Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)

I doubt whether I will need the entire 20 minutes but I will take a few minutes to make some comments. While the Bill is important, it is not massive. I will make a few comments on both the Competition Authority and on the Bill.

First, I find it strange that the Minister was obliged to introduce a Bill to do what is proposed but I understand he must do so to make a temporary appointment. The process of appointing people appears to be very slow but such a process must be gone through. Perhaps in future, for those authorities that must have a certain number of members, a panel of substitutes could be put in place. Substitutes always are available for any bodies on which Members serve who automatically can take up a vacancy. My suggestion for the future is that when interviews take place, this might be a useful way to give everyone a positive response at the interview stage and of having them on the board anyway.

This Bill proves that when it must, the Government is able to introduce a law very quickly. I make this point because Members often call for badly-needed legislation but are told it would take months or years. Alternatively, important Bills hang around in the House and it is ridiculous that some Bills have been before Dáil Éireann for nearly as long as me. This proves the point that when the Government so wishes, it can get it together and a Bill can be passed through the Houses.

This Bill does not do much apart from addressing a temporary situation but it provides me with the opportunity to speak about the Competition Authority. I acknowledge the Minister is bringing forward new legislation shortly to merge the Competition Authority and the National Consumer Agency, to make changes and so on. However, members of the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment and other committees have had a few discussions with the previous chairman of the Competition Authority in recent years. Members debated its work and went through what it does. It is fairly apparent that the authority needs more powers and new laws. While the representatives of such bodies who appear before a joint committee will never tell Opposition Members the real story, I hope they approach the Minister behind the scenes and apprise him or her of their needs.

It was quite clear to me, as I listened to the contributions and went through the reports of the Competition Authority, that it needs greater powers to move through the court system much faster. There is not much point in having a Competition Authority if, for example, in the case of one of the car cartels it investigated, the case went on for years. However, those involved went unpunished in the meantime and nothing changed. Alternatively, if the Competition Authority detects a practice that is wrong, it is unable to stop it dead in its tracks but must go through the legal system to do so, like anyone else, which can take a number of years. While the publicity surrounding an investigation might get the message out to the public, not everyone would be aware of it. Consequently, I understand that such bad practice can continue while waiting for the authority to prove its case. I accept there must be due process and so on but the best way to solve this issue is to make it a fast process and to make such decisions. If someone is acting illegally or uncompetitively or at an advantage to someone else, it should be dealt with quickly. The only way in which this can be achieved is by giving further powers to the Competition Authority. While it may be through the provision of more money or staff, it also should be given quicker access through the court system or a special court system should be established. This is not a lecture but is merely my point of view as developed from listening to contributions to joint committee meetings. Reading between the lines, something is holding the authority back from doing an excellent job. I acknowledge it does quite a lot of good work but the authority needs a little more to be perceived as a threat.

The majority of businesses in Ireland operate properly, do their best and so on and try to make profits in a tough environment facing tough costs and so on. However there always are a few rogues who must be nailed there and then because otherwise the practice spreads and one encounters a few more such operators in the same business. It is highly unfair to a business that does everything by the book and in a law-abiding fashion to be operating next door to someone who is breaking the law. The person who breaks the law will gain in the short term, which is unfair to a proper business that is providing good employment and so on. Consequently, there is a duty on the Government, through all its agencies, to move as fast as possible.

Second, I refer to the proposal to merge the National Consumer Agency with the Competition Authority. I have a problem with the former and the work it did or did not do in recent years. I believe it was a case of it closing the gate after the horse had bolted. When recessionary times hit, it highlighted that massive price differentials between those that obtained in the Republic and across the Border. Moreover, it encouraged people to cross the Border. I also should note that I had problems with the actions of the then Minister, Deputy Coughlan. As the present Minister is new, I will not blame him for that just yet. However, there was a role for the agency to try to correct the movement across the Border of those who thought they would get a better deal because such deals were nearly gone. While price comparisons had been done, they were out of date and when retailers in the South reduced their prices, the National Consumer Agency and the Government were very slow to correct the information or to explain to people that the position in the South had improved and that they should consider spending their money here. The hysteria still obtained and the message still was that one should go to the North to spend one's money. Moreover, this still is happening, which is costing jobs in the South, as well as a loss of revenue to people.

My understanding, from the extensive investigations by the aforementioned joint committee, is that Irish people do not mind paying a little extra for certain items because they know this is a small island. They acknowledge the country's population, at only 4 million people, is not massive and is not comparable to that of England, for example. Consequently, while there will be a difference in prices, they will not accept being taken for a ride by anyone. A massive price difference means that people will travel but if only a small difference obtains, people understand that for jobs and so on, it is worth spending their money down here. It is the Government's role, through all its agencies, to keep that message current and to encourage people to do this. Perhaps I am being harsh in this regard but I believe that although the National Consumer Agency did much in the first instance to raise the issue, it did not do anything subsequently to clarify that the position had changed. Although the great deals that people may think are to be had in the North no longer exist, it is only when they go there that they realise this.

Second, I hope this will be remedied in the forthcoming changes, but the agency did not do anything regarding any of the costs to business. All such costs to business are passed on to the consumer and are added to the price. While I acknowledge that many retailers made profits above what was appropriate in comparison with other countries, there still are high costs associated with doing business in the Republic. Moreover, the majority of costs that are too high in Ireland are in some way connected to the Government. I am not being partisan in this regard and am not blaming any particular political party but simply am stating the reality. For example, Ireland's insurance costs are among the highest and the same is true in respect of banking charges, telecommunications, energy, council rates and so on. As for contribution levies, if one wishes to start a business, one is obliged to pay out tens of thousands to a council simply to open the business. Talk about restrictive practices.

All these costs went unchecked, with the exception of the efforts of a few Members on this side of the House who tried to raise the issue periodically. Apart from that, no agency considered such issues and this is what the National Consumer Agency should have been doing. It should not simply have been examining other costs and it should not have been afraid to consider Government-related charges as well. Regulated businesses operated on behalf of the Government, such as energy and so on, increased costs for business that were passed on to the consumer yet the National Consumer Agency never touched on them or conducted a comparison on them at all. The reason for this is obvious but this should change. If it is going to be truly independent, it should act independently and where prices are too high, it should say so, regardless of who causes or is responsible for that price in the first place. Prices must be brought down if Ireland is to be more competitive in the future and is to be able to compete with other countries in exporting, for jobs and so on. This must be done because otherwise we will suffer badly. One can have all the cutbacks one wishes and all the bord snips one likes and all the bailouts one wishes for but unless our export markets are increased, Ireland will not be able to emerge from the problems it faces. The only way we can do this is to trade our way out of it.

I am afraid that for ten or 15 years, buying and selling houses from and to one another was not good for the country. While it might have enriched individuals, it did not enrich the country. It was a false pretence and we suffered during those years. I know the Minister will tell me that exports are rising. While this is the case, they should be doing much better and ten or 15 really important years of good times were lost, during which time this country could have exported a great deal more and could have done a lot better to be in a better position. In the future, if we get our costs right, then we will have jobs. When the Competition Authority and the National Consumer Agency merge, they will have a role in this regard and I hope the Minister will take this on board.

As for making appointments, be they permanent or temporary, my party and I have a major problem in this regard. I am sure that my colleague, Deputy Varadkar, has dealt with this matter already. What is wrong with bringing before the joint committee people the Minister would recommend for positions whom he believes have the necessary qualifications, even if they are quite wide-ranging, be it in law, economics, public administration, consumer affairs or business generally? That range of qualifications covers nearly everybody. Those people should appear before the joint committee and present their case. They could explain why they are suitable for the job, show us their CV and we could ask them questions. This should be done even if the Minister does not give the joint committee the power to make the final decision, which I accept is probably the Minister's decision. I would like if that were changed but that is position. There is nothing to prevent the Minister from allowing those people to be brought before the joint committee to be questioned - not to be interrogated, made feel bad or to investigate their personal life, but to deal with their qualifications for the job, be that the position of chairperson or member of a board. These are public appointments and they should be subject to public scrutiny. This has to be done by TDs in this House and such a change alone would make this House more relevant. People to whom we listen, our constituents and ourselves look with envy at other countries that have this procedure and do this properly.

The Minister is a practical man and I am sure he agrees with me on this. I hope he will use his office to ensure this is done. If he even achieved that in his few years in office, although he might be only there for a short term before the next general election - he would make an impact. That is one proposal he could bring to the Cabinet table. It would be an important change, especially in Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation. We did a critique of how that Department has worked based on the Government's analysis of it on foot of a report, the name of which escapes me, which was done for the Department of Finance. It set out a spot analysis of the Department, all the practices that should be changed and so on. I am not convinced that we made all those changes, although some progress has been made on them, but I questioned the previous Minister on whether enough has been done. I expect the new Minister to drive forward that policy. Many of the problems could be solved by bringing the people he proposes to appoint to the various agencies, of which there are quite a number under his remit, before the joint committee to enable us to have a good conversation with them to ascertain their thinking, note their CVs and so on. I hope that will happen in the future. As I said, the Minister could have a panel of people lined up to take up these jobs rather than having to waste time. I have dealt with the question of the National Consumer Agency.

On the role of the Competition Authority in making decisions, Deputy Penrose referred to the discussions being held on the planning laws governing the square footage for supermarkets and the restrictions that apply in that respect, which are in place for a reason. In most cases they are beneficial, protect town centres and encourage existing businesses to remain in town centres. However, there is room for everybody to have a say and for the large retailers to be located on the outskirts of towns. Consumers love the idea of having a big shopping centre with a large car park where they can do their shopping. They love that idea because it is convenient but it is convenient because we have failed town centres. There is a duty on Government, though all the Departments, to correct this, be it in terms of parking or traffic management, and to make it easier for people to shop in town centres and to rebuild town centres. Then there would be fair play and consumers would be happy to shop in either place. If we allow the huge supermarkets to become even bigger, they will hoover up all the business, of that there is no doubt. That has happened throughout the world. They will hoover up businesses and draw customers to shop in one place, which will result in job losses and business closures in town centres and elsewhere.

The Competition Authority has a very strong position on that, namely, that it could not restrict the size of such premises and it advocated increasing the size laid down. I know where it is coming from on that, which is with a view to ensuring there is competition. However, the job of the Minister and the Government is to get a balance in terms of what is right across the board for the consumer in the long run. Sometimes the Competition Authority makes a decision that will benefit the consumer for perhaps the next few years but in the long run if shops close and there is less choice the consumer will lose out, of that there is no doubt and, furthermore, jobs will be lost in the meantime. I hope the Minister will bring a balanced approach to this matter. I hope he and other Ministers, including the Minister, Deputy Gormley, who has a role in this area will listen to such a balanced approach.

The Minister said that he intends to implement a code of practice for transacting business in the grocery goods sector. I know it is intended to introduce a voluntary code first, which has been discussed, but I have not seen any conclusive evidence to prove that will work. The Minister should consider putting this on a legal footing now rather than wasting time introducing the code on a voluntary basis, seeing how that operates, having a review on it and then deciding two years down the line to put it on a proper legal footing to protect suppliers and producers of goods. That is what we need now. If we let this drag on and we introduce a voluntary code which does not work in practice, jobs will be lost and people will be out of business. It is important this be put on a legal footing. As the Chairman of the joint committee said, considerable work has been done on this. We have gathered a good deal of information and research and I am sure all the agencies under the Minister's remit have that same information. He has some excellent people in the Enterprise Ireland and in other sections who work with those in the food sector, who talk to them on a daily basis, help them with their business plans and make money available to them. They know what is happening in the sector and that there is bad practice there. We have to do something about it. It would be wrong to let this drag on and we would regret the decisions to so do.

There are bullies in the retail sector. This Government and country should not be bullied by anybody, even if it is done under a cover up that such practice is beneficial to the consumer. It is not in the long run and it is not good for this country if jobs and good products are lost as a result. Suddenly consumers will be left with very little choice but to buy imported goods. That is what will happen if we do not take action. I do not mean to be dramatic about this, but that is a fact because we know what is happening in other places. That is part of what we are talking about here. I hope the Minister will bring the common sense approach to this Department that he brought to his previous Department and listen to our views on this matter.

The Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment does a great deal of excellent work, its members put in many hours and its membership is cross-party. I do not believe there was ever a vote at any of its meetings. Good research has been done in this area. The Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, was a member of that committee and served well on it. It has gathered good information and I ask the Minister to put it to use. He should not leave those reports lying on top shelves gathering dust because that makes a mess and a mockery of what we do in this House. The Minister should use the good information available and make quick decisions based on it. We have suffered as a result of inaction during the past few years when it comes to this portfolio and that is the reason there has been an increase in job losses. We must make some quick decisions and move swiftly.

See this speech in context