Forensic Vet Report

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Time to leave the advise of the barrack room.

hachette

Not quite true, it also contains opinions and emotions Quote from lincroft 1710.

Letter without opinons and emotions is not worth much. I wrote it because I had opinions and emotions. If I did not I would not write it.

hachette

wealdroam wrote: »

Yes, you had certainly left those two names in place, but you had also left the names of two ladies directly involved in your case.

Do you know what I really don't care.

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

hachette

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

Time to leave the advise of the barrack room.

Why don't you leave then?

hachette

Lord Rooker of DEFRA made the inquiry in 2008 and made the list of recommendations. These recommendations were amazing. So why when it came to examinations of witnesses later in 2008 he said this was not priority as he first thought. He is no longer part of DEFRA so the process has to start again, I indent to start it again.

1jim

hachette wrote: »

Not quite true, it also contains opinions and emotions Quote from lincroft 1710.

Letter without opinons and emotions is not worth much. I wrote it because I had opinions and emotions. If I did not I would not write it.

You are of course free to include anything in your letter you choose. However, removing the opinion and emotion, sticking to the facts at hand and not quoting cases that have no direct material relationship with your case will make it easier for the recipient to understand and address...which is of course what you want
I really think you should seek legal support if you intend to continue.

WTFH

1jim wrote: »

I really think you should seek legal support if you intend to continue.

That was said several times in the previous thread too.

Give this one 2 weeks, it will get closed, then another will appear and the same thing will be said again.

lincroft1710

hachette wrote: »

Lord Rooker of DEFRA made the inquiry in 2008 and made the list of recommendations. These recommendations were amazing. So why when it came to examinations of witnesses later in 2008 he said this was not priority as he first thought. He is no longer part of DEFRA so the process has to start again, I indent to start it again.

Can you briefly say what these recommendations were?

hachette

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Can you briefly say what these recommendations were?

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Parliamentary Committee launched an inquiry into the Veterinary Surgeons Act in July 2007. Its terms of reference were to examine whether the provisions of the Act were out of step with developments in the veterinary surgeon and related professions, and whether there was a need to replace the Act. It did this by asking a series of questions on a range of issues and for written evidence in response to each of those questions to be submitted. A number of representative bodies, organisations and individuals submitted written evidence.

Defra submitted written evidence and the Defra Minister Lord Rooker gave oral evidence to the Committee which is published in the Committee’s report.

The Committee also published Defra’s response to the recommendations.

Defra’s written evidence acknowledged that the Veterinary Surgeons Act is in need of updating and replaced by new legislation but due to current constraints on Departmental spending, Defra is unable to take this forward during the current spending period (2008-11).

Page last modified: 9 September, 2009

© Crown copyright Access to inform

hachette

List of recommendations.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmenvfru/348/34808.htm