Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. This has been an interesting debate because one can hear different views expressed on all sides. The Bill further strengthens the consumer's legal powers in the marketplace and its objective is to ensure that the consumer is protected against sharp practices. We should not, however go overboard on this. I have some difficulty with Senator Cox when she says that the Government runs everything. The marketplace is the answer to the problem. We must maintain competition there. We should recall the Latin phrase caveat emptor — let the buyer beware. If I am stung once I do not return to that place. I am very careful in that respect and am therefore shy of saying that the Government should legislate to cover everything.

I am concerned too that the agency replaces the Director of Consumer Affairs because I have been very impressed by successive directors. The public had a relationship with the director, perhaps because the office was held by an individual. I am not sure that it is easy to sustain the same relationship with an impersonal agency instead of a director. To what extent is it possible to ensure that whoever is in charge of that agency can establish the link with customers?

We must protect the public from sharp practice but let us not try to protect it from everything. When I started in business in the 1950s, there was a practice known as re-sale price maintenance. Those of us who went into business at that stage were trying to take business from the traditional traders. When we cut a price below the recommended retail price, some long-established business people told me that it was unethical to do business that way. It is for this reason I am concerned by the use of the phrase "A trader shall not engage in an aggressive commercial practice." That is wrong; people should engage in aggressive commercial practice because that is how competition is created. If traders did not engage in such practice, they would all sell at the same price and would not try to take business away from each other. I have no difficulty with Chapter 4, which refers to prohibited commercial practices and provides a list thereof. Using the phrase "A trader shall not engage in an aggressive commercial practice.", gives rise to the danger that the level of competition might be reduced.

The price of petrol was referred to by approximately six previous speakers. The introduction of legislation a number of years ago obliging the owners or operators of petrol stations to display their prices on signs of a certain size was extremely helpful. Senator Leyden referred to a petrol station located close to the quays in Dublin that sells petrol at a price that is approximately 35% above that charged at other stations. I am of the opinion that it is fine to do this because most people will not be stung a second time by someone operating in this way. It may be that the operation to which I refer is geared towards trapping tourists arriving off the boat and has, therefore, a captive market. One of the things we must do in this legislation is ensure there is increased competition.

I referred to petrol on previous occasions because a large number of petrol stations in the area on the northside of the city in which I reside closed down. As a result, one is often stuck and has no choice regarding where one buys petrol. It would be incorrect, however, to state that traders should not charge different prices. If I travel to a five-star hotel to attend an important event, I know that I will be obliged to pay more than I would if I were staying at a two-star establishment. If I go to a lounge bar, I know I will pay a higher price than I would in an ordinary bar. Let us not try to control everything; let us ensure we encourage competition and that we do so in a manner that ensures consumers are given a choice.