96% of Irish Vets Use Own Software for State Prescription System at Own Cost
Veterinary Ireland says only 4% of vets use the state-provided IT system for recording veterinary prescriptions, while 96% pay for third-party software themselves. The body also criticises a rule allowing prescriptions without knowledge of the farm.
Veterinary Ireland, the representative body for vets in Ireland, has told the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture and Food (a parliamentary committee) that 96% of vets use third-party software at their own expense to meet the requirements of the National Veterinary Prescription System (NVPS). Only 4% use the application provided by the state.
The prescription requirement and the system
Under the Veterinary Medicinal Products, Medicated Feed and Fertilisers Regulation Act 2023, which came into force two years ago, certain veterinary medicines became prescription-only. The change proved controversial among vets, farmers and licensed merchants. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine set up the NVPS to record prescriptions. Vets can submit them through a departmental web application or through their own practice software.
Veterinary Ireland stresses that the costs were significant and that practices were offered no assistance in implementing the system. It acknowledges that the NVPS is nonetheless fully implemented, and says its prediction that the department's "free" system would see little use has proved correct.
Criticism of the Proper Assessment Protocol
The organisation also criticises a provision allowing vets to prescribe without a relationship with the farmer or any knowledge of the farm, known as the Proper Assessment Protocol. According to NVPS data, just 30 vet practices together issued 50% of all anti-parasitic prescriptions under this provision, while more than 1,400 vets issued the other half.
Veterinary Ireland calls the provision "regressive, anti-competitive" and a threat to 24-hour care for farmers. It argues that anti-parasitic resistance cannot be tackled when prescribing happens without proper veterinary advice, and claims the protocol has undermined the client-patient-practice relationship as a universal obligation.
The organisation also points to "political pressure" to allow more veterinary medicines to be sold through non-veterinary channels, which it describes as anti-competitive. In its view, practices cannot cherry-pick the easier parts of the service while ignoring their other responsibilities.
