FAQs

No, you can do any combination of C-modules, although certain combinations are required for designated certificates.

Yes, you must demonstrate that you can communicate in English at an appropriate level. If your primary veterinary degree was taught and assessed in English then you may be granted exemption from language testing.

Candidates whose primary veterinary degree was not taught in English can demonstrate their English skills by taking either the academic version of the International Language Testing System (IELTS) or the veterinary version of the Occupational English Test (OET).

Please see the examination guidance for more information about these requirements.

While the RCVS is not a representative body, unlike the British Veterinary Association and its divisions, it is important the views of the profession are understood. The College does this through consultations, surveys, and via the input of the professional members of RCVS Council and its committees.

An appointment system will ensure that Council Members come from those with an appropriate range of knowledge and expertise, including, crucially, front-line first-opinion practitioners.

Some other regulators have recruitment criteria that ensure not only appropriate expertise and knowledge but also ensures that its board members are recruited from across the UK, something not guaranteed by the current RCVS governance model.

An appointment system may also appeal to a wider range of candidates, as some veterinary surgeons who are highly qualified to be excellent members of a governing body may not also have the skillset or desire to campaign to be elected in a modern media environment.

The College’s principal purpose is to protect animal health and welfare, and to maintain public confidence in the veterinary professions. It does this by setting standards of professional conduct and veterinary care, by setting educational standards, by providing guidance on what is expected of veterinary professionals, and taking action where necessary where there are concerns about fitness to practise.

It must do so in a way that gives assurance to the public and government that it is acting in the interest of the public rather than the professions, where those interests may differ.

It is therefore appropriate that the College considers governance reform in line with the principles established for other regulators, both in the human health sector and elsewhere.

The RCVS is indeed unique as ‘a Royal College that regulates’, and this may be a justification for some variance from the usual principles of regulatory governance.

RCVS Council has already agreed that it should recommend the retention of a membership of 24 people, which is considerably above the norm, and is also considering whether to maintain a majority of registrant members.

However, the medical Royal Colleges are not regulators and therefore their governance arrangements may not need to reflect the aforementioned principles; they are therefore not useful comparators when considering RCVS governance reform.

The traditional model of self-regulation, involving professional majorities and elections to governing bodies, is no longer in-line with government principles on good regulatory governance.

However, one key aspect of self-governance is a statutory regulatory body responsible for regulation that is independent of government – this contrasts with models where regulation is carried out directly by government departments. There are no plans to change this aspect of self-regulation.

In any event, those members elected to Council are not there to represent the interests of the professionals who vote for them, but to ensure veterinary input into decisions that are in the public interest.

This would count as a veterinary prescription, even where the human-licenced medicine is not itself prescription-only.

Human-licensed medication could be prescribed under step (c)(i) (in Great Britain) or (b)(i) (in Northern Ireland) of the prescribing cascade, however, the justification in this case would also need to account for why a veterinary medicine (authorised for that species and condition, or for another species or condition) could not be used.

There is specific information regarding prescribing human-licensed paracetamol on the RCVS website.

Additionally, the VMD has provided guidance on the use of medicines commonly found around the home:

In exceptional emergency circumstances, you may judge there is a need to alleviate a pet’s discomfort until a home visit can be made or the animal brought to the surgery. You could recommend that an animal owner use a human medicine that they already have in their possession, such as antihistamine tablets. This does not mean a pet owner should be encouraged to go into a pharmacy and ask for a human medicine for their pet.

As it already does for its appointed lay Council members, and for members of PIC and DC Committees, an appointment mechanism would be independent in line with Professional Standards Authority guidance, as is the case with other health regulators.

It is not possible to claim credit/equivalence for previously achieved qualifications.

The majority of these programmes are based on a blended learning approach, with the majority of your work completed remotely. However, there is likely to be an expectation of some attended sessions.

You should check this when you contact the provider and ensure you can feasibly travel to the relevant campus if required.

No. VetGDP applies to all veterinary graduates from summer 2021 and you will not be able to defer to the PDP. The practice or workplace you’re employed at needs to become an RCVS Approved Graduate Development Practice, which means that they must have at least one fully trained VetGDP Adviser.