RCVS responds to CMA’s working papers

We will take time to read the overview paper and five detailed working papers published by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) today [6 February 2025], which set out their emerging views on how the veterinary services market is working, and will be responding in detail to the CMA in due course.

In the meantime, it is worthy of note that the CMA had been “hugely impressed” by the dedication and commitment to pet owners and their animals shown by individual vets and vet nurses, and that nothing in the CMA’s work should be taken to cast doubt on the professionalism, clinical skills or ethics of the vast majority of individual veterinary practitioners.

The CMA’s proposals around the role of veterinary nurses, protection of the vet nurse title and the benefits of greater utilisation of vet nurses closely resemble our own thinking and work that we have already had underway for some time.

We were particularly pleased to note that the CMA has highlighted a number of shortcomings in the legislation that underpins our regulatory framework, which significantly affect our ability to work effectively.

We support the CMA’s stated view that our current regulatory framework, established by legislation in 1966, has not kept up with changes to the veterinary industry, for example, practice ownership by non-vets, and is no longer fit for purpose. Neither has it kept up with regulatory best practice, which is why we have been calling for legislative reform for many years.

We are acutely aware that the regulatory workarounds we have needed to put in place over recent years to compensate for this outdated legislation, such as our voluntary Practice Standards Scheme and the Veterinary Client Mediation Service, can only go so far until such times as new legislation is enacted by parliament.

Looking ahead, we welcome the CMA’s intention to understand whether there are any factors that could modify its stated concerns, including around improving our monitoring and enforcement of regulatory compliance, and that they remain keen to hear from those who understand the veterinary market to shape and refine its thinking.

As such, we look forward to continuing to work closely with the CMA, in order to help in their understanding of the veterinary sector in general and the role of professional healthcare regulators in particular.

We welcome the CMA’s intention to consult further on any concerns and potential remedies, and that they do not want to propose remedies that might benefit competition but disproportionately harm public interests protected by regulation.