but to protect stockowners from frauds. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) said the bill was all right. It should go through and the House should go on with more important work. Mr. H. Atmore (Nelson) contended that capacity to pass an examination was no guarantee of practical ability. The discussion proceeded until 10.30 p.m., most of the speakers being hostile to the bill. At that hour the Prime Minister suggested thtvt the bill should be amended by allowing unqualified men to describe themselves as 'unregistered veterinary surgeons." He did this to facilitate the passage of the bill on which" he did not wish to Sfend the whole night. Mr. R. McKeen (Wellington South) suggested that the English .precedent should be followed and* that unqualified men should be described as "existing veterinary practitioners." • Mr. Armstrong contended that the Prime Minister's suggestion was equivalent to asking old practitioners to describe themselves as "bogus" veterinary surgeons. The bill was insisting on men passing examinations when there was no college in New Zealand where they could pass such examinations. Mr. <W. J. Girling (Wairau) indicated that he would, move an amendment entitling men who had practised for six years to register, The Minister would not accept this and indicated ho had accepted the suggestion of the Prime Minister. After the opposition to the bill had proceeded for some time the Minister indicated that he was prepared to move "that any person who had practised in New Zealand for" 10 years prior to the passing of the Act should be entitled to register and describe himself as a veterinary practitioner." Mr. Atmore said thnt the amendment did not meet the objection to the bill. Veterinary surgeons should be placod on the same footing as dentists and midWives. Was the calf of more importance than the child? Opposition then ceased and the clauses were agreed up to clause ID, which, at Mr. Jordan's suggestion, was amended to give the board permission, instead of mandatory power, to remove name's from the register. The remainder of the clauses were then passed, but the battle blazed up against the Minister's new clause, which Mr. Atmore describee! as "most unfair discrimination." Finally the clause was agreed to and the bill was reported with amendments