THE MONOPOLIES AND MERGERS COMMISSION

HC Deb 16 May 1973 vol 856 cc1660-3

Mr. Millan

I beg to move Amendment No. 17, in line 15, at end insert— '(2A) At least half the regular members of the Commission, including the chairman of the Commission, shall be full-time members'. This amendment would ensure that at least half of the regular members of the commission, including the chairman, were full-time members. In Committee a point was made from the Opposition on a number of occasions that one of the important requirements, if the monopolies and mergers legislation were to be effective, was a strengthening of the membership of the commission. As we have it at present, the commission has a full-time chairman and all other members are part time.

It is implicit in the Bill that the Monopolies and Mergers Commission is intended to be more active in future. The reduction of the monopolies criterion from one-third to one-quarter by itself means potentially a much larger number of references to the commission. The Minister for Trade and Consumer Affairs, the other day in a parliamentary Answer, said that the Government had in mind a number of monopoly references to be made in the near future. Indeed, we have been assured on a number of occasions—until some of us as rather sceptical of what it means in practice—that the Government are following a more active policy of references of mergers.

The report of the National Institute for Economic and Social Research, published recently, identified a number of areas where it thinks there should be fairly urgent references by the Government to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission. That makes the point that if all the areas identified were referred and the commission operated on the time scale to which we have been accustomed over the last few years, it would take 30 years for all reports to be prepared. If we are to have an active policy we should strengthen the membership of the commission. The amendment would provide for a majority of full-time members.

I do not want to criticise the present membership of the commission. I said one or two rather harsh things about them in Committee but they have redeemed themselves to some extent with the Roche Report. That reassured me that the commission could produce the kind of vigorous and tough report that I would like to see produced more often. But the criticisms of length of time taken to produce the report and a number of other criticisms that I have made but will not repeat now still remain. If we are to put an added burden on the commission we should equip it to do the job adequately. That means having more full-time members.

Mr. Emery

I do not believe that the Government's intentions differ from these of the Opposition. We want to see references, once made to the commission, examined as fully and ably as possible and the reports made in a manner which brings them, so far as, is humanly possible, above criticism. After all, the great strength of the commission has been that its reports have been of a calibre which has been admired by all except the few who have been criticised.

Mr. Fletcher-Cooke

Is it not a fact that they are admired not only in this country but, increasingly, overseas? It is as a result of the reports of the commission, particularly in the example that the hon. Gentleman gave, that we have taken the lead in this field.

Mr. Emery

My hon. and learned Friend has stolen my next-but-one sentence. Only two weeks ago, from this very Box, I was dealing with the Roche case.

There is therefore a great deal of agreement between the two sides of the House. The amendment provides for the appointment of full-time as well as part-time members. There must be an advantage in having some flexibility and not tying the Secretary of State's hands over the detail of the commission's composition. I am not suggesting that the amendment does that absolutely but it does it in a small way.

Part-time membership has the great advantage of making a much wider range of people available for service on the commission. It enables people to remain in touch with their own businesses and occupations. People from the academic world and the unions and people who are still active in business can often serve on the commission and have given remarkable service. On one occasion1 there was a full-time member other than the chairman. The possibilities of having additional full-time members or a full-time deputy chairman are by no means ruled out by me or my right hon. and learned Friend. I made that clear in Committee and I willingly repeat it on the Floor of the House.

It is hoped to announce shortly some new appointments and re-appointments. Consideration will be given at that time to the question whether it is desirable to increase the number of full-time members of the commission. That is what the amendment tries to elicit from the Government. I could not, however, accept the idea that half of the members of the commission should be full-time members, especially when one considers the problems of obtaining the background information for the reports. Much of the work is of a clerical nature at certain times, when the information is being sought. There are periods of inactivity after a reference while information is being compiled. I cannot accept the concept of having full-time members doing nothing at such times. We need men who can give a considerable part of their time when the information is available in order that the reports can quickly be brought forward when the background, the presentation work and the cross-examination has been carried through.

The Opposition and the Government are closely in alignment about what we wish to achieve, but I cannot accept that there should be a majority of full-time members on the commission.

Mr. Millan

I agree with the Minister at least to the extent that the amendment would impose rather greater rigidity in the Bill than I should like. I am glad to have the further assurance that the Government have it in mind to strengthen the commission and that the question of full-time membership will be seriously considered.

My approach is simply that we decide what kind of jobs we want to give to the commission and then see that it is adequately equipped to perform them and has the number of full-time members which is required.

On the strength of the Minister's assurance, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.