andMr. O'Toole asked the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism the nature and number of mergers and takeovers referred by him to the Examiner of Restrictive Practices under section 7 of the Mergers, Takeovers and Monopolies (Control) Act, 1978, if he has complied with section 8 of the Act which requires him to furnish both Houses of the Oireachtas with an annual report stating the nature and number of such investigations and, if not, when he will comply with it.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Mergers and Takeovers.
29.
To date, I have referred two proposed mergers or takeovers to the Examiner of Restrictive Practices for investigation by him. The first reference involved two enterprises involved in the retail sale of grocery goods and I allowed this to proceed after considering the examiner's report of his investigation. As regards the second case which involved two enterprises engaged in the concrete products sector, I received the examiner's report on 19 March and this is now receiving urgent attention.
The first report, required under section 6 of the Act, will be represented to each House of the Oireachtas shortly. In order to make available to the Houses the most-up-to-date information I propose that this report should cover the period up to the end of 1979. An effect of this is that future reports will be in respect of calendar years as is the case with other annual reports presented to the Houses by me.
Having considered the report I should like to know if the Minister is in a position to tell the House if the examiner advised against the first merger referred to in the grocery trade?
I do not think I am at liberty to disclose the contents of that report.
I am not looking for the exact contents of the report but I should like to know if the examiner advised the Minister against the proposed merger in which 5 to 6 per cent of the Irish grocery trade was involved?
Normally I would not answer that question but in view of the fact that certain information appeared in newspapers which is incorrect I should like to tell the House, without prejudice to the position, that the examiner did not advise against allowing the takeover.
Did the examiner make a positive proposal one way or the other?
I am not prepared to enter into a discussion on that report. Under the Act the examiner is required to deal with the various criteria which are set out in the Schedule to the Act and he did that.
Is the Minister now aware of the serious consequences resulting from his approval of this merger?
Is the Deputy suggesting that I should not have approved of it and allowed, perhaps, 30 retail outlets throughout the country to close down?
Is the Minister now aware of the serious consequences of his action in approving that merger?
The consequence of my not approving would have been much more serious. It is a difficult decision to make at any time and I had to balance the various interests concerned but I am satisfied I took the right course.