HC Deb 17 July 1972 vol 841 cc22-3
23. Mr. William Price

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will now refer the Grand Metropolitan-Watney merger to the Monopolies Commission.

Mr. John Davies

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade to the hon. Member for Newark (Mr. Bishop) on 6th July.—[Vol. 840, c. 223.]

Mr. Price

Whatever the rights and wrongs of that decision—and it will certainly cause astonishment in the licensing trade—will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will closely watch the position of the thousands of publicans involved? Will he make it clear to Grand Metropolitan that if the merger goes through he will not stand idly by while the policy of Watney Mann is continued of kicking out hundreds of tenants and replacing them with managers solely for the benefit of profits?

Mr. Davies

The whole area is constantly under consideration by the Government. The position of this strengthened brewing group does not constitute any new effective monopoly, as the hon. Gentleman knows. I will certainly watch the matter.

Mr. Benn

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that there is a growing feeling, not confined to one side of the House, that to consider mergers of this kind without any requirement to take account of the people whose lives will be affected—my hon. Friend has mentioned one group of people, and there are many others—is increasingly being seen as totally unsatisfactory? Failure to take into account the interests of those involved may well be a recipe for failure, even in that limited range of criteria. Will the right hon. Gentleman look again at the possibility of ensuring that those who work in firms or industries in which mergers are proposed have their views sought and put before the panel or the Commission before a final decision is reached?

Mr. Davies

How the Commission operates under the terms of our reference to it is prescribed by Statute and determined by the Commission itself. The right hon. Gentleman reproached me for inadequate concern about consumer interests and forgetting the people involved. Those interests also have to receive a large degree of consideration—a degree for which the Labour Government did not adequately provide.

Mr. Pardoe

Does the right hon. Gentleman remember that when I recently drew an analogy between his decision not to refer and then to refer a certain drugs merger to the Monopolies Commission and contributions to the Conservative Party, he described that as an insolent suggestion? Would he similarly describe a suggestion that his decision not to refer the Watney merger to the Commission has anything to do with the fact that Watney refused to contribute to the Conservative Party this year?

Mr. Davies

The hon. Gentleman is working up for himself a monopoly in insolent suggestions, is he not?