Fiona O'Malley (Dún Laoghaire, Progressive Democrats)

The policy has created more than 450,000 net new jobs under this Government. It has produced the most generous tax and welfare systems in the world for single income families on the average industrial wage. These are extraordinary facts.

The Opposition may be correct in stating that a clear alternative is emerging. This alternative is an unsure taxation policy for the future, an appalling record on taxation in the past, a rebalancing — or unbalancing, rather — of the income tax system, and a wealth tax that would operate as a property tax. Under this Government, in contrast, an expert group has made recommendations and there has been consultation, notice, action and now legislation. Problems are identified and dealt with, fairly. This Bill is an example of that process.

The consumer strategy group's recommendation was followed by a public consultation process. This review generated in excess of 550 submissions to the Department. They were received from a wide range of parties including trade union groups, producers and retailers, as well as many from the public. Concerns expressed to my party were considered during the extensive deliberations on the future of the order last year. A fear of so-called predatory pricing, even by those not in a dominant position, was a common thread in the correspondence I received. There are fears that sections 4 and 5 of the Competition Act 2002 may not capture certain unilateral conduct on the part of non-dominant undertakings in the grocery trade and this is a result of a revocation of the order. This amending Bill addresses those fears.

I repeat the advice of the Minister that measurement of dominance does not have to be at a national level as legislation now provides for dominance to be measured in the context of smaller areas or towns. Nor should dominance be measured simply in terms of mathematical majority. As has been pointed out previously, a business with a 25% share of a particular market may be a dominant player if other operators have only a 1% share of that market. Ultimately, competition legislation allows the Competition Authority to tackle predatory pricing in all circumstances. That is as it should be and is to be welcomed.

Of course, legislation is merely one half of the process. Its implementation and enforcement are the other. A true test of this Bill, when enacted, will be how adequately it enables the Competition Authority to tackle predatory pricing, to end inappropriate dominance and ensure competition. Adequate legislation and adequate enforcement are both necessary. Nevertheless, we have a duty to allay the fears of those in the retail trade. We must get the message across that the removal of the groceries order gives freedom to retailers. Retailers themselves know their business best. They know their customers and their trade best. They are best positioned to determine the prices that they should charge their customers for goods and services, to keep those customers.

The groceries order did not protect retailers. Some 2,500 stores closed in the nearly 20 years since the groceries order was introduced. It did not act as it was intended, and it did not prevent the move toward the increasing concentration we currently see in the Irish market. The legislation before us today provides balance in the market between the prohibition of certain practices that might be considered undesirable and ensuring that the new competitive environment will be fair for all. The groceries order kept prices artificially high. If it were left in place, it would continue to do so.

For the balance it provides and for addressing the potential negative conduct of non-dominant undertakings in the grocery trade, this is a necessary Bill which I welcome and support.

See this speech in context