MILLIONS of pet owners will benefit from the most significant overhaul of veterinary regulation in six decades, as the government today published its White Paper setting out its vision for a thriving and fairer veterinary sector — but one industry insider said the “practical outcome could be higher fees and higher insurance premiums” for pet owners.
New measures, the Government says, will radically modernise the industry, delivering better protections for households and greater transparency around prices – helping pet owners understand what they are paying for, avoid unexpected costs and choose the best value care for their pets.
To this end, vet practices will be required to publish price lists for common treatments and be transparent about options and changes, allowing pet owners to choose the best treatment for their animals.
This will be supported by an enhanced ‘Find a Vet’ service and a £21 cap on written prescription fees. The Government adds that knowing key prices beforehand will help owners choose the best value.
A new independent veterinary ombudsman is also being considered to give pet owners a clear and straightforward route to redress when complaints cannot be resolved directly with their practice.
With the power to make binding decisions, the ombudsman will ensure disputes are resolved more quickly and fairly, increasing confidence across the sector.
The White Paper includes new proposals for veterinary businesses to be subject to statutory regulation, including a mandatory licencing system, inspections and published compliance reports to improve accountability and choice.
Greater transparency around prices and practice ownership will be mandated for the first time, so pet owners can make genuinely informed decisions about their care.
Secretary of State for Defra, Emma Reynolds, said: “Pets are part of the family, but for too many households the cost of caring for them has become a real worry. These reforms will help owners avoid unexpected bills, compare prices more easily and get the best value care for their pets.
“We’re modernising a system that hasn’t been updated for sixty years, putting pet owners first while giving vets the modern framework they need to support the future of the profession.”
The White Paper responds to the findings of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which highlighted concerns around transparency and competition in the veterinary sector. Recommendations from the CMA will address competition concerns, ahead of the new legislation coming into force.
These changes, the Government says, are vital with the profession today radically different to the 1960s when the Veterinary Surgeons Act was introduced. The industry was then largely made up of agricultural vet practices and small family run businesses.
The sector is now dominated by small animal care and a handful of large corporates meaning the legislation has not kept pace with the modern world.
The reforms will support veterinary professionals and businesses, ensuring the regulatory framework keeps pace with a modern, growing sector.
UK Chief Veterinary Officer Christine Middlemiss, said: “The veterinary profession has changed enormously over the past 60 years, but the legislation underpinning it has not kept pace.
“This new framework will build a stronger, more resilient veterinary profession fit to meet the needs of the UK’s animal sector whilst ensuring the highest standards of care for our animals.”
British Veterinary Association President Dr. Rob Williams MRCVS, added: “Current veterinary legislation is shockingly outdated and frankly is no longer fit for purpose.
“The publication of today’s White Paper is a positive, landmark moment for vet professionals, as well as for animals and their owners, taking us all one step closer to improved legislation that meets the demands of modern veterinary medicine.”
Meanwhile, Tim Hutchinson MRCVS, President of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, said: “These are the biggest reforms to the veterinary sector since 1966 and, while we welcome the CMA’s pricing and transparency recommendations being incorporated into this white paper, it’s no overstatement to say that Defra’s proposed reforms are even more significant for the public interest and animal health and welfare.
“They will provide stronger powers for the RCVS to regulate all veterinary and animal healthcare businesses, ensure the title ‘veterinary nurse’ is used only by properly qualified professionals, allow for the regulation of the wider veterinary team, and introduce a modern fitness to practise framework.”
The White Paper is being introduced following extensive public consultation. The consultation received thousands of responses from the public and veterinary sector, which were carefully considered to shape the new White Paper.
Eddie Holmes, Founder at vet comparison website, VetsCompared, said he welcomed the government’s intention to improve transparency, competition and outcomes for pet owners, “as the veterinary sector needs reform, and pet owners should have clearer information on prices, ownership, treatment options, prescriptions and routes of redress”.
He continued: “However, there is a serious risk that these reforms are being presented as a route to cheaper vet fees when the practical outcome could be higher fees and higher insurance premiums, unless the implementation is handled carefully.
“It is notable that, while the government headline refers to “cheaper vet fees”, the industry voices quoted in the announcement do not appear to make that claim.
“The comments from the RCVS, BVA and BVNA focus on modernisation, regulation, professional recognition, animal welfare, transparency, choice and public confidence. Those are important objectives, but they are not evidence that prices will come down.
“That distinction matters because these reforms do not simply remove cost from the system. In many areas, they add cost.
“Mandatory licensing, inspections, published compliance reports, price disclosure, complaint handling, ombudsman processes, data submissions and enhanced Find a Vet reporting will all create new operational burdens for practices.
“Large corporate groups can centralise that work across compliance, legal, data and pricing teams. Independent practices cannot do that so easily. For many independents, the same people delivering clinical care will also be expected to manage more administration, more reporting, more documentation and more regulatory process. That cost has to go somewhere.
“If written prescription fees are capped, that may reduce one visible charge for pet owners. But if practices lose income from prescriptions or medicine margins, they are likely to recover it through consultation fees, diagnostics, procedures, medication reviews, care plans or other charges. That is not necessarily profiteering. It is basic cost recovery in a high-pressure clinical business.
“There is also a risk that price transparency pushes some prices up, not down. If independent practices discover that they are materially cheaper than corporate competitors, many will conclude that they have been undercharging. Public pricing may reduce excessive charges in some areas, but it may also cause cheaper practices to move closer to the local market rate.
“The insurance effect also matters. If practice costs are recovered through consultations, diagnostics and procedures, those costs may flow into insurance claims. Higher claims costs usually mean higher premiums, narrower cover, higher excesses or tighter insurer controls. Pet owners may save on one line item while paying more through insurance or treatment costs elsewhere.
“The policy objective is right. Pet owners deserve transparency. But the implementation must not unintentionally accelerate consolidation or make independent practice ownership less viable.
“Good independent vets are often the practices most likely to provide continuity, local accountability and fair pricing. They should not be hit hardest by a compliance model designed around the capacity of large corporate groups.
“The government and CMA should ensure that these reforms are proportionate, digitally deliverable and realistic for independent practices. Otherwise, a package promoted as reducing costs could end up increasing fees, increasing insurance premiums and weakening the independent sector that many pet owners trust most.”
