Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)

I broadly support Deputy Morgan's amendments Nos. 2, 3 and 4. They are inter-related amendments in any event. I refer to the Competition Act. Competition is important in terms of the consumer and we all advocate the concept to ensure no cartels or concerted practices evolve in respect of business interests which could be detrimental to consumer interests. Nevertheless, one could have a person appointed who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing and, very often, that is what takes place. If everything in the country were reduced to bottom-line economics where profit is the only thing that matters, then the social and utility values of various matters would be disregarded and the country would be headed to a serious pass.

This is what happened with section 4 of the Competition Act 2002. We took umbrage at the section and it was a major source of disappointment that an amendment was not included in this Bill to address section 4 of the Competition Act 2002. Section 4 gave rise to consequences which were clearly unintended from the perspective of actors, musicians, artists and people deemed to be undertakings for the purpose of that Act. In that case, the Competition Authority was acting on foot of the board's recommendations and that should not be the case. Someone must have made a recommendation. The director general or chairperson of the Competition Authority must have made a recommendation to the effect that the authority should go to court in respect of Equity, the actors union, at that time and argue that the union had no right to represent freelance actors.

There are some 5,500 of such people, including freelance journalists, actors and others. I believe an attempt was made to undermine their right to collective representation and to sweep the union aside in the name of competition according to that interpretation.

An amendment of section 4 of the Competition Act has been promised. As the Minister of State indicated, the proposed legislation will be a belt, braces and all embracing tranches of legislation. Why does the Competition Authority insist that artists, freelance journalists, musicians and others who, because of the nature of their occupation, do not enjoy collegiate employment are classified as undertakings and denied the right to be represented by a trade union? What was the ideological imperative that drove this agenda? Such questions are important. All these matters can be fleshed out in the context of Deputy Morgan's contribution. This is about the views people hold. We are not in favour of the all-American approach either but, nevertheless, when appointments are being made sometimes the public there is very aware of the perspective and views held, articulated, promoted and promulgated by particular people who are to be appointed. In the case of members of the US Judiciary and various other bodies, those appointed must go before a representative body.

I am the chairperson of the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Innovation and the Acting Chairman, Deputy Cyprian Brady, is the Vice Chairman of that committee. I can honestly state that neither Deputy Brady nor myself have ever taken a partisan approach on that committee while in the Chair. We would never allow it to happen because everyone has a view but, ultimately, we try to distil it down to a collective view which represents the best of everything. We all share that objective. We may have different ways of trying to get to the objective but we are all trying to help people, especially in the employment area. The Competition Act has an important role to play in this overall area. We acknowledge the Competition Authority has a very important role but I seek to ensure some of the past decisions taken by the Competition Authority are never again taken in the future.

See this speech in context