Consultation Document July 2017 | Page 30

Modernizing the Practice of Veterinary Medicine INVESTIGATIONS & RESOLUTIONS •Investigator Appointments• Existing Provisions The Veterinarians Act provides that, where the Registrar believes on reasonable ground that a member or former member of the College has committed an act of professional misconduct or serious neglect or that there is cause to refuse to issue or renew or to suspend or revoke a certificate of accreditation, the Registrar may, with the approval of the Executive Committee, appoint one or more persons to investigate the matter. What Change is Proposed? With respect to investigator appointments, it is proposed that the Registrar may appoint one or more investigators to determine whether a member has committed an act of professional misconduct or is incompetent if: a. the Registrar believes on reasonable and probable grounds that the member has committed an act of professional misconduct or is incompetent and the Investigations and Resolutions Committee approves of the appointment; b. the Investigations and Resolutions Committee has received information about a member from the Quality Assurance Committee under the relevant section and has requested the Registrar to conduct an investigation; or c. the Investigations and Resolutions Committee has received a written complaint about the member and has requested the Registrar to conduct an investigation. Further, it is proposed that the Registrar may appoint an investigator in an emergency if the Registrar believes on reasonable and probable grounds that the conduct of the member exposes or is likely to expose his or her patients or clients to harm or injury, and that the investigator should be appointed immediately and there is not time to seek approval from the Investigations and Resolutions Committee. Why is the College Considering Changes to this Concept? While the approval process for the Registrar to proceed with an investigation fundamentally remains the same, an additional authority to appoint an investigator has been added for circumstances when the Quality Assurance Committee becomes aware of serious at-risk behaviour by a veterinarian. This latter authority is used rarely, as the Quality Assurance Committee’s focus is remediation and support. But when necessary, it is in the public interest to investigate a matter where significant harm may occur. The reasons for appointment related to concerns raised by a Quality Assurance Committee are actually the same as for emergency circumstances. It is anticipated that the need for an emergency investigation will be rare; however, when it is necessary, this authority provides a tool for swift public protection action. 30   Achieving a Modern Approach to the Regulation of Veterinary Medicine in Ontario