Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Dec 1991

Vol. 414 No. 9

Ceisteanna—Questions Oral Answers. - Coal Dealers Merger.

Tomás MacGiolla

Question:

10 Tomás Mac Giolla asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he has considered (1) the proposed merger between four of the country's principal coal dealers and (2) whether the merger is permissible under monopolies regulations; if so, if he will outline the proportion of the market the new merged concern will have; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

I received a formal notification under the Mergers, Take-overs and Monopolies (Control) Act, 1978 on 13 December 1991. I cannot make any comment on the proposal until I have examined it and have been given all the information necessary for me to assess it.

Can the Minister indicate what proportion of market share the new merged company would have? Is he satisfied that if they do have a dominant position in the market — which I submit they will — there is adequate competition to maintain some control over prices? As I understand it, the differential between bituminous and non-bituminous solid fuels has virtually doubled since the making of the order for clear air in this city?

Since the notification has only come in within the past few days I cannot answer the Deputy's question on market share. I have not seen the file yet and the information is not available to me here. Obviously, that is one of the questions that will be asked by my Department in the course of inquiries about the matter and before it comes for a decision.

Before going to prison.

In regard to the question of a dominant position in the solid fuel market, several months ago there was another proposal for a merger between dominant interests in a particular part of the country which disturbed me somewhat as it would have led to about 80 per cent or more of the market being held by the new merged firm. I referred that proposal to the then Fair Trade Commission for examination before I made a decision. When I referred it the parties withdrew the application so that the question did not have to be decided. I do not want to prejudge this case in any way because I have not seen the details of it yet.

Question No. 11, please.

Top
Share