Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I do not intend to rehearse everything I said in the committee. It was a very long Committee Stage, which I am sure the Minister of State has had a chance to read in detail. Suffice it to say the amendment is the straightforward insertion of a new subsection (6) in section 1 to state that a person who contravenes the new section 15B shall be guilty of an offence and liable for penalties provided by the Act for breach of sections 4 and 5 of the parent Act.

Having read over the response of the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, to me in the committee, it seems there is a lack of clarity regarding why this set of offences — I will not fill up my time reading the new section 15B — should have been treated in this way when there are other matters, including the introduction of "hello money" and retail price-fixing by a wholesaler, which in most circumstances are regarded as very serious. Why should they not be regarded as serious enough to warrant criminalisation escapes me.

The Minister said that although predatory pricing is a criminal offence under section 5, as we know, that the new section 15B relates to similar practices. He has conceded the point that they are similar to those criminalised in section 5. They include the issue of "hello money" and other matters I have mentioned. However, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment went on to tell the Select Committee on Enterprise and Small Business: "Due to the fact that both the conduct and questions are not prohibited in all cases, it would be inappropriate to criminalise those particular activities". I am simply unclear about what that means. Further in his reply the Minister stated: "civil prohibition has the advantage of allowing aggrieved parties or the Competition Authority to proceed quickly in court to challenge any suspect conduct or practice". That is well and good.

I will not labour the issue any further as we had a long debate on a similar amendment on Committee Stage. I hope that the Minister of State has had a chance to reflect on the issues and will not consider himself bound to reject the amendment. It will be interesting to see whether he will set the tone of how the debate proceeds by showing that, having reflected on the points made on Committee Stage, he is willing to accept amendment No. 1 and other Opposition amendments that are appropriate.

See this speech in context