Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and I will not press the amendment. We know where the problem is and the Minister has eloquently described the problem of regulatory capture. The producers have been dominant. The reason we could not give Cork Airport autonomy recently was because airport management love building terminals and one was built for €168 million and we do not know what to do with it. Shannon Airport, on the other hand, was given autonomy. Negotiations on airport charges, for example, must start on the basis that the people in charge love building terminals but consumers may be less enamoured and particularly when they must pay for them. Charges increased by 40% in order to pay for Terminal 2 in Dublin and only now has tourism returned to the level where we want it. There was a problem with higher air fares and the original decision ignored the views of consumers.

There is quite a tradition of that in the other fields, some of which the Minister referred to.

The starting point in these agreements must be an uphill one for the consumer and the competition interests. The bodies are used to being dictated to by producers but we should spin them around, for which the Minister has my support, and insist they give an even break to the consumer. That has not been the tradition because they usually support incumbents. In that kind of economics the new entrants are the worthwhile people and the incumbents are the people who usually try to obstruct competition.

I thank the Minister for his fine observations and share his sentiments. Perhaps he would make some of the points stronger, thus recognising the tradition where the producer dominates and consumers do not. It is an uphill struggle and I wish him, his Department and the new agency every success in that goal. It is not an attractive starting point in many places. We are willing, in the case of health insurance, to defy the European court and the Irish Supreme Court because we have a particular view of the market and are going to make the consumption of that product compulsory. In the insurance case there is regulatory failure, which was considered by the finance committee yesterday. We need a mechanism that allows the consumer agency to say it would like the insurance sector to be better regulated here, particularly as half a dozen insurance companies have gone broke, and for it to be financed by a fund paid for by consumers. I share the Minister's goal and, therefore, will not push my amendment but remind him that we are not at a propitious starting point.

The Minister mentioned the interests of different Ministers. A lot of Ministers favour their own sectors against the wider competitive implications for the economy. My amendment sought to strengthen his hand when dealing with that issue but I thank him enthusiastically, as always.