Good afternoon and thank you very much for inviting me back. It is a pleasure to be here. We are now close to the end of our process. Throughout the inquiry , we have admired the professionalism of vets and veterinary nurses, often working in pressured and emotive circumstances. But the commitment of individual professionals is only part of the wider picture. Veterinary services are principally delivered through busi...
Good afternoon and thank you very much for inviting me back. It is a pleasure to be here. We are now close to the end of our process. Throughout the inquiry , we have admired the professionalism of vets and veterinary nurses, often working in pressured and emotive circumstances. But the commitment of individual professionals is only part of the wider picture. Veterinary services are principally delivered through businesses, and our report set out serious concerns about the behaviour of some businesses including limited transparency over ownership, pricing and quality, unexpected treatment costs, high medicine prices and weak complaints processes. All this within a regulatory framework that is outdated and not fit for current purposes. Our remedies will address those issues by improving transparency, choice and accountability, while keeping animal welfare and public health at the heart of the system. Wider regulatory reform is also necessary, and we welcome the government’s work in this area. These decisions have been shaped by extensive engagement across the sector, including thousands of veterinary professionals and pet owners, and that evidence helped us refine the package to ensure it is proportionate and practical. How the remedies package will apply in practice First, a word on implementation – understandably that is where much of the interest now lies. In designing the package, we have taken account of the administrative burden on practices and the fact that businesses start from different positions. We adjusted a number of remedies in response to consultation feedback , including simplifying the price list, the calculation of the prescription fee and allowing more time for smaller independent practices to comply. The aim is a clearer baseline for information, fairness and client confidence, not unnecessary bureaucracy. Now, on the remedies package itself. The package is broad because the concerns we identified arise at different stages of the client journey including: selecting a practice deciding on treatments medicines and end-of-life choices Transparency is central. Not because veterinary care can be reduced to a simple price comparison: clients choose practices for many reasons, and treatment decisions are shaped by professional judgment and the needs of the individual animal. But transparency nevertheless matters – it helps clients understand the basis on which they are choosing and paying for care. In practical terms, that means clearer information about who owns a practice, including where individual practices are part of a larger group, better visibility of prices for a standard list of services and for more complex treatments, clearer information about out-of-hours arrangements, and improved tools to help clients compare providers. The objective is straightforward: better-informed clients responsive practices stronger trust in the sector a framework that supports good outcomes for pet owners, vets and the animals in their care We found that the branding and signage of 4 of the 6 large veterinary groups did not make clear to clients that individual practices were part of a larger group. This matters not only because many pet owners who expressed a preference said they preferred independent practices, but more fundamentally because people should know who they are doing business with. Our remedies will change this. For some practices this will make little difference to what they already do; for others, it will require adjustments to websites, signage and internal systems. An important part of the package concerns what happens in the consultation room and immediately afterwards. We heard repeatedly that treatment decisions can involve significant costs and difficult choices, sometimes in emotive circumstances. That is why the remedies include written estimates for non-urgent treatment pathways reasonably likely to cost £500 or more, and itemised bills afterwards. These measures are not intended to interfere with clinical judgment, but to support clearer conversations with clients about likely costs, available options and what was ultimately charged. Alongside that, veterinary businesses will need policies and processes that support vets and veterinary nurses in giving impartial advice about treatment and referral options in line with the individual vet’s professional responsibilities. For many of you, this will reflect the environment in which you currently practise but we have heard that this is not always the case. The aim is to ensure that business systems support your professional judgment consistently, in a way that benefits clients, supports veterinary professionals, and helps animals receive care that is right for their circumstances. Medicines are one of the clearest examples of where better information could make a tangible difference for clients. Our evidence showed that some pet owners could save meaningful amounts if they were better able to compare options. Practices will need to inform clients more clearly that they can request a written prescription, that medicines may be cheaper online, and that there may be clinically equivalent alternatives to certain own-brand products. We are capping prescription fees at levels we consider fair and which should cover cost, so that those fees do not become a barrier to clients choosing cheaper alternatives. We recognise that this may prompt some practices to think about how medicines fit within their wider business model. But the answer cannot be to preserve a situation in which clients are not aware that they may be paying more than they need to. The aim is to support informed choice, fair pricing and better affordability, particularly for those managing chronic conditions in their pets. There are other measures that may receive less public attention but matter greatly in practice: clearer and more consistent complaints processes, with minimum standards and access to mediation greater clarity on pet care plans, so clients can better understand what is included and how claimed savings have been calculated clearer presentation of cremation options and pricing at what is a very distressing time action on out-of-hours services to reduce contractual barriers that can make it difficult for practices to switch provider or bring provision in-house These measures are intended to improve how the sector works in ways that benefit pet owners, support practices, and improve outcomes for pets. Critical comments Our proposals have been broadly welcomed by consumer groups and many within the profession, but not surprisingly there have been some challenges. One is that, while our remedies will lead to lower prices for veterinary services for pets, this will disadvantage farmers in rural areas where, it has been suggested, fees paid by pet owners cross-subsidise fees for farmers. I recognise the challenges faced by agricultural businesses but is denying pet owners full transparency over pricing – pet owners paying more so farmers can pay less – a fair or efficient way of dealing with these issues? Personally, I am not convinced. Then there is the opposite argument, put forward by a financial services firm in a marketing document, that independent vets have responded to our remedies by increasing prices to match the fees of larger groups. This seems an odd contention. Our remedies are not yet in place; the sample on which this non-independent survey is based is tiny and it contains no like-for-like price comparisons. The fact is that many retail markets, including professional services businesses, have transparent pricing and this drives competition. Transparency will give pet owners clearer information about ownership, prices and costs so they can make more informed choices and that supports competition not just on price, but also on service quality and brand reputation. Next steps We are in the process of drafting the measures that will turn these remedies into binding obligations – Orders, that will apply to veterinary businesses, and undertakings, that will be given to us by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) . Later this month we intend to consult on funding measures, including the levy on veterinary businesses, and in July we plan to consult on provisions which will implement the remedies package. These consultations are not about reopening the decisions in our final report but testing the drafting and making sure the requirements are clear and workable. I would encourage responses from across the sector. Once the Orders are made, different remedies will take effect on different timetables. Some will apply very quickly: out-of-hours providers will need to comply with obligations on contracts from the day after the Order is made. Others will have longer lead-in periods: the requirement to share complaints information with the RCVS will allow 18 months for compliance. Most remedies will fall somewhere in between, and smaller businesses, with 15 or fewer first opinion practices (FOPs), will generally have more time to comply than larger providers. The funding Order will set out when levy payments will be due, the amount payable, and the practical arrangements for collection. There is a useful explainer for veterinary professionals on our website , which sets out the remedies and the expected timetable and may help businesses start preparing ahead of the final Orders. So my closing message is simple: these remedies, which are principally targeted at veterinary businesses, are intended to improve trust and confidence in the sector. They will benefit pet owners, but also support individual veterinary professionals, and help pets get the care they need. We welcome constructive engagement on the detail when the draft Orders are published in July.
Speech Brief