§ 3. Mr. Jayasked the Attorney-General how soon he expects the question of the agreements in the building and sanitary supplies industry to come before the Restrictive Practices Court.
§ The Attorney-GeneralDirections to refer agreements relating to the supply of some sanitary goods were given to the Registrar on 3rd September. In two cases the agreements have been varied by the omission of all the restrictive clauses and it is unlikely that they will be referred to the court in the near future; I am not in a position to say when any other cases will come before the court. No directions have been given about the building and sanitary supplies industry as such.
§ Mr. JayIs it satisfactory that nearly eighteen months after the passing of the Restrictive Trade Practices Act no case has yet come before this court? Is the Attorney-General aware that a great many customers of the industry have written to me to say that the present policy of the industry is to register their restrictive practices and still continue on the principle that they can legally do so and that it will take years before it is stopped? Is that satisfactory?
§ The Attorney-GeneralIt is the case that a great many people are amending their agreements and so avoiding the necessity for registration by deleting the objectionable clauses. I am sure that that is a satisfactory step as long as they do not adhere to the past practice. Any evidence that they are adhering to their past practice despite an alteration in the agreement would be welcomed by the Registrar.
The hon. Member referred to the delay in taking these cases before the courts. He realises that even where an order is made for representation a very large number of interests are involved. If justice is to be done, it means that both sides must have proper opportunity for consideration and for investigations. I think that the way in which the Registrar's Office is now functioning shows quite clearly that the time which is being taken to bring these cases before the court compares very favourably with the time normally taken in any big commercial case which is somewhat analogous.
§ Mr. JayIs the Attorney-General aware that it is precisely for those reasons that we on this side of the House always argued that this procedure would be far too slow?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI cannot accept that as a conclusion when we find that, without the matter coming before the court, a great many of the things which were objectionable are being corrected.
§ 5. Mr. E. Fletcherasked the Attorney-General, in how many cases he has nominated counsel under Section 23 (4) of the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956, to represent the Registrar in proceedings before the Restrictive Practices Court.
§ The Attorney-GeneralI have nominated leading counsel in three cases. The work of junior counsel has in all cases been carried out by standing counsel to the Registrar.
§ Mr. FletcherCan the Attorney-General say whether that Answer is some indication that he is satisfied with the progress being made in carrying this Act into operation?
§ The Attorney-GeneralYes, Sir, I am satisfied.