Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I support the amendment in the knowledge that if more time had been available for consideration of the Bill, it would have been preferable to have included Senator Regan's proposal in the legislation. However, following a meeting with retailers who are concerned about the provisions on structural separation, the Minister agreed not to commence the section pending the introduction of a code of practice by retailers. Senator Regan is correct that it would be preferable to have included his proposal. Nevertheless, the Minister has paid attention to the concerns of the trade. The cost of imposing the provisions would have been prohibitive. I am not sure if the figure of €200 million is correct but it is outrageous that we would consider imposing such costs. The Minister has listened and his proposal appears to be acceptable. I remain concerned, however, and would prefer if Senator Regan's proposal was accepted.