Mr. Brian McHugh:

I will also discuss the other side of the question, namely, that we were a wolf with the farmers. In the case of the Beef Plan Movement, we identified a potential for anti-competitive behaviour to be carried out. We wrote to the movement for the purpose of expressing those concerns and setting out some of the issues that might arise for them in terms of anti-competitive behaviour. In particular, the movement faced the potential risk of private action. To some extent, the movement needed to be aware of the risk it was taking and get legal advice, given that parties could have taken private action against it. It was of benefit to the movement to understand that, as private action could have been a serious matter for it. It is important to emphasise that, in the letter we wrote to the movement, we highlighted the benefit of producer organisations and the option to form one.

This is a question of how we engage with bodies. We did not take enforcement action in this case.

We continue to monitor developments. We are aware there has been some de-escalation but we did not take action. We wrote, in what we regard as a constructive manner, to try to identify a potential issue, resolve it and achieve compliance. That is a constructive approach we always take in these matters. Regarding the producer organisations, we welcome the fact that the Beef Plan Movement has, since our letter, got approval to be a producer organisation. That is a positive development.

With regard to meeting the various parties, I met representatives of the IFA recently. I have gone through all these issues. We are always available to meet various parties to discuss the issues we face, to explain where we are coming from, and to try to understand where they are coming from. It will not always be the same. We understand they have their interests and goals and we explain our position.

With regard to the merger, the IFA will have its view. It is quite constructive in providing its view on the evidence and the expert report mentioned. We go through a very large process in respect of a merger like that whereby we examine all the evidence. We work through the technical issues to determine whether there is evidence of a substantial lessening of competition. We publish our analysis and our rationale for our decision in that case. In the case in question, we considered all the evidence and the report provided and arrived at our conclusion that there was not any evidence of a substantial lessening of competition in the market. There are quite a number of players still in the market. We did not feel the evidence would point to the merger damaging the interests of consumers.