I propose to take Priority Questions Nos. 6, 8 and 10 together.
The first point that needs to be clarified is that the decision I announced on 14 February 1991 in respect of the Goodman Group under the Mergers, Take-overs and Monopolies (Control) Act, 1978, was not acceptance or approval of the rescue package in spite of widespread assertions in the media and elsewhere to that effect. The decision to accept or approve the rescue package was for the High Court under the terms of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1990.
I made a decision, specifically under the 1978 Act only, to allow a proposal notified to me under that Act involving a change in control of the group, which is no longer controlled by its former owner. This proposal arose from the package put together by the examiner and approved by the court. In taking my decision I had to consider the substance of the proposal, that was to enable 60 per cent control of the group to change from its then owner to the bank group.
Given that this proposed change in control did not entail any increase in the market share of the existing group, I felt that there were not sufficient grounds to refer the case on competition considerations, especially as the Fair Trade Commission had relatively recently reported on the relevant position of the group.
As Deputies will know, in order to protect competition, I made orders under the 1978 Act, preventing the transfer of the assets of Master Meat Packers (Bandon) Ltd, and of DJS Meats Ltd to the Goodman Group, until the four other Master Meat plants are disposed of as going concerns to unconnected third parties. These orders are still in effect.
Indeed, it is probable that the alternative to the proposal notified to me would have had negative implications in the short term at least. The alternative was probable liquidation.
Because of these considerations I considered that there were insufficient grounds to refer the proposal to the Fair Trade Commission.
My role did not involve passing judgement on the commerciality of the restructuring proposals and I made this clear in my statement. I express no view therefore on the question of the company being able to satisfy the financial commitments involved.
Price fixing will be made unlawful under the new Competition Bill, which I hope to publish shortly.