andMr. Enright asked the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism if he has satisfied himself that the provisions of the Restrictive Practices Grocery Order, 1973 are being fully implemented and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Restrictive Practices Grocery Orders.
39.
The 1973 Order has already been amended on three occasions in efforts to achieve the objectives originally envisaged for it. More recently, in July 1979, I requested the Restrictive Practices Commission to hold an inquiry under the Restrictive Practices Act, 1972 into the practice of retail sales below cost of grocery goods. The commission have concluded their hearings on the views of all the interests concerned in this matter and I am awaiting their report and recommendations, which, when received, will be considered as a matter of urgency.
Is the Minister aware that where the terms have been implemented and manufacturers have given terms to independent traders, these manufacturers have been boycotted by multinationals? Kelloggs—I am prepared to mention the name—introduced preferential terms for independent traders and they are now being boycotted by at least four major chain stores. Is the Minister aware of that and is he prepared to take action since these people are in breach of section 3 of the 1973 Order?
I am not prepared to make any further orders pending receipt of the report and pending examination of the recommendations of the report. In the meantime negotiations have been going on. As recently as yesterday my Department had a meeting with the Irish Association of Distributive Traders to discuss details of trade. Negotiations are continuing and we will tackle the problems.
Is the Minister prepared to implement the provisions of the existing order?
The Deputy has asked another question on this matter and I will be able to answer him there.
40.
andMr. Enright asked the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism the number of prosecutions which were brought under section 5 paragraph 1 of the Restrictive Practices Grocery Order (No. 336 of 1978), and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I have referred three cases to the Chief State Solicitor's office for prosecution in respect of breaches of Article 5 (1) of the Restrictive Practices (Groceries) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order, 1978. I am informed that summonses are about to issue and the cases will be brought to court very shortly thereafter.
The Examiner of Restrictive Practices is charged under the Restrictive Practices Act, 1972 with responsibility for the monitoring of the operation of orders made under that Act. I am informed by the examiner that the operation of the provision relating to the advertising for sale of goods below net invoice price continues to be monitored and that, in fact, a substantial number of cases involving possible breaches of this article are being investigated. If any such cases are reported to me by the examiner, prosecution will be initiated without delay.
It is not a fact that dozens and possibly scores of cases were brought to the attention of the Department by the examiner and that it was as a result of the putting down of this question that action was taken in respect of the three cases where summonses were issued?
There were not scores of such cases and it is not true to say that it was this question which initiated action.
When were these summonses issued?
I have not that information.
Of course the Minister has not the information. The summonses were issued in the past few days.
How many complaints were received in the Department?
Sixteen.
When does the Minister expect to act in relation to these cases?
Action has already been taken in relation to three cases and we are awaiting further examination of the other cases before action can be taken.
Is it not a fact that it took a High Court action to press the Minister into taking action?
That is not a fact.
It is correct.