asked the Minister for Supplies whether his attention was directed to the price charged in Dublin shops for sections of honey; whether he has taken any steps to fix maximum prices for this commodity; and, if not, whether he will state the grounds on which he has declined to do so; further, whether he is aware that honey is a valuable substitute for sugar which is now in short supply; that chemists are unable to meet the demand for saccharine; and that the price of honey was advanced recently in certain Dublin shops from 2/3 to 2/10 per section, and that in 1941 the normal price was 1/9 per section.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Price of Honey.
I am aware that the prices of honey have increased. I have decided, in so far as retail prices are concerned, to instruct my Department to concentrate on those commodities which are more essential to the least well-off sections of the community, to whose interests the present system of price control is primarily directed, and in particular to commodities in which the force of competition no longer operates to maintain a reasonable level of prices. Honey is not classified among the more essential commodities. As the staffs of the price-control and control-enforcement sections of my Department are fully occupied in dealing with essential commodities, I am not satisfied that it is in the public interest to divert any part of their activities to investigating complaints concerning luxury or non-essential articles, such as honey, which the public can refrain from purchasing without serious inconvenience.
Does the Minister acknowledge the fact that a complaint was made to the Department that a particular firm in Dublin increased the price of honey by 7d. per section within a week representing an increase of 26 per cent., and though this was brought to its notice as obviously a case of overcharging, the Department apparently does not intend to take proceedings or to fix a maximum price for the commodity, so that there will be no protection for consumers?
I have repeatedly expressed the opinion that members of the public must be expected to protect themselves in relation to commodities which are non-essential. They can always refrain from buying non-essential commodities. The entire activities of the enforcement section of my Department are being concentrated on articles of an essential kind.
Here is a clear case of overcharging, where a commodity was priced at 2/3 one week, and the following week—for probably an article that was in stock—2/10 was charged. Is not that obviously a charge of looting the public?
I think the public can protect themselves in a matter of that kind.
Does the Minister not realise that honey is a valuable substitute for sugar, which is now in short supply?
The Deputy will find that very little honey is purchased in Francis Street.