asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce why the special order, controlling the price of stout and ale sold in bottles in the town of Clones, County Monaghan, was made by him on 16th November, 1967; and why this order makes no distinction in prices without regard to supplementary amenities provided and recognised for purposes of price control in the case of lounge accommodation.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Monaghan Liquor Prices.
55.
In view of the continued refusal of the majority of the Clones publicans to refrain from charging more than the permitted price, I had no option but to make an order fixing maximum retail prices for stout and ale in Clones. Because of the lack of co-operation, it was not possible to establish the prices charged for stout and ale in the various lounges in the town.
I am prepared to review the matter if I receive satisfactory undertakings from the Clones publicans that they will comply with the Maximum Prices (Intoxicating Liquor and Non-alcoholic Beverages) Order, 1967.
What difference did the Minister observe in the town of Clones as distinct from any other town in the country? Why did he deem it expedient to make a special order in regard to Clones?
Because there was clearly a conspiracy by the publicans in the town not to comply with the existing order.
The existing order simply requires publicans to continue charging whatever they had been charging prior to the date of the Minister's order? Is that not so?
With an allowance——
For lounge prices.
——for the Budget increases.
There was traditionally an allowance for lounge amenities, which was a halfpenny or something per bottle, permissible where stout was served in the lounge. Why does the Minister consider it expedient to make a special order in regard to the publicans of Clones any more than any other place?
Because the publicans there as a group, with two exceptions as a result of visits from officials of my Department, had decided they were deliberately going to charge prices higher than those allowed under the prices control order. This is the reason I made the order in question. The reason I made no distinction as between bar and lounge was that, as I said, the lack of co-operation was such that I was unable to get the details to enable me to make such distinction. I should add that in two cases publicans there informed me that they made no difference in the charges between the lounge and the public bar.
Is the Minister satisfied that such a differential normally exists? Would he not agree with me that it would be an abuse of his powers under the prices regulations machinery to impose a penalty on a particular town by depriving the publicans there of the customary differential on the ground that he was vexed at what he describes as their failure to collaborate?
May I make it clear that there is no question of inflicting any punishment on the town of Clones? If there is any question of punishment, it is not the town of Clones that is being punished. However, this is not my attitude; it is that the necessary information which would have enabled me to make the distinction which the Deputy wishes me to make was unavailable to me because the publicans in the town were not prepared to cooperate with my inspector. I have said I am prepared to review the matter but I shall, in reviewing the matter, require satisfactory undertakings that the publicans in Clones are prepared to comply with the order and to cease overcharging their customers.
What type of co-operation does the Minister require? What does his inspector want? I presume his inspector asked: "What were you charging for liquor before the date on which the Minister's order was made?" Did they sing dumb or did they say: "We won't tell you."? Or was the Minister's officer so dependent on the individual publicans that he could not find out? Two publicans in the town are apparently collaborating; could he not get the information from them? Does he not know what prices were being charged in Clones prior to the making of the order?
Yes, but not the different prices in each case, the differences that arise between their bar and lounge prices. I have not got that information.
But the Minister has the information of what the average prices in Clones were?
Yes.
Why make a special order as regards Clones?
I have already explained it. The publicans in question had got together and decided that they were going to overcharge their customers in deliberate defiance of the order which was made controlling the prices in question.
Was it not the proper procedure to prosecute any person who broke the law?
This was a matter for me as to whether that was the proper procedure or not. I decided in this case it was not.
So the Minister makes an unjust order in respect of one town?
It is not an unjust order. It is in respect of the publicans in one town who were overcharging their customers.
It is for a court to decide that, not the Minister.