Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)

To be effective, the Competition Authority needs evidence rather than mere suspicion of wrongdoing. It is important that complainants to the authority provide as much information as possible. The authority has published on its website and in its annual report information on how to make a complaint. All complaints are subject to a screening process. Any objective analysis of the Competition Authority's record in dealing with such complaints must take into account that competition cases are inherently complex. It does not investigate matters by relying solely on information already in its possession but must engage in an evidence gathering process. Imposing a statutory deadline for completion of investigations would inevitably compromise this process. Within the context of an investigation, parties retain a right of reply. Imposing deadlines that do not provide an adequate period for parties to consider and respond on the position taken by the authority would compromise that right of reply.

The setting of a statutory deadline for completing a competition law investigation would also set such investigations apart from all other agencies in the State with a responsibility for investigating breaches of the law, whether criminal or civil. Why should the investigation of an alleged competition law offence be treated differently to an allegation of fraud, assault, theft, murder, smuggling or tax evasion? Voluntary compliance with competition law is an important and frequently overlooked part of the authority's work. The essence of civil enforcement is to ensure compliance with the law in the speediest, most efficient way possible. In the civil area, court proceedings are, and always should be, measures of last resort.

Compliance, on the other hand, means the parties in breach commit to changing their behaviour rather than forcing the authority to the expense of challenging them in lengthy court proceedings. Examples of compliance of this nature include Statoil, Independent Newspapers, The Irish Times and Irish Actors' Equity. In all of these cases, the authority subsequently published enforcement decisions to provide transparency and predictability in the enforcement of the Competition Act, resulting in greater legal certainty and in the reduction of compliance costs to undertakings.

I am aware the Competition Authority has recently been considering the idea of an annual review of competition in the light of its broader statutory functions in the area of competition advocacy, as set out in section 30 of the Competition Act. The purpose of such a review would be to provide an annual status update on developments affecting competition in liberalising and restricted markets and provide a simple forum where the full impact of State restrictions on competition could be synthesised regularly. In any event the authority's advocacy division plays an important role in areas where the State, either through direct involvement in the economy or through regulatory systems, may restrict competition. The authority is also made aware of some public restrictions on competition through its own study and observation of individual markets.

While the authority continues to deal with its caseload of competition issues arising from the existing stock of regulation, there is also a regular flow of proposals for new legislation. The importance of the authority's expertise was recognised by the Oireachtas in 2002 when, in the Competition Act, it gave the authority the specific function of advising the Government, Ministers and Ministers of State about the implications for competition of proposed legislation. Ministers receive the advice of the Competition Authority on how proposed legislation may impact on competition.

See this speech in context