Michael Ahern (Cork East, Fianna Fail)

The Deputy dismissed the views of the dean of the faculty of human and social sciences at Trinity College as those of an academic and well-known opponent of the groceries order and implied derisively that the dean's views are somehow less than objective. It is interesting that the measure of objectivity in this matter is whether one agrees with Deputy Hogan. It is unfair to characterise a contribution to the debate as less than objective because the person who makes it happens to hold an informed view.

Deputy Hogan accused the Minister and Department of ignoring the valid concerns of anti-poverty groups, including the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Crosscare and the Combat Poverty Agency, notwithstanding the fact that a full chapter of the Department's report is primarily devoted to the submission these organisations made to the public consultation process. The concerns of these groups are based on the fact that consumers in areas of economic deprivation have little choice other than to shop with symbol group operators and small independent grocers which, in turn, limits their access to healthy foodstuffs. The anti-poverty groups want the multiples to be attracted into such areas to provide the competition and choice needed. I agree with this proposition and fully support the anti-poverty agencies in pursuit of this objective. It does not make sense, however, to argue against abolishing the groceries order on the grounds it might encourage the multiples to compete more aggressively with the symbol group operators. This is a case of being damned if one does and damned if one does not. One group argues we must keep the order to ensure competition from the multiples, while other groups argue we must keep it to protect against such competition. Between these arguments we have Deputy Hogan who somehow manages to support both of them.

See this speech in context