Colm Keaveney (Galway East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I do not wish to repeat what has been said. I thank the witnesses for their positive presentation. Like previous speakers, I am also a customer. The model presented from the perspective of the consumer is a low-cost model. One can only assume that has an implication at the other end from the supplier-producer point of view. As Deputy Barry said, there is a sense that there is a race to the bottom for suppliers. It is not just a question of floor space, presentation or Lidl’s out-of-town locations which facilitate the margins on which the company delivers a profit. There must be some connectivity with a similar type of philosophy with suppliers. That is a general assumption. Needless to say, the quality of the product from a consumer point of view is high.

Lidl is concerned about the proposed code and legislation. Does it have difficulty with a whistleblower's charter being attached to the legislation? Deputy Barry referred to alleged instances and we have all heard on the corridors and from people we meet in our constituencies of primary producers being squeezed but who are afraid to speak out because their livelihoods are at risk. Would Lidl object to the protection of whistleblowers and that they would have immunity? We could develop best practice on them divulging information about retailers who adopt unethical practices.

Deputy Pringle referred to the consistency of approach by multiples. If they were to adopt the same practice as competitors that would be in the interests of consumers and suppliers and the cost base would be equalised across all competitors. Lidl has its own code and says it maintains its own standards. Surely it would have a vested interest in achieving competition with its competitors in terms of raising the threshold given that we suspect there is a difficulty with some of the operators in the market. Surely Lidl would have an interest in ensuring there is a level playing field in that respect.