I move:
That Seanad Éireann, mindful of the imminent completion of the Single Market, notes the progress made in the implementation of legislation for consumer protection in Ireland.
Consumer Protection Legislation: Motion.
I note the very interesting statement in the motion. The statement and the submission are very timely, apt and interesting in the context of what we are experiencing at present in our progress towards the implementation of the Internal Market.
I heard the earlier debate in the House, if you would allow me to digress a little, in which the Seanad, quite rightly, is seeking to be relevant by updating its procedures, measures and methods of operation. I applaud all sides, particularly the new Leader of the House, for his speedy implementation of such measures and the diligence he has brought to bear on his task, particularly the all-party response which he has evoked by his measures. I noted the last comment, that eminent persons would address the Chamber from time to time. Let us hope I may qualify from time to time for such an appellation. As an ex-Senator of two terms, I have always been very swift in whatever position I have held, in coming to the Seanad and I am very glad to be here today.
We will be voting on the Maastricht Treaty on 18 June. We have all been concentrating on one aspect of it recently but on page 50 of the book dealing with the Treaty entitled 11 Consumer Protection it is very interesting to read that the Community will contribute to the attainment of a high level of consumer protection. It then goes through various measures relating to the Internal Market and member states and what they should do to bring about a high level of awareness of consumer protection. That sets the scene for what we will be talking about today but in particular it makes this debate relevant and timely.
I should say at the outset that as well as being responsible for both trade and marketing, I have responsibility for consumer affairs, about which I am very pleased. It is a topic which concerns everybody worldwide. It permeates every area of life. There is no end to it, every topic talked about, every time picked up and everything you look at and read about concerns consumers. I intend to take it very seriously and I am conscious at all times of the need for fair play all round; we must balance the rights of consumers with the rights of suppliers and, as political people elected through one franchise or another, we tend to be on the side of the consumer. That is as it should be, as long as we are aware of all the background knowledge because we in essence are pro bono publico. We represent people is interests and we work for the public good.
Since I took office I met Mr. Willie Fagan, the Director of Consumer Affairs and Fair Trade. He came to my office and we had a most interesting discussion. I then met him and his staff in their offices and I was greatly impressed by their professionalism and dedication to the myriad aspects of consumerism as they operate here. During the next few days, I will meet the Consumer Association in Ireland and then I plan to meet my Northern Ireland counterpart when his or her name is announced today or tomorrow. I also plan to meet the Consumer Association in the UK and the Consumer Consultative Council in Brussels, all in the lead-up to the consumer council meeting which will be held at the end of June and which will mark progress to date in the member states and make plans for the future.
Over the next few years there will be a radical change in the shape of the Community, and we all know what economic and social cohesion will bring about, we have talked of that in so many spheres and now it is imminent. As I said, I welcome the Maastricht Treaty and what it embodies for consumer protection. It commits the Community to contributing to a high level of consumer protection through measures adopted for the completion of the Internal Market. The interests of consumers are reflected in other Community policies as has been made clear in the three year plan of the Commission. The Maastricht Treaty and the Commission's three year plan contain ambitious targets, adding to the measures, Bills and directives already implemented in this country. They will flesh out the measures already there.
The measures already enacted here vary and involve a considerable body of legislation which will benefit consumers. They include toy safety and misleading advertising regulations. There are also "doorstep selling" regulations designed to protect the consumer, where he or she could be "surprised" by a trader and, as a result, enter a contract without adequate opportunity to consider the commitment. I am sure one way or another we have all been at the wrong end of the stick in relation to many of the irregularities which led to the implementation of the measures. There are regulations to tighten up information on food labels as to the shelf-life of food, embodying a "use by" rather than a "best before" date and requiring an indication when foods have been treated with ionizing radiation. These regulations also extend the rules to canteens, restaurants and similar establishments, and that brings us to another sphere about which I will talk later — the environmental health agencies.
Regulations to ensure that textiles which are being placed on the market for production must be marked with the names and descriptions of the materials contained therein. That has come in; we are all aware that when you purchase a garment there is a description of its washability and durability. There are regulations to control the use of materials, including simulants in contact with foodstuffs, regulations to prevent the importation, manufacture, sale, assembly and export of products which could be mistaken for other consumer products, thereby causing risks to consumers, especially children and regulations to improve the presentation of information about prices of consumer goods. All these are already in place and indeed are assiduously followed up and brought to the attention of the Director of Consumer Affairs and Fair Trade, although he and his staff have very limited resources. We will have to examine the need to bring consumerism and the knowledge of consumer rights and affairs though the education process in schools, seminars and adult education classes and also to make it available in a physical sense through, what I would hope would be a network of consumer offices where information would be available. That is all for the future, but there is no harm in thinking about the idea.
The Single European Act provides that measures will be taken to free the market from barriers to trade based on a high level of consumer protection. A number of measures has been agreed; the Liability for Defective Products Act which introduced into Irish law for the first time the principle of strict no fault liability. The Act should make it easier now for the injured party to take, and to succeed in, legal action as he or she does not need to prove negligence on the part of the producer. I should mention at this point that companies which operate to high quality standards in management and production processses should have no problem with the new measures. That is why so many companies now are seeking to qualify for the ISO 9002 — the quality standards mark for management and personnel relationships for running their firms. Irish consumers, of course, benefit from this also.
It is proposed — this will be of great interest to Members of this House and to people throughout the country — to introduce a consumer credit Bill that will control the conditions under which credit is extended to consumers. This Bill is in preparation at present in the Department of Industry and Commerce. The expression "consumer credit" is a description of the broad spectrum of credit business and arrangements, including the various types of loans provided by banks, building societies, moneylenders, pawnbrokers, credit unions, etc. It covers overdrafts, hire purchase, credit sale, trading cheques, credit cards and budget accounts. The arrangements governing the transactions vary from case to case with the regard to the amounts involved, the repayment periods involved and the legal nature of the agreements, for example, ownership of goods. In some cases the transactions are linked to the purchase of goods or services and in others no goods are involved. There is, however, a sufficiently strong relationship between them all to justify their being made amenable to an application of uniform rules.
The proposed draft Bill is intended to give effect to the EC Council Directive on consumer credit. The general intent of this legislation will be to lay down rules which will, as far as possible, apply to agreements under which credit is supplied to consumers, especially moneylending agreements. If we were to think about it, what will be the main effect of this Bill? It is a large Bill which in many instances seeks to consolidate and update existing legislation as well as introducing fresh measures. Indeed, it goes beyond the EC Directive on consumer credit. The Maastricht Treaty makes the point, that while it lays down in broad terms what should be done in regard to EC Directives on consumer protection, each member state is free to go beyond the directive and act as it sees fit.
If I were asked what will be the main effect of the Bill, I would say it will ensure that a consumer, when taking out a loan or otherwise availing of credit, will be given the maximum amount of information so that she or he is fully aware of the commitment being undertaken. That is the essence of the Bill. If one is taking out a loan, be it from an agency or establishment, it is the lack of information which leads to trouble later. Many people do not read the small print and do not realise, or are not made aware of, the effects of the rate of interest, the period of the loan, or the accumulation of money due. The main effect of the rules will be to ensure that a customer will be given the maximum amount of information and that he or she will not be told to read the small print on his or her own. The information in the small print will be very explicit and clear. In fact, there will be no small print — that is the best way of putting it — everything will be made so clear.
The legislation will also lay down rules in relation to such matters as early repayment by the consumer, repossession of goods by the creditor, the use of promissory notes and other such matters.
Moneylending is one form of consumer credit which is governed by detailed legislation. As I said, it has been necessary to review this and relevant legislation in the context of the draft Bill. The legislation dates back in time and, therefore, obviously requires massive updating. The Moneylending Acts, 1900 and 1933, which provide for the licensing of moneylenders, the form and content of moneylending agreements and various other matters, will be repealed and the provisions will be embodied in the new draft Bill.
The Hire Purchase Acts, 1946 to 1980, which make provision in relation to hire purchase and credit sale agreements, and the Pawnbrokers Act, 1964, provides for the licensing of pawnbrokers, the content of pawn tickets and the pawning redemption and sale of pledges, will be updated to bring them into line with the EC Directive. Section 14 of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980, and the Consumer Information Consumer Credit Order, 1987, set down rules for advertising the cost of credit, and credit linked to the purchase of goods and services and they, too, will be brought up-to-date and consolidated in this consumer credit Bill.
When we talk about moneylenders — there is no doubt this is an emotive term — we think about this as a problem. When I spoke in the Seanad on the Friendly Societies Bill, these problems were brought to my attention when dealing with my constituents. When we talk about the wrongs of moneylending we should make a distinction between the illegal or unlicensed moneylenders and the licensed moneylenders. There are obviously two types of moneylenders — licensed or unlicensed and legal or illegal; either term is interchangeable. It is, of course, the illegal or unlicensed moneylenders, we want to circumscribe by regulations and make sure they do not flourish. The Combat Poverty Agency drew up a report in 1988 for the Minister for Social Welfare which was made public, and showed clearly — and they would be dealing with this at first hand — that unlicensed moneylenders outnumbered licensed moneylenders by 5:1. As you can see immediately, they are much more numerous on the ground.
Second, the customer has no information or knowledge of the rate of interest which can be exorbitant in some cases. They do not know who is licensed or unlicensed when the moneylender sets up in business.
I want to make a distinction between licensed moneylenders, who operate their credit transactions in a businesslike way according to the rules, offer one form of credit — indeed, in some instances they can operate reasonably satisfactory — and unlicensed or illegal moneylenders who outnumber them by 5:1 and charge exorbitant rates. The customer has no notion if the lender is licensed or unlicensed and, of course, in a time of stress and huge financial difficulty he grabs at what seems like an attractive proposition. So often that all that turns to tears leading to very difficult times. That if where the evils — which is the right word to use — of the operation and the manifestly incorrect and unprofessional operations of the illegal or unlicensed moneylender who preys on people become apparent. They prey upon circumstances in which the consumer finds himself or herself, at a loss and needing credit. Engaging in credit transactions can be worrying and confusing for consumer who find it necessary to do so.
The proposed new measures will ensure that consumers are adequately informed about what they are taking on. There is no substitute for knowledge of your product and of your rights. Providers of most forms of credit will be required to give consumers information on the conditions and cost of credit and on the obligations of the consumer. The main requirements will be to provide information about the true cost of the credit — in other words how much you are paying back, at what rate of interest and the cumulative amount that will eventually be realised — and other terms in advertisements and in written agreements.
In dealing with consumer legislation we would need to refer to the Competition Act, 1991, which implements in domestic law provisions similar to Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty of Rome. Further regulations will be introduced shortly to require that prepackaged foodstuffs bear a reference to the manufacturing or packaging lot to facilitate identification and recall of a product in case of a health risk. We read in the newspapers from time to time of some firms recalling all their tins or packages of a specific product because of a defect discovered. This labelling procedure will enable such a lot to be called in very quickly and, therefore, minimise the risk to consumers buying that commodity.
My colleagues in other areas are responsible for measures which will also benefit consumers: the Department of Tourism, Transport and Communications are presently, I understand, examining the legislation of transport and the improvement of controls on the provision of package tours; increased safety control on food production and processing, that comes under the environmental health officers in the Department of Health; and the improvement of information on the labels of medicinal products, energy appliances and products claiming to be environmentally friendly will be shared between various Departments. One would wish that all consumers could be treated under one Department or under one item of legislation. It would be a massive feat and would involve expertise not obtainable within one Department or section or one consumer office. They in turn would have to call in professionals in one area or another.
A proposal for a directive on general product safety will establish at Community level that member states ensure that only safe products are produced and marketed. We hope that proposal will be adopted by the Council of Ministers in June this year. It will guarantee that consumers will enjoy adequate protection from exposure to unsafe products while at the same time allowing free circulation of goods.
I spoke earlier about the Commission's three-year plan for consumer policy. It seeks to help the consumer realise to the full the economic benefits of the internal market and sets out priorities for the development of consumer policy in the Community in the areas of consumer representation, consumer information, consumer safety and consumer transactions. We are examining these measures and will be involving ourselves in widespread consultation. These measures include a proposal for a council directive on the liability of suppliers of services in respect of the accuracy of advertisements which refer to competing products or services; a proposal for a council directive on unfair terms in consumer contracts; a draft proposal for a directive on "distance selling", which aims to protect the consumer from fraudulent operations by practitioners of distance selling using techniques such as mail order, telephone, telefax and tele-shopping. Who has not been the victim of distance selling? You may get something in the post advertising a product to make you beautiful overnight — maybe not quite overnight — or promising an unending supply of books for a very small amount of money. In one way or another we all fall for the soft touch in one of those areas from time to time and a proposal to protect consumers from that would be very interesting.
There are also proposals in the area of food labelling. A proposal to protect consumers from certain practices in relation to timeshare selling is being prepared. We have all seen claims that for a small amount of money you can take a stake in a villa or a flat somewhere and you will have unlimited sun holidays. I do not know much about it, I just read the ads, but I understand many of the descriptions have been found to be very much exaggerated or inaccurate.
An innovation which has already started — and I know many Senators will be aware of it — is the small claims procedure in the District Court. Consumers can have claims up to a limit of £500 dealt with speedily, cheaply and informally. Claims can be made for bad workmanship and faulty goods but not for debts or personal injuries. The procedure is already operating on a pilot basis in Dublin city and county, in County Cork and Sligo town. We hope to evaluate their progress, but their development all depends on resources. I learned early on when I came into Government that you can say what you like as long as you qualify it with "according to available resources". I intend to go to those courts and to see how they are progressing. I understand they operate informally but that they are very successful and while they come under the Department of Justice, they are monitored by the Director of Consumer Affairs and his staff.
There is considerable momentum in the development of Community measures to protect the consumer. But, we should not draw the conclusion that the initiative in framing such measures is entirely the preserve of the EC Commission. The most important consumer measures in place in Ireland are the Consumer Information Act, 1978, and the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980. The 1980 Act provides the legal base for the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs. The enforcement of much current, and future, legislation is carried out by him — Mr. Fagan at present — who has powers of prosecution. His has wide-ranging functions in the enforcement of the laws which he seeks diligently to implement, but again we need to have greater resources in personnel. My aim is to highlight the matter, by speaking about it.
I am pleased there is such an interest in consumerism and the consumer and that many parties have appointed spokespersons who are responsible for this area. In that way we will make it an everyday practical, political issue whereby the rights of people will be very clearly spelled out. Information can be had through schools, modules, perhaps, and VPT courses, adult education, explanatory leaflets which frequently the Director of Consumer Affairs brings forward, and through the resources of the Department. I very much support all that is going on. I believe that information is the most improtant resource for the consumer. The area of consumer rights consumer information, consumer directives, consumer legislation is vast.
As I said at the beginning, we seek to bring fair play to all but we also seek to explain consumer rights in a very basic sense so that everybody will know where to go for information as to how they can get justice in areas of difficulty or where they have been wronged. Consumers are our constituents, throughout Europe and throughout this country. I see consumer rights as the vehicle by which the ordinary man and woman can become aware of what Europe is about in the fullest sense. I commend the House on their initiative in arranging the debate and I look forward very much to what Members will have to say on the matter.
I begin by welcoming the Minister back to the House this week. When she was here last week we had a very fruitful discussion and I anticipate today's discussion to be as fruitful.
I wish to comment on the Minister of State's speech and raise a number of points during the course of my contribution. First, it is obvious from the Minister's speech that she has taken over a Department in which little or no work was done prior to her arrival.
I have not.
I wish to make it easy for the Minister of State who is not long in the Department. She has listed a litany of regulations which should have been made long ago. I agree with her when she says that there is a need to strike a balance between the rights of the consumer and the supplier. This is essential and, in fairness, a reasonable attempt is being made to do this.
The Minister of State said a consumer credit Bill is being prepared and that Bill will deal with the question of credit, with particular reference to moneylending. Such a Bill is long overdue. I agree totally with her when she says, in relation to credit, that the best way to protect the consumer is to ensure maximum information is provided.
As the Minister of State is aware, consumer protection has been discussed in this House on many occasions and there is legislation in place. Indeed given her comments today it is clear that we will discuss this subject on many occasions in the future.
We should however have been far more active and introduced many of the regulations that the Minister of State mentioned. Indeed it should be said that far too often in the past consumer legislation was introduced on foot of EC directives when we should have taken the initiative. The last time we discussed this issue was during the course of the debate on the Liability for Defective Products Act which updates the law in relation to damages. Indeed, it strengthens the protection for consumers.
I wish to refer to the question of faulty or defective products which has assumed greater importance in recent times. Unfortunately, having regard to our performance in the past, we contributed to this problem. Prior to our entry to the European Community when we protected home produced goods, we permitted a situation to develop where poor quality goods could be produced and sold. We found that even when trade opened up many manufacturing firms and providers of services continued to produce goods and provide services of poor quality. However, everyone now realises that there is no place for that attitude because we will only be able to trade our goods and services in a free and fair market if they are of good standard.
We should also accept that the vast majority of our manufacturing firms now produce goods and provide services of excellent standard. Indeed it has been established that our manufacturers can compete with the best of them in terms of the quality of product produced. That should be the source of some satisfaction for us.
The main purpose of consumer legislation is to provide the necessary safeguards, in particular at retail level. The Minister of State dealt with this matter in some detail in her contribution.
Following the completion of the internal market there will be free movement of goods and services within the Community. That is another reason we need to be even more vigilent in relation to substandard products, and conscious of the fact that there is no place for them in the marketplace.
The Minister of State referred to the contribution the Director of Consumer Affairs has made in this area. That office provides an added safeguard. Indeed, there is a clear need for such an office especially when we take into account the fact that during the past few years this office has received on average 20,000 complaints per annum. Despite what the Minister of State said, that office is understaffed and many members of the public complain regularly that it is difficult to get through to it by phone. While many members of the public do make a written complaint, the fact is by the time they get round to putting the complaint — which can be justified — in writing it has assumed less significant proportions and as a result they may decide not to proceed any further which is regrettable.
There is a need to strengthen the powers of the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs and Fair Trade, especially as they relate to product safety. For example, I understand the director does not have power to order that unsafe products be taken off the shelf. I therefore suggest that the Minister of State should remedy that as a matter of urgency. In her speech the Minister referred to toys sold prior to Christmas. This is a typical case of where the absence of the power to remove unsafe products can manifest itself. While I am aware that the director can prosecute a retailer for selling unsafe products, given that the Christmas toys market is confined to a few weeks the retailer who is a chancer may feel it is worth the risk selling these toys in the knowledge that they cannot be, legally, removed from the shelves at the point of sale and that by the time a prosecution is taken the profits will have been made.
The Minister of State referred to the efforts which have been made by the Director of Consumer Affairs and publicised the options that are open to the consumer. I have here two leaflets provided by his office, a guide to the Sale of Goods and Services Act, 1980 and a guide to the Consumer Information Act, which are very useful. However, their circulation is not sufficiently widespread.
I would like to address the question of housing finance. It is a mine-field with many hidden costs which are not disclosed by the financial institutions. In recent times there was advertising to the effect that one could get approval in principle for a mortgage within 24 hours. In real terms that claim means nothing but people bought on the strength of verbal approval only to find later they were refused the loan. Formal approval, in the case of those who were successful, took anything from ten days to two weeks at best. The consumer must be protected against that type of advertising, against meaningless claims in public advertising.
Some financial institutions have recently offered incentive bonuses to brokers who successfully introduce clients for housing loans. That is unfair competition. Another objection to this is that the cost will inevitably be passed on to the consumer. There is a need for a code of conduct in relation to this because the people we are trying to protect here are largely young people making the biggest decision of their life, to purchase their own home.
Competition between the financial institutions is welcome in the context of repayment rates, maximum terms and types of loans. However, it is unacceptable that the cost of processing should vary so much between the different societies. The legal fees charged by one financial institution for processing a loan are double that of another, and the public should be made aware of this.
The Minister did not refer to Telecom Éireann. In its current report the consumer magazine Consumer Choice shows clearly that the rental charge and the charges for long distance calls are by far the highest in Europe. The proportion of time spent by the Ombudsman in endeavouring to sort out complaints about telephone bills, the majority of which are found to be unreasonable anyhow, proves the point I make. It is unfortunate that we do not have the appeals procedure that is available to other countries in the EC. Perhaps when the Minister has dealt with this raft of regulations here she might look at that?
The Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs and Fair Trade has been very responsible in all cases. Consumer protection can be provided in a number of ways. It can be provided by legislation which, to date, has mainly given effect to EC directives or by the Director of Consumer Affairs and Fair Trade — and clearly much use is being made of that office as the 20,000 complaints per annum over the past couple of years show.
There is another aspect of consumer protection, that is, the demands and survival in the marketplace and the acceptance by the majority that goods can only be successfully marketed when high standards of quality are observed. Despite that, there are always those who try to pass off substandard goods to unsuspecting customers. Further safeguards are, therefore, necessary.
I want to place on record the valuable part played in consumer protection by the Consumer Association of Ireland who constantly draw public attention to anti-consumer practices. Their work is an added safeguard for consumers.
While in other areas I might not be so generous with my comments, I have to say that the media have played a very valuable role in this area. I refer in particular to newspapers who provide weekly columns that highlight the exploitation of ordinary people by shoddy operators who engage in sharp practice. In many cases these columns have succeeded in getting satisfaction for consumers. Radio and television programmes have also provided an opportunity to redress certain situations and, equally important, have created an awareness among consumers of the right to complain and seek redress when the occasion demands.
The message is clear. Despite the legislation and the penalties, the number of complaints submitted to the director's office each year and the fact that the complaints columns and the various media programmes are as busy as ever are evidence that shoddy goods and services are still on offer to the public in some places.
It is interesting to note the areas where most complaints occur. They occur mostly in relation to consumer goods, household goods, airlines and holidays. Other areas are finance, banking and insurance. Further examination by us, as legislators, is required and whatever legislation is needed should be put in place.
I welcome the Minister's contribution. My regret is that many of the regulations she referred to have not been put in place up to now but perhaps it is a case of better late than never. Bearing in mind the commitment the Minister has shown to these various matters today, I sincerely hope, she will be able to devote the time and energy necessary to put in place very pressing regulations. I look forward to this House receiving at an early date the legislation she has promised under a number of headings.
I welcome the Minister to the House. I have noticed quite distinctly that she has a habit of visiting this House when the other House is in recess, but the Minister is welcome at all times.
We have many regulations in place and many of the provisions are adequate. I want to compliment the Minister on this genuine effort to bring all the pieces together in terms of consumer legislation and consumer protection. We can certainly say that in the past the emphasis was on protecting the manufacturer and supplier rather than taking an overview of the rights of the consumer and the protection the consumer deserved. Many of these protections have now been put in place. Although they are in existence and the Minister is now putting them together, perhaps the consumer is not aware of their existence. The Minister is to be complimented on the fact that in pulling all the strands together she is ensuring that there will be far greater protection for the consumer because he or she will be a far more knowledgeable person.
I ask the Minister what programme she has in mind whereby the consumer will be far better educated with regard to the existence of the various provisions, rights and protections under the Act? There is little point in having provisions enacted unless the people are aware of them. I know this is exactly what the Minister is trying to get at in piecing these together. I would like to know her views and how she can communicate all this information to consumers to make them far more aware than they are at present.
Given the fact that in the old days the supplier/manufacturer was protected, it is important also that we now strike a balance. Whether we like it or not we are in an era where we want to create jobs rather than have in legislation restrictive practices in favour of the consumer that may do away with jobs. We must try to arrive at a happy medium where both can co-exist. We must ensure that the protection is there for the consumer and, at the same time, that extraneous demands are not made on the supplier to the detriment of cost and sales at the end of the day.
The Minister's term in the Department of Education was typified by the fact that she was out there meeting people, consulting people, asking their opinions and at the end of the day taking meaningful decisions. In this Department I see that she is adopting the same very progressive approach. The Minister has met the Director of Consumer Affairs and Fair Trade. She is arranging to meet her counterpart in the UK and that consultation process will mean we are going to get very good consumer legislation as a result of the Minister taking all shades of opinion into account. That is what we expect of her and I congratulate her again on that aspect.
Senator Howard mentioned the Christmas period and the appearance of toys on shop shelves and the fact that many of those toys could be unsafe. It is correct to say that in the past there was a fairly high incidence of toys appearing on the shelves which could be dangerous for children but it is only right that we should acknowledge there is a major improvement in that area. All products now are required to have the CE mark which is a mark of quality and safety. Difficulty might arise in relation to products which we import from low-cost countries. What is the position in relation to those imports which may not be as safe as we would like them to be? There are not in place the same regulations with regard to standards. We may have bought such toys for the children over a period of time, but it is only having bought them that the danger is recognised. What defences are there for the consumer relative to the importation of toys, in particular, from low-cost manufacturing countries?
I notice in the regulation a sentence which provides that wholesalers or retailers may be able to plead certain defences. That leads to another question. What defences can they plead? Does it, for instance, provide an avenue for wholesalers or retailers to evade responsibility? What is their responsibility if a defective or dangerous toy appears on the market which does not comply with the regulations? I wonder if the Minister would be good enough to elaborate on the defences that wholesalers and retailers can use.
I come now to door-to-door selling. We are all aware of how the door-to-door salesman operates. Of necessity he is as good as the next sale. Obviously the door-to-door salesperson has to make leads, contacts, obtain names, arrive at doors and convince householders that the products he or she is selling are products they cannot do without and that if they do not have them they are not as good as anyone else. Door-to-door salespersons play on emotions. There is nothing wrong with that. A good salesperson has to build up a rapport between the customer and himself or herself in order to ensure that there is that relationship between them which, hopefully for the salesperson, will result in a sale at the end of the day.
One of the provisions I welcome is the cooling-off period. Sales are an emotional thing. Some of us make up our minds maybe to change a car but the financial constraints will tell us that we cannot change it. When we do change it you can be sure we have been thinking about it perhaps for 12 months or two years but it is very easy to make up your mind when somebody calls to your door and represents a sale to you in terms of its costing 10p a day or 70p a week. That is the salesperson doing a job and saying "one packet of cigarettes a week and you would have this product for your child." You would deny yourself that one packet of cigarettes or whatever it is in order to buy the product. A good salesperson can build on the positives and at the end of the day definitely feel that the sale is made. You couch it, therefore, in the lowest possible denominator in order to explain to the customer that you are not really spending much money but, at the end of the day when the interest is charged, many people have a difficulty.
I have received complaints as a result of direct selling where forms are filled out showing the amount to be paid weekly or monthly in terms of credit sales, but very often the total amount at the point of sale is not filled in until later. The result is that the person making the purchase does not see the full amount of the credit transaction until two or three weeks after it has been processed. When the customer's copy comes through the letter box, the person then realises that what costs £20 a month will cost £700 or £800 at the end of the term.
I have difficulty, therefore, with the seven day clause. I accept that the salesperson must outline all the details, but I know of a number of instances where it took three weeks for the sale to be processed and the full details of the credit price to be revealed and it was at that stage that the difficulty arose when the seven day cooling off period has elapsed, the consumer does not know whether they still have rights. The Minister will agree that if the salesperson did not collate all the details and fill in the form completely the consumer has rights. We all know that the consumer may not be aware of their rights under legislation and, consequently, may be stuck with a sale they cannot afford and in which they would never have got involved had they known they were being hoodwinked.
I would ask the Minister to consider the seven days clause in view of the difficulties that can arise. I must point out lest this be misconstrued, that the number of people who act in that way is minuscule. These people work on a commission basis and unless there is a sale, they have no cash. After all, it is the pound that matters at the end of the day. A salesperson has to show some sales in order to generate commission and cash in his pocket.
The matter of bold print and small print is a major——
There should be one print.
There should be one print; I am glad the Minister made that point. In the past people have been using small print to hoodwink the customer. Naturally people will read larger print rather than small print but we should always read the small print.
As regards door to door selling, contracts for less than £40 are exempt — and insurance is one item so listed. I would like clarification on this point. If I take out a life assurance policy and premium is, say, £10 per week, is that a monthly contract for £40 or will an insurance contract be considered in terms of its overall cost to the consumer?
I would be glad if the Minister would elaborate on that point.
I would like to refer to newspaper advertising, particularly classified advertisements and the level of control on these advertisements. It seems that anything goes as far as classified advertisements are concerned. They are cheap; it is easy to take out such an advertisement; generally speaking, many people read them and it is easy to make claims that are far from being factual. I would like the Minister to address this question and say whether there have been complaints in this sphere.
I would like to refer to the sale of videos through rental. On the one hand, the Minister for Justice appoints a person to censor films and videos coming into this country; I welcome his proposal to increase the number of censors as a result of the massive increase in the number of videos being made. Videos which are rented give trailers of videos that have been outlawed including video nasties and crime films. In terms of rental sales, should the showing of such trailers be outlawed? If the censor has asked that they be taken off the shelf, surely these trailers should not be shown to titillate the viewers and encourage them to try to borrow that video.
Moneylending should be part and parcel of any debate on consumer protection. In many instances I have called for a debate on banking. It is interesting to compare the totality of charges by banks as against licensed moneylenders. In many instances, there would be very little difference between them. Hopefully, we will have an opportunity to discuss the role of the financial institutions and we will say much more about them on that occasion. The prevalence of unlicensed moneylenders is a cause of major concern. The Minister rightly pointed out that people who are desperate for money suffer great stress. They go to the financial institutions who are not interested in lending them money because they have no collateral. These people look for a few extra pounds to buy food, shoes, clothes or whatever. The temptation is there and if they can lay their hands on money they take it, regardless of the consequences. Unfortunately, unlicensed and unregulated moneylenders will not conform to the practices laid down for legal moneylenders. These people must be rooted out and we must make every effort to ensure that they are brought to court for their evil ways. In many instances people suffer great trauma because they are unable to repay the money borrowed. In the past, jackpot-tactics were employed by many moneylenders to get their money back, thereby causing even greater trauma and, in many instances, disruption on families. In raising that point, I again express my concern about the knowledge of consumers of their rights.
This is an occasion when all of us in public life must pay tribute to credit unions for the way they operate and the kindness they extend to those in difficulty. They are a people's bank. Credit unions have helped every one of us allay the fears and deal with the problems people have from time to time.
I wonder whether the Minister, who has special responsibility for trade and marketing and consumer affairs, could play a role in co-ordinating an effort between the Department of Social Welfare and the credit unions, for example, to make people more aware of what is available. In other words, information should be available so that community welfare officers might be better versed in what is available. It is inevitable that those in distress will first go to community welfare officers to find out what is available. Help is provided. However, in-service education on the interaction between credit unions, social welfare agencies, community welfare officers and consumer legislation might be worth while and of benefit to consumers.
I was delighted to discover that the term "better before" is to be replaced by the term "use by". It is about time that step was taken.
I was also very interested to hear the Minister talk about an environmental health agency. The Minister spoke about produce having an environmental impact. I should like the Minister to expand her comments a little further and tell us how she envisages the environment will play its role in consumer protection.
I have very little else to add other than that I am glad to have had the opportunity to make several points on this subject. I am happy that the Minister is placing all her emphasis on getting information to the consumer. By doing so, she realises that the consumer will be even more protected. We know we have the legislation and that the Minister will ensure that better protection is provided. The question we must now ask is how we can use that information on the rights of consumers. I know the Minister will do a good job and I have every confidence that she will be successful.
At the outset I also should like to welcome the Minister to the House. I congratulate her on her appointment, particularly on her new responsibility for consumer affairs.
Of necessity, the consumer will always be at something of a disadvantage when dealing with big corporations and businesses. Big businesses have the resources and the capacity to study consumers. They have the capacity to analyse consumers and spend much of their time doing just that. When in doubt, they commission extensive surveys and employ psychologists and other specialists to analyse the thinking processes of consumers and work out how consumers will behave. On the other hand, the consumer is faced with dealing with huge corporations that have immense resources and experience when it comes to handling an issue. The business corporations are able to adopt any attitude necessary, from "I'm glad you asked me that question" to "Get stuffed", depending on what is the most appropriate. It is very important that some effort be made to redress the imbalance in favour of the consumer. I do not think it will ever be easy to create a completely fair environment for consumers dealing with big business. Big businesses will always be able to manipulate their relationship with consumers and they will be able to manipulate the circumstances. That is what they spend their time at; they are constantly changing and thinking of new ways to benefit the consumer or — if one were to express it in different terms — to exploit the consumer.
Misleading advertising is a very big problem. There is a particular problem with aspects of subliminal advertising, in which messages can be given without the use of actual words — an impression can be created, an aura generated. That is a very important aspect of marketing. In many ways, it is a way of making a consumer feel he or she should purchase some product which he or she has no need for. Indeed, if a consumer stood back and thought about the product for some time he or she probably would have no wish to purchase it.
I was particularly interested to hear the Minister talk about various aspects of the food industry. That is an area in which I have had much interest and involvement in over the years. I am pleased to hear of the intention to introduce regulations to ensure that foods exposed to ionising radiation will be labelled as such. It is only fair that consumers should know whether food has been exposed to ionising radiation and make up their minds about whether they wish to purchase such a product.
Reference has already been made to the change from the term "best before" to the term "use by". That is a welcome change but there is a need to go much further than that in relation to the hygiene standards of food. In the latest issue of Check-Out magazine it was stated that about 70 per cent of the cooling cabinets in use did not conform to good hygiene practices in that their temperatures was higher than that considered desirable. I do not want to make a big issue of that, but I draw attention to the fact that as many as 70 per cent of those cabinets are said to be not working properly. That implies a risk to the consumer and I cannot think of a way in which it could be easily monitored. There is considerable difficulty in the regulation of hygiene and in the monitoring the hygienic state of foods.
Regulations in relation to ingredient and nutritional labelling are welcome developments. However, again there is a great need to go further. In particular, there is need for the Minister to deal with manufacturers' claims. I think specifically of items that carry a label such as "low cholesterol". What exactly is "low cholesterol"? What is "light butter" and what is a light spread? What are healthy foods and what are home-made foods? What is home-made soup? Is it a soup made entirely from ingredients produced in someone's home?
That is a fair question.
Is it soup made in someone's home out of a package that was purchased in bulk, or is it soup made to the notion of home-made soup. Perhaps a head chef might announce to his or her junior chefs that he or she is about to make home-made soup and a business is then able to put up a placard outside the door advertising home-made soup, or home-made pies or other home-made delights. How does one define the terms "pure" and "environmental"? What does one do when someone legitimately and popularly claims that a produce is high in fibre? I might add that there is no gripes with that claim and everyone accepts it is true. But how does one deal with such advertising when at the same time the product might be high in salt and high in cholesterol, two items that a consumer would speed away from. The only mention of the high salt and high cholesterol content of the product might appear at the bottom of a long list of ingredients, which only the truly committed would bother to read.
What can we do about the claims made by superstars and personalities in the promotion of products? Celebrities do not have to advertise food; a superstar might say that he or she rides a particular bicycle but that does not change the quality of the bicycle. A celebrity eats a particular food and then announces solemnly that he or she feels much better afterwards.
And they might use a particular cosmetic.
I am not mentioning cosmetics, an area about which I must confess a considerable degree of ignorance but I have no doubt that such advertising is used very effectively in regard to cosmetics. Is that fair and to what extent can you control it? What is to be done in relation to claims, even when you have tight regulations, which move away from advertising and arrange for sympathetic articles to be written in newspapers which effectively amount to a plug but which are written as copy rather than as advertising? If you go too far in restricting the use of those type of claims you will, understandably, be involved in issues relating to the freedom of the press, an area that I do not particularly want to get into. However, it illustrates a series of dilemmas relating to how the use of different claims promoting products, which in many ways are quite spurious, can be controlled.
There are the questions of totally unrealistic advertising and how you deal with it. How, for example do you deal with the way Royal Jelly is promoted? It is represented as a product which is a cure for everything. That is not an exaggeration, there is a book listing all that Royal Jelly can do for you. One section lists most of the major diseases of western society and case histories are included of people who have recovered from cancer or heart disorders as a result of taking Royal Jelly. If there was an easy cure for these type of problems then it would have been used. This product is used and sold in significant amounts and is quite expensive. What is to be done about that and how will it be controlled?
What is to be done about slimming products? It is no exaggeration to say that there are thousands of slimming books, all of which claim that if you follow its instructions you will slim down rapidly and live happily ever after.
You will get the man of your choice.
The Minister is right; that is thrown in as a bonus with a case history or two to illustrate the point. These ladies and gentlemen appear on chat shows and other programmes to promote this type of tomfoolery and nonsense. How will that be dealt with? As far as slimming is concerned, the reality is that over 90 per cent of people who are seriously overweight and who have the best slimming treatments will be back to their original weight in five years' time. Slimming is a preoccupation of modern society. If there was a simple answer people would move on to solving some new problem. I suppose the most incredible and ridiculous dimension of this type of thing is hair restorers. They do not seem to be as popular as they used to be but there was a time——
The Senator does not need them.
I have not used them but, again, they illustrate how ridiculous these claims are. Of course the reality is that the claims would not be made if they did not help to sell the product and indeed some of them are pushed very vigorously. There are slimming products which are pushed not only vigorously but highly dangerously also and, to be fair, the Department of Health have issued warnings about the manner in which they should be used, but their sale has been pushed effectively from door to door and by people who are exceptionally anxious to seek redress by invoking the law against anybody who speaks badly of them or contradicts the type of claims they make. These people would haul you through the courts at the drop of a hat if they got the slightest opportunity, yet their products do not work and are dangerous for a certain proportion of the population. It is enormously difficult to cope effectively with those matters.
Ecological labelling and the standards which have been laid down are very welcome, but quite a number of products get around those labellings or certainly they are used to give a misleading impression of the products. I was pleased to hear the Minister say that where comparative advertising was used at least it would have to be controlled. I am a bit scared of comparative advertising. Nobody makes unfavourable comparisons about their own product. Inevitably there will be an element of less than the full truth in that kind of practice and I would much prefer to see some independent organisation make those type of comparisons.
I share the concerns of all the Senators who spoke in relation to money lending and credit. It is essential that consumers should know what they are letting themselves in for; much of the time I am certain the do not, otherwise they would not sign certain contracts. I agree that the cooling-off period should be greater than a week. I also acknowledge that no matter what cooling-off period you have — unless you say it is something like 20 years — inevitably the sales pitch and the methods of working of these organisations will be adjusted to cope with the way the rules have been changed. If you say the cooling-off period will be one month they will adjust their tactics and practices to cope with that and if you say it will be one year they will come up with some new stunt. The whole area of consumer affairs is developing and, essentially, any Minister dealing with it will have to run very hard to stand still because, inevitably the people with whom they are dealing will keep on inventing new ways around rules and regulations.
My colleague, Senator O'Keeffe, has waited for almost a year for a debate on banking, something to which we are all looking forward. Certainly the number of calls for it would be well into the hundreds, even as many as one thousand. As a weekly ritual I like to speak on the Order of Business and make my call and I am told that we are not allowed to have such a debate. I know that the banks are very busy at present with their own problems but perhaps when they have sorted out their difficulties they will relent and allow the Department of Finance to authorise this House to go ahead with a debate, if that is not some terrible constitutional contradiction. It is very important in relation to banking charges that people should be able to work out easily what they are being charged. I do not know whether I am an average member of the public as far as the banks are concerned but I do not have a clue in regard to what I am charged by the banks. It would take me a week to work it out and I simply do not have the time, energy or resources to do that. The whole history of the banks suggest they are certainly not into anything that is free to their customers.
There are just one or two other minor points which I want to mention, one relates to the collection of data base information by certain corporations. Telecom Éireann got involved in data base collection; in other words, they asked people to kindly fill up a whole series of questions about themselves and to let them have that information. I am not sure the average person has any idea what will become of that information. It is used to bombard appropriate sectors of the market with junk mail and goodness knows what other type of marketing and selling techniques available. I have the greatest reservations about the use of that kind of information. If it is to be used then it is highly desirable there should be some kind of warning in fairly stark terms of what becomes of the information, how they propose to use it, indeed to whom they may sell it and what restrictions are on third parties using that information when it is sold to them. That is jolly fine if Telecom Éireann are doing it but perhaps a little deduction — indeed, even a reasonably significant deduction — from the telephone bill would not be out of place if somebody filled in that type of information. There is nothing for nothing in this world, and when dealing with those types of organisations, there is nothing for nothing. That might be one way to approach this matter rather than trying to hook people on illusions and dreams by offering them a ticket in a free draw for a motor car.
My final point relates to how Telecom Éireann conduct their business with their customers. Telecom Éireann have had a very long, troubled, and difficult relationship with their customers. I understand that approximately a quarter of all the complaints the Ombudsman has to deal with arise from disputes about telephone charges and so on and about a quarter of these complaints are upheld by the Ombudsman. That seems a large fraction of the total number of complaints of which are upheld.
Telecom Éireann is a very important organisation in this country, and a telephone is now a necessity. I would like to see considerably greater degrees of protection afforded to the consumer in the manner in which Telecom can deal with them. I would like to see guidelines, and a code of practice laid down on what is acceptable and what is unacceptable in the way Telecom deal with their customers. I had to deal with Telecom about a specific case and the responses I got were unacceptable. I resent the manner in which I was treated when I was making representations on behalf of a constituent who came to me with a case I thought worthy of more consideration than it got. Whatever about the question of giving it more consideration, I expected more courtesy than I got from the people in Telecom Éireann. Their attitude was "why don't you mind your own business?" which is totally unacceptable.
I am very glad to have the opportunity to say a few words on this very important topic. First, may I welcome the Minister to the House and congratulate her on her appointment. I know she will give it the same commitment, and bring her enthusiasm and expertise to bear as he did in her former Ministries.
The fact that this debate has received such widespread recognition from all sides of the House is indicative of how important and appropriate it is that we should debate consumer legislation and the laws to protect the consumer.
Due to the opening up of the Single Market a multiplicity of products and services will become available, in addition to what is already available, and it is extremely important that we do our bit to inform the consumer of his or her rights and enact legislation that is in the best interest of the consumers.
It is important to point out, as the Minister said, that organisations and companies which produce quality products, or are endeavouring to produce quality products and services, need not fear this legislation. There is a great deal of legislation in this area dating from the Sale of Goods Act, 1890; the Hire Purchase Acts, 1946 and 1980; the Consumer Information Act; the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act; and the Defective Products Act, 1991. A multiplicity of legislation has been brought forward to try to protect the consumer and it is appropriate that we discuss these Acts today and try to highlight them.
Members of local authorities have a further responsibility. To an extent information emanating from this House and the other House reaches a relatively small proportion of the population, but the local authorities operate at local level and their discussions and negotiations are reported in the local press. The majority of people buy the local paper and may read reports of those discussions. The advent of local radio is also extremely important.
Those of us who are also members of local authorities have a responsibility to convey that information at local level. It would be very appropriate if local authorities would, as a matter of course, put items of this nature on their agenda for discussions and in that way inform consumers of their rights under the law. The difficulty is that you may introduce fantastic laws but the number of consumers who are aware of their rights under different legislation are few and far between. For example, how many are aware of their rights under the Hire Purchase Act, 1946? How many consumers are aware of their rights under the Consumer Information Act, 1978? Our intention is to inform the consumer of his rights. How many consumers know that under the Sale of Goods Act that it is against the law to mark an item at a reduced price unless it was at that higher price for 28 consecutive days in the previous three months? The number of people who know that are few and far between.
As a matter of interest somebody sought my advice on this point and I had to look up the Act because I was not aware of all their rights under the legislation. I heard of a person who purchased an item and got an invoice for it, but on the back of the invoice the retailer had written that the item was not subject to the description that had been applied in the first instance. The retailer tried to indicate there was a change in conditions and that the acceptance of goods was on a different basis because he had written on the back of the invoice that the conditions were different from those ordinarily applying.
I want to refer briefly to persuasive advertising. It is important that people are aware of the position in relation to persuasive advertising. All the previous speakers mentioned it but it is extremely important that we highlight the difficulties. Again we may enact as much legislation as we like but unless the consumer is aware of his rights, it is difficult to know what exactly we can do about it. As a nation, we are very slow to complain. If you complain about a product, you may be made to feel as if you had two heads, and that people are saying "here he is again, he does nothing but complain", a great many people have that attitude and because of that attitude many of the products being sold today are of inferior quality. They are sold on the assumption that the individual would be embarrassed to return and complain particularly if there are a number of other people in the shop and if they think the shopkeeper will be annoyed with them.
I do not know what we as legislators can do about that. All we can do is continue to inform the general public of their rights under the legislation and hope that in time attitudes to the purchase and sale of goods will change. Of late people are quite prepared to come forward and complain about products, whereas in the past they would not have been anxious to do so. The Director of Consumer Affairs has a very onerous responsibility and he is doing a very good job. I am aware of a number of people who had occasion to get in touch with him and the response they received was positive and he followed up particular cases. One major international company that had been advertising different goods on the basis that they wanted to reflect different attitudes in the present day world in terms of war, etc., did so in a manner that was unacceptable to the general public but again the Director of Consumer Affairs got involved and tried to deal with it.
While insurance may not come within the remit of this motion; there is a linkage with the whole insurance area, particularly life and endowment policies etc. People who have problems in this particular area tell me of the persuasive approach adopted by brokers and agents who when selling policies to individual consumers, like to explain and highlight the benefits of those policies but, on the other hand if some type of growth bond is involved they never explain the fact that in future years that bond may not be as successful as they had anticipated. They will tell you that after ten years your policy should be worth an enormous amount of money, and you are almost guaranteed that. When you check it out after that period you will be told, "we are extremely sorry, we expected those growth bonds to be far more successful but we had a very bad year last year or the year before"; the result is that the policy is worth, perhaps, half what the person had expected. In many cases, apart from a life assurance policy, the investment is worth absolutely nothing. Alternatively if a person invested the money for ten years even with these licensed money lenders — whom we are always criticising — or with the banks or building societies or whatever they would be far better off. I am not suggesting that people should not take out life assurance. In fact, it is an absolute essential in the modern age, endowment policies leave much to be desired. It should be spelled out in very simple language and in no uncertain terms exactly how people will fare in particular circumstances with life assurance.
I welcome the fact that a consumer credit Bill to control the conditions under which credit can be extended is to be introduced, that all the Bills which I mentioned will be tidied up and repealed, and that we will have very modern legislation. One could go on discussing it because it is such a wide area with many important aspects. I am absolutely delighted we had the opportunity to debate this motion and that the Minister of State came into the Seanad today to debate this very important topic. I wish her every success in the future.
I thank the Senators who contributed to what was an extremely interesting and lively debate. As Senator McKenna said, you could see the thought processes of Senators as they spoke and developed their themes. Senator Michael Howard for Fine Gael, Senator Batt O'Keeffe for the Government side, Senator Pat Upton for Labour and Senator Tony McKenna addressed various issues as they arose throughout the debate. Is it in order to answer some of the queries and generally sum up?
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Yes, certainly.
I shall not mention the questioners but the actual points. On the safety aspect, the Minister, can, under the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards Act, 1944, make an order concerning the safety of a product, and the Director has further roles within that area.
Senators Howard, Upton and O'Keeffe addressed Telecom. The Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications and my Department are presently in consultation in regard to making the activities of that body amenable to the requirements of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980, in the matter of liability for the quality of service provided. I think that was the general tenor of the complaints which ensued. A telephone is a very important daily requirement now. We are examining ways in which the level of service provided can be improved.
All Senators referred to the need to increase the resources available to the Director of Consumer Affairs, the office staff was increased in 1990 from 23 to 30. When the Consumer Credit Bill is enacted obviously more resources will be needed, subject to the resources available, which is the talisman under which we all have to operate. In view of the nature and complexity of the regulations, the directives and legislation and the rights of consumers there will be a much greater need of resources. If I had a magic wand or if somebody waved one for me in the period when I would be examining this entire area, I would wish that consumer offices existed throughout the country which members of the public could visit, learn their rights and go about having those rights addressed. I hope it is not just a pipe dream and, perhaps, it is a matter to which we should address ourselves but, of course, the resources come into play. It is a matter we should have on our list of priorities, and the Bill to be introduced will highlight the need.
There were questions about toys. Toys must, as we know, conform to the EC toy safety regulations. Defective toys are confiscated and those trading in them, therefore, are at a loss. Apart from the toy safety rules, any product which causes physical damage to property or to a person would be subject to the provisions of the Liability Act, 1991. Cases taken by the director are highlighted from time to time, but how many escape our notice simply because he or his staff cannot pursue them or because, as Senator McKenna said, the public do not complain. It is not that the public are stroppy; it is that they are becoming well aware that it is up to them to complain. When I was young I would die of shame if my parents or elders started to complain in a restaurant or shop — I would be fit to crawl under the table. Thankfully, young people today are far livelier, are better informed and will not buy or keep a product if there is anything wrong with it.
With regard to advertisements, the Minister for Industry and Commerce made a consumer credit order in 1984 which dealt with classified advertisments. It stipulated that the advertisement should indicate where the seller was active in the course of a business. At present any misleading claims in relation to food would contravene the food labelling regulations. However, there are proposals at EC level in this area as the Senator mentioned.
We need to look at that matter also to see what can be done. With regard to claims made in respect of diets and fads, these will be dealt with by the Department of Health.
As I mentioned at the outset many Departments, including the Departments of Industry and Commerce, Health, Environment, Tourism, Transport and Communications and Justice, are involved in this area but I would like to see the matter dealt with by one Department. However, it would be very difficult to do this given the professionalism needed.
Many queries were raised in regard to the cooling off period. The consumer credit Bill provides that an agreement will not take effect until after the cooling off period. Senator Howard, who mentioned Telecom Éireann, rightly said that we have been tardy and asked us to move a big faster. I cannot quibble with that. The Senator said it in a kind way and I take it in that vein. As I said, I intend to get it together.
Senator O'Keeffe referred to products and toys from countries with low labour costs. I should say however that toys from EC countries or countries with low labour costs have to meet the same standards. On occasion, the product found to be defective comes from a country with low labour costs. Senator O'Keeffe also wondered how we were going to educate people. However I will address that point later.
Senator Upton mentioned "unreal advertising" and painted a piquant picture of the ways the subliminal message is put across. The thought struck me as he spoke that perhaps the political parties should take note of what he said, given that we all seek to send out messages particularly at election time. Perhaps we should make regulations about ourselves. In any event we will have to be more careful about the claims we make with regard to our prowess or the unlimited vistas we open up to the electorate at election time. Now that these regulations and directives are to be put into force we may have to comply with a very strict job description and fulfil any promises made.
Senator McKenna also wanted to know how we are going to educate people, a topic on which I hold strong views. Perhaps in the few minutes that remain we could discuss this question. No matter what way we look at it, it comes down to a question of education. The purpose of the consumer credit legislation that I set out today is to consolidate all the legislation that has been passed dealing with consumer credit in our Bill.
In response to Senator Howard, it is comprehensive legislation, and contains 60 "heads" approximately. Regulations are already in place and we hope to implement the proposals in the directives. While there will always be a need to adapt these directives to suit the needs of the country, above all there is the need for consumer education.
Consumers' need should be highlighted in a simple fashion for young people in civics in primary school. I understand that the Director of Consumer Affairs met with Albert Ó Ceallaigh of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment to discuss the possibility of providing a module on consumer affairs and protection in second level schools. I would envisage it as a module in the vocational, preparation and training programmes which run throughout the country. Consumer information is admirably provided by the Consumers Association of Ireland through their magazine, by bodies such as the ICA and others, while night classes and outreach courses are organised in most towns and villages by vocational schools. I note also that in the United Kingdom a student of the year competition is organised for young people at primary, post-primary, and third level. It attracts great publicity and is availed of by young people. I will explore these ideas when I meet my counterparts to find out what is happening in other countries with regard to consumer legislation.
We want to ensure fair play all round — Senator Howard made this point also — and, obviously, we do not want to restrict business or to see false claims being made with the result that there would be no commercial interaction between vendors and purchasers. Buying and selling is the oldest task in the book but we need to give it shape and strike a balance between the rights of the consumer and those who sell, the retailers. As legislators, we must always be on the side of the consumer, assume that the consumer needs protection and ensure that the consumer receives up-to-date information. That is what I intend to do. The caveat, caveat emptor— let the buyer beware — is relevant. However the buyer will not be aware unless he or she has all the necessary information. I envisage many more debates before this legislation is finally introduced and I am committed to introducing it.
Question put and agreed to.
Sitting suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 6.30 p.m.