Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)

The first part of the amendment is unnecessary because the authority is already empowered under section 3(1)(f) of the Competition Act 2002 "to identify and comment on constraints imposed by an enactment or administrative practice on the operation of competition in the economy". Where any legislation is proposed, the views of the Competition Authority are advanced and received by all the sponsoring Departments. As we know, in the recent past the Competition Authority has commented on a wide range of issues which would be encompassed by this amendment. A perfect example is its contribution to the public debate on the groceries order, for which it was roundly taken to task by Senator Coghlan and his colleagues. We can have more of these types of debates in the House if the Competition Authority is given more powers in this regard. In essence, it has these powers in any event because the 2002 Act was structured to allow the Competition Authority to be an advocate for greater competition in the economy. It has ample powers to comment on practices in both the public and private sectors. It can comment and advise on anything it sees as inhibiting competition.

The amendment would make it compulsory on the authority to report on this issue each year and I am not satisfied this would be beneficial. It might be better if the power were discretionary, as currently framed. As for placing an obligation on Departments to respond, although no such statutory requirement exists at present, it is practice to pursue such issues with the appropriate authorities. I regard it as good practice that public policy makers justify their actions in public debate. I am not in a position to accept the Senator's amendment.

Having said that, my Department will be reviewing the operation of the Competition Act 2002 during the current year and will bring forward proposals for legislative change when that is considered warranted. I will ask that the Senator's proposal be borne in mind in the context of that review. If the Senator wishes to make a submission to that review, it will be gratefully received. We believe that aspects of the proposal, which has merit, are better included as part of the comprehensive review of the Competition Act rather than in a piecemeal fashion through the Consumer Protection Bill. The bulk of it is unnecessary apart from that one area concerned with Departments having obligations and so on. However, Government is the policy maker as well and it is a question of balance.