Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 23 Oct 2003

Vol. 573 No. 2

Ceisteanna – Questions. Priority Questions. - Competition Authority.

Phil Hogan

Question:

1 Mr. Hogan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of applications for immunity from prosecution the Competition Authority has received since it launched its immunity programme in December 2001; the number of prosecutions which have resulted as a result of applications for immunity being granted; the arrests that have been made on the basis of the provisions of the Competition Act 2002 since enactment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [24635/03]

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney):

Section 29(3) of the Competition Act 2002 provides that the Competition Authority shall be independent in the performance of its functions. The enforcement of competition law in the State is a day-to-day operational matter for the authority and is not one in which I have a function. I understand that the cartel immunity programme has been operating satisfactorily since its introduction. For obvious reasons, the authority does not comment publicly on individual investigations or cases that may result in legal proceedings. I am informed that the powers of arrest referred to have not been exercised in any case to date.

I consider that the authority's enforcement role is central to the effectiveness of our overall national competition policy and I am confident that the implementation of the enforcement arrangements for which the Oireachtas provided in the 2002 Act will make a significant contribution to our national competitiveness.

Mr. Hogan:

I am surprised to hear there have been no arrests in respect of the action taken by the Competition Authority since it was established in 2001 under the Competition Act 2000. How many applications for immunity from prosecution has the Competition Authority received since it launched its immunity programme in December 2001 and how many prosecutions have resulted from the granting of applications for immunity? What is the Minister's interpretation of the fact that no arrests have been made on the basis of the provisions of the Competition Act 2002? Does it mean that they are not active or are not seeking to do their job in the manner which the Competition Act intended and, if so, will the Minister make necessary changes to ensure that the Competition Act is enforced rigorously, as envisaged when it was enacted?

Ms Harney:

As the Deputy knows, the authority received its new powers just over a year ago. Only the DPP can grant immunity and it is not a matter for the authority but I understand from the authority that there have been many inquiries under this programme. The intention is to seek to provide new mechanisms for bringing information to the authority's attention so that cartels and behaviour that is harmful to consumers can be identified and rooted out. These provisions work very effectively elsewhere and in the fullness of time they will be part of the measures which will help the authority to bring an end to some cartel behaviour that may exist in this economy.

I am not at liberty, and it would not be good practice, to disclose the kind of information which Deputy Hogan seeks. The authority is an inde pendent body accountable to the Oireachtas and to the Committee of Public Accounts. The new Act provides for new accountability functions on its day-to-day operation. We have an authority that is extremely effective and legislation that is among the best of its kind in the world. Additional resources have been given to the authority in recent times and prosecutions are slow. There have been cases in the public domain recently in which the authority was involved in prosecutions. Difficulties arise sometimes but the authority is determined to use all the powers that can be given to it to ensure that we have a fairer and more competitive environment.

Mr. Hogan:

I ask the question because the Competition Authority is accountable to the Oireachtas. We cannot hide behind the excuse that the Competition Authority is independent and not accountable to the Oireachtas or the Committee of Public Accounts. I inquired recently about how the immunity programme operates. It seems very ineffective. There is a mobile telephone number available for processing immunity applications, which is staffed only between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. on Monday to Friday, as if criminal activity would relax outside those hours. That does not include bank holidays or public holidays. Does the Minister believe that the restricted hours under which this immunity programme is operated are sensible or wise, given the nature of the calls likely to be made by persons seeking immunity? Can she confirm that the number of calls made to the Competition Authority on the designated phone is adequate? This programme needs to be reviewed in order to fulfil the spirit of the Competition Act. I agree with the Minister that it is a good Act but it is not working effectively at this stage.

Ms Harney:

We are looking for people who have been involved in cartel behaviour to come forward. There is a long tradition in Ireland whereby the informer is not a well respected individual so we will not have thousands of people beating a path to our door.

Mr. Hogan:

Then why have whistleblowing?

Ms Harney:

These things often come to light when people or groups fall out with one another. This is a very new regime and it took a considerable effort to have it accepted here because it was a new practice in Irish law. I understand there have been several inquiries about the immunity programme and these will bear fruit but it will take time because we are asking someone involved in this behaviour to squeal on someone else. We will not receive thousands of those cases in a year and the restricted hours will not stop people coming forward. Anyone who wants to do this is more than aware of how he or she might contact the authority with a view to assisting in the successful prosecution of someone involved in cartel behaviour.