Susan O'Keeffe (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State. While we are awaiting some figures, research that has already been conducted, particularly from the University of Sheffield's alcohol research group, clearly showed that a policy of minimum pricing or price controls led to fewer deaths and hospital admissions. There is a price tag on both. We all agree that we need to tackle prices. We just have to work out precisely how to go about it, and the sooner the better. We in this country have a cultural and emotional relationship with alcohol that will cause difficulties for anyone trying to impose new rules.

I will turn to this report and the proposed legislation. I am a member of the committee and, for us, one of two key elements is the facilitation of retailers that are independent of the multiple chains to compete on a fair and equal basis with their larger competitors. Surely this is at the heart of everything we are trying to achieve. The second element is the prevention of discriminatory practices by brand holders that are large monopoly or duopoly suppliers, as these might prevent independent retailers from getting foods on competitive terms for their customers. In addition, we want to protect jobs in the farming community. This is an important factor, given the fact that 40% of people live in rural communities. We also want to protect jobs in the valuable retail sector, where thousands of jobs have been lost and thousands more are employed. We do not want to lose sight of what we are trying to achieve, namely, some level of equality.

As Senator Mary Ann O'Brien stated, it is a tough old world out there if one is in business. If one is balancing everything fairly well, one is hopefully making some money. One encounters such expenses as needing to pay for a brochure or publicity, but that comes part and parcel with the market in question. The Senator was not complaining about it, merely observing its existence. I welcome the statutory code suggested in the report. I am always disappointed that this debate about codes always seems to go one way. One side claims that it will cost money, make businesses less competitive and be impossible for them while the other side claims that, without it, businesses cannot compete. It seems to be a laborious statement of the position over a long period. I would have expected there to be a benefit for the retail sector in being subject to proper standards under a good code.

The Senator mentioned horsemeat. Clearly, problems arise when there is not enough regulation of the food chain and price drives everything. I would love to know what went on behind the doors of some of the larger retailers in terms of what they said, did and knew about the cost of the burgers they were selling on their shelves. Surely be to goodness they knew that one could not make an edible burger from good meat for 8 cent. It is not possible. Evidently, someone knew something, but we have not got to the bottom of that situation. A statutory code to ensure equality between smaller and larger retailers is not before time.

The Senator also referred to the price of milk and the return to farmers. This major issue arose at the agriculture committee. The fear is that we will eventually reach a point at which no milk is produced. For the chocolate makers among us, this would be a serious problem. It is okay for me, as I might be able to give up milk in my tea, but it might not be okay for the Senators. There is a serious problem with milk supply. Perhaps we do not-----