Groups want CMA review focus on sector’s workforce crisis

Regulators investigating the delivery of UK companion animal veterinary services have been urged to put addressing current workforce shortages ahead of the potential imposition of price controls.

Some of the sector’s largest operators have highlighted the issue in their latest submissions to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), including warnings that efforts to regulate prices may be “unworkable”.

Meanwhile, a consumer rights group that was criticised for suggesting legal guidance may be necessary has now echoed the professions’ warnings about the risk of interventions increasing pet owners’ costs.

Published responses

The messages emerged following the publication of more than 20 separate responses to the CMA’s issues statement released in July.

It set out the areas the authority expects to explore during the current investigation, which includes the information made available to pet owners on areas such as pricing.

The paper insisted the inquiry group appointed to conduct the investigation had not reached a view on whether there are competition issues that require action.

No account of crisis

But, while potential barriers of entry are also among its areas of interest, several major care providers have suggested that what one of them, the CVS Group, called the sector’s “recruitment and retention crisis” has yet to be taken into proper account.

In its submission, VetPartners said the authority should “look in detail at the causes” of the present problem, adding: “The ongoing shortage does not only represent a barrier to entry, but also results in an upward pressure on wages and therefore prices paid by clients.”

While it recognised the issue was not the inquiry’s primary focus, Linneaus said the recruitment issue should be taken into “proper account” in the process and in any interventions that do arise from it.

Key challenge

A similar message was also provided by IVC Evidensia as it urged the CMA to “use this opportunity to recommend government action to address the key challenge facing the industry, [that is] the shortage of vets”.

Both it and Linneaus also attacked the possibility of imposing price controls, arguing there was “no basis” for what IVC described as a “very intrusive market intervention”.

Meanwhile, Pets at Home suggested price regulation was “unworkable” for first opinion practice, partly due to the “herculean challenge” of keeping such rules up to date over time, while Medivet warned the authority “should not put undue emphasis” on pricing and called for greater clarity on its underlying reasoning.

Prescriptions

One area where pricing concerns have already been raised, though, is around the potential for limits to be set on charges for written prescriptions.

Last month, the BVA, the BSAVA, SPVS and the VMG warned that such measures could lead to increased costs in other areas.

That warning has also been expressed by the Federation of Independent Veterinary Practices (FIVP) and Which?, the consumer rights organisation that was accused of painting an unbalanced picture of the sector when it released its own survey of pet owners late last year.

Transparency

In its response to the CMA statement, Which? argued that some practices’ decision to list prices showed transparency was possible in some service areas and could also facilitate the development of comparison tools similar to those available in other sectors.

It went on: “We recognise, however, that there is a need to consider potential unintended consequences that could arise from price transparency remedies.

“For example, practices could focus on providing competitive prices for services with prices they are required to list, but push up prices for other services.”