CMA veterinary panel under fire for potential bias

An advisory panel appointed by the competition regulator to assist its investigation into the veterinary services market includes members who have voiced anti-corporate or pro-independent practice opinions, raising questions over potential bias.
The Competition & Markets Authority is pursuing a full market investigation into the £5 billion-a-year industry amid concerns that pet owners may be overpaying for medicines.
The investigation has deepened some of the tensions within the industry between independent practices and those owned by large corporate groups, which have been consolidating the market.
Last week, the regulator announced the appointment of a six-person veterinary advisory panel to support its inquiry group, made up of two veterinary nurses and four veterinary surgeons.
Research shows, however, that four of the six work for independent practices, and two for corporate operators: Medivet, owned by CVC Capital Partners, and IVC Evidensia, backed by EQT, a Swedish private equity firm.
Two members of the panel have also voiced pro-independent opinions online.
One, a former regional director at CVS Group who founded an independent practice in Lincolnshire in 2021, has stated that “we strongly believe in bringing back veterinary care that is locally owned and run, with vets and nurses you will build a bond with over the years”.
He also stated: “Our costs are not based on central budgets or corporate profits, we are impartial when making recommendations and will offer a spectrum of care options. We employ local people and spend locally and most importantly we intend to be here for years with the same faces.”
Another, who founded her own practice in Kent in 2020, has said she “champions independent practice” and that corporates buying up practices “didn’t sit very well with me”.
• Veterinary group IVC Evidensia advises against price controls
A source at one large corporate concerned about the panel said: “It is important that the panel represent a diverse perspective and recognise the professionalism that has been brought to the sector over the last 20 years.”
The CMA declined to comment on specific questions over how it selected the advisory panel, whether it was aware of the comments beforehand and whether it meant the panel was potentially biased.
A spokeswoman for the CMA said: “Our advisory panel members were chosen for their broad experience as veterinary practitioners and their input is restricted to technical, clinical and therapeutic expertise, not opinions on business models.
“The conclusions of this investigation will be based on a wide range of evidence, including thousands of internal documents from industry as well as evidence gathered through site visits, roundtables with a range of veterinary professionals and hearings with the large corporate groups.”
Martin Coleman, the chairman of the CMA’s inquiry group, said when the panel was announced last week that they would “bring immeasurable experience to the process, all of which will help us make well-informed decisions and reach the right conclusions”.
The two panellists who have voiced pro-independent opinions were approached for comment.
The CMA’s market investigation follows an initial review last September, which prompted an “unprecedented” 56,000 responses from pet owners and those working in the sector.
Pet ownership has risen sharply since the pandemic and has coincided with corporates, including those owned by private equity firms, buying up individual veterinary practices.
Almost 60 per cent of vet practices in the UK are owned by large companies, up from about 10 per cent a decade ago.
An investigation could lead to vets being forced to be more open with pet owners about the prices they charge and who owns them, and under more severe action, companies may also be forced to set maximum prices or to sell off practices.