Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Carthy. What I suggest here is that we reflect more on it between now and Report Stage. I would not necessarily be inclined to accept it but I will consider it further. I need to consider whether allowing the regulator to seek views on those documents would be counterproductive and discourage the submission of codes of practice in the first place. This is because the codes of practice referred to in this section in particular concern documents and codes of practice that may be submitted by a person or persons representing one or more buyers. These codes are therefore documents owned by the person providing them to the regulator. As it is a voluntary decision whether codes would be submitted for review by the regulator, the amendment may give rise to a reluctance to submit such codes. It would be helpful to the regulator’s work if buyers submit codes of practice for review as this could help to raise awareness of unfair trading practices and also bring consistency across the agrifood supply chain. Therefore, I want to be careful not to discourage this.

In addition, the Deputy may be aware that under section 20(2)(e) of the Bill, the regulator may itself issue codes of practice and guidelines and also that section 20(2)(d) already provides that the regulator “may consult with suppliers, buyers and other persons who the regulator considers could assist in the performance of its functions.” There is, I believe, sufficient cover in the Bill for appropriate consultation.

I am happy to reflect on the amendment and we can discuss it further on Report Stage if Deputy Carthy agrees. One of the things being encouraged here is that companies would submit their codes of practice to the regulator on a pre-emptive basis for its input and advice before companies adopt them. It is not about existing codes of practice or codes that are pertinent to an existing investigation. It is to enable the regulator to work with companies so they can engage and consult with the regulator in advance to get its input and advice on codes of practice. If we were to amend the legislation to say that where a company decides to initiate an engagement with the regulator to get its advice, the regulator would circulate the codes of practice more widely, it would happen before the company adopts the code. That may dissuade companies from engaging. It would be useful for us both to reflect on that further. We want to achieve this. It is an important and useful function for the regulator but on initial examination, I am concerned that it could make the section less effective which I know is not the Deputy's intention.