Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak about this Bill. I am very concerned about the impact of this legislation on consumer prices. The submissions upon which the Minister chiefly relied to make his proposed changes to the competition legislation came from the Competition Authority and the consumer strategy group. The consumer strategy group argued that if the Minister revoked the groceries order and made the necessary changes to the Competition Act 2002, it would result in a 9% reduction in prices almost immediately. A few months later, the chairperson of the consumer strategy group decided that this figure might be too high, indicated that a figure of 3% might be more accurate and argued that such a figure might be achieved within 12 months.

Dr. John Fingleton, the former chairperson of the Competition Authority, stated that €500 million would be put back into consumers' pockets if the groceries order was revoked. This is an amazing figure. If this Bill is the Government's answer to Eddie Hobbs, we can look forward to new episodes of "Rip-Off Republic" for every year that this Government remains in office. The Government has done almost nothing to improve the lot of Irish consumers. It has presided over an appalling lack of competition in every area: energy, insurance, transport and communications. It was not until the momentum behind Fine Gael's Rip-Off Ireland campaign helped to spawn public outcry and a television series that the Government decided it needed to give the impression that it cared about consumer rights. Nothing could be further from the truth as the present Administration is responsible for no fewer than 41 stealth taxes in the past three and a half years.

This Bill is short in terms of words and benefits to consumers. The Minister can be assured that because of Fine Gael's total opposition to predatory pricing and market dominance, it will not support the Bill in its current form. It has become clear to him from the debate that many of his Fianna Fáil colleagues on the backbenches support what we have stated. In addition, the suppliers of indigenous Irish produce to particular multiplies and retailers will be forced to outsource to remain competitive. The consequent reduction in employment in the food sector is a worrying feature for many people. What consequences will this have on employment in areas across the country such as Mitchelstown, Charleville, Tipperary, Wexford and Kilkenny which produce milk, beef and other agricultural products? These potential consequences have not been debated or even touched upon in this debate. Given that agriculture is declining, there must be considerable anxiety in the food production industry. We have not addressed the consequences of the Bill for this industry.

Fine Gael believes that we cannot accept the Bill as it stands because it weakens a number of key protections for consumers and relaxes certain regulations dealing with the relationship between suppliers and the major multiples, with no benefit to the consumer. My party has no difficulty with reviewing the groceries order given that it has been in place for 17 or 18 years, but some provisions of the groceries order, which were of considerable assistance in achieving a level playing pitch, should have been included in this Bill. Fine Gael wanted to see rebates and discounts and a guarantee that they will be passed on to consumers. This all-important provision should be the major plank of this Bill, but there is nothing in it to suggest this will happen.

Fine Gael believes, and has consistently stated, that the groceries order should be replaced with a new law such as this legislation which would take account of the necessary changes to the Competition Act and modern trends in the grocery trade. The new law, when enacted, should protect our communities from predatory pricing by multiples and ensure we have choice and diversity in the food sector where multiples and local shops can compete on a level playing pitch. This is where the real concern lies. The local shops found in every village and community across the country are concerned about the abolition of the groceries order. These people provided credit when people could not afford goods or did not possess credit or laser cards when the country was less well-off and people needed to feed their families. Local grocers and local shops maintained and protected those families. These people sponsor local credit unions and GAA, rugby and camogie clubs. I am concerned for their future. They employ students in the summer, work long hours, and contribute significantly to our communities. We are not addressing the needs of these people, who have been burdened with a considerable amount of stealth taxes by the Government.

Ireland is crying out for change in the context of competition. Some 41 new stealth taxes have been imposed on everything from energy to stamps. We have suffered a drop of 22 places in our international competitiveness ranking. Dublin is now a more expensive city than Paris and Ireland is one of the most expensive countries in Europe. Some nights ago on the news we saw that Dublin is now a more expensive place to live than New York. That represents Government action in terms of imposing additional charges and taxes in order to make the country uncompetitive. Government inaction on the consumer agenda is undoubtedly part of the reason we are in this grave mess. However, if we really want to tackle the root cause of our high cost base — that feature will be more vital in the years ahead — it is time to take on the anti-competitive behaviour and rid this country, once and for all, of the cartels and agreements that work against the consumer interest. The Minister has set out his objectives to do that, but he is doing the opposite.

The Bill fails to do it in this case. Not surprisingly, it has all the hallmarks of having been hastily drafted and presented, and there are many flaws in it. The abolition of the groceries order and the introduction of these changes are clearly meant to take the heat off the Government for its inaction towards Irish consumers over a long period. Faced with the ever increasing costs, particularly those in the State sector, and in the context of considerable consumer concern about being ripped off, this administration has demonstrated inaction and neglect in terms of the plight of consumers. Aside from direct increases in costs of goods and services within the State, the Government has consistently failed to give consumers the benefit of competition in key sectors. Instead of truly taking a positive and pro-consumer stance on consumer issues, all we have had is lip service.

For example, we have a new national consumer agency, which has been presented as the saviour for Irish consumers, but it has very little power. All I have seen in recent times has been the spending of plenty of money on soft public relations initiatives. This is to present the agency as being on the side of the consumer. Few who have witnessed the activities of the national consumer agency since its establishment on an interim basis would be inspired with confidence that it will be the saviour of Irish consumers.

In particular, it has failed to give any indication of the areas it intends to tackle on behalf of consumers. It seems to be considering many areas. That is hardly surprising, given that the Consumers' Association of Ireland was ignored when the members of the agency were being appointed.

The Competition Authority's record in the area of enforcement has been dire. There is no evidence that it has successfully deconstructed any cartels in the economy, or taken on any hard cases in a manner that has benefitted consumers. The authority's approach to the financial services industry, which resulted in a weak and mealy-mouthed report, can be contrasted with the work of the National Consumer Council in Northern Ireland, where a hard-hitting and focused report had the banks in that jurisdiction in a state of crisis as they sought to stave off an investigation by the Office of Fair Trading.

It is clear the authority is not operating as an effective body. It does not have a chairman and there is no sign of a new chairman being appointed. There are vacancies in key areas of its membership. For example, the head of its anti-cartel division left that position some months ago. The Minister is relying on some of his officials to ensure the authority has a quorum to do its business.

This Government does not seem to care about the poor performance of the Competition Authority and the impact this is having on consumers and businesses. He seems content to allow the authority to perform at a low level. By giving it new powers in this legislation, the Minister is placing his faith firmly behind the authority. He has shown his hallmark unwillingness to take measures beyond those contained in the manila covered brief handed to him by his officials. Fine Gael has published some constructive policy proposals which will make the Competition Authority more resourceful and effective. I request that the Minister examine our well thought out proposals on Committee Stage.

The Minister's approach to competition policy is illustrated by the provisions of the legislation we are debating, which has been presented on foot of a consultation process on the future of the groceries order. I have mentioned some of the problems I have with the Minister's report and his subsequent legislation. It is interesting to review the manner in which some of the submissions which were received by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment have been presented in the Department's report. It is clear from the report that the Department decided to remove the groceries order before it received any submissions on the matter. Having read the report, I must express strong concern about a policy decision being taken on the basis of one side of an argument.

There is particular concern about the legislation presented on the basis of what it states about predatory pricing. This is the nub of the matter and an important aspect of the legislation. The Minister has consistently stated that existing competition law is sufficiently robust and appropriate to deal with the issue of predatory pricing. I presume he has a legal opinion from the Attorney General, who changes his mind regularly and has done so on several occasions.

Protecting the consumer is uppermost in any legislation moved in the House. The people in the smaller shops in country towns throughout Ireland who have given a service are those who are most concerned about this matter. Various people in the food and drinks industry have made submissions, and the debate has been long with many views taken on board. The multiples and bigger stores are emerging the winners all the time, however. I implore the Minister and the Government, in examining the Bill, to consider favourably the people who have given a service to our communities throughout the country.

See this speech in context