§ 10. Fiona Mactaggart (Slough)What measures she has taken to enhance protection for consumers; and if she will make a statement. [49381]
§ The Minister for Competition and Consumer Affairs (Mr. Nigel Griffiths)My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and I have taken a number of measures to put consumer interests and consumer protection at the heart of Government, from banning dangerous laser pens to tackling time-share touts and protecting British loaf weights. Among other things, we have targeted rogue directors, introduced a Competition Bill, moved to allow consumers' organisations to take representative actions in our courts and improved protection for low-income consumers seeking credit.
§ Fiona MactaggartI know that my constituents welcome this active approach to consumer protection, especially the swift action that the Minister took last autumn to tackle unsafe fireworks, which led to the largest fall in firework injuries in 23 years. However, will he share my disappointment and anger at those Opposition Members who, by talking out the Fireworks Bill, stopped him building on that track record, and thus put their petty politics before public safety?
§ Mr. GriffithsI certainly share, as do firework safety campaigners and the Confederation of British Industry, my hon. Friend's anger at the activities of the former Conservative consumer spokesman, the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh), and his Conservative friends in talking out that measure. When the hon. Gentleman was a Minister, the number of firework injuries rose by 567 46 per cent. and 335 more people ended up in hospital. Fortunately, the Government are able to use secondary legislation to outlaw bangers this year.
§ Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam)The Minister will be aware of the problems faced by consumers who purchase home-working packs with the promise of making large amounts of money and then find themselves ripped off as the income does not materialise. Does the Minister have any plans to tackle the problems faced by such people, including my constituents in Sheffield, who have found themselves ripped off by unscrupulous home work offerers?
§ Mr. GriffithsThe Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Mr. McCartney), and I have launched a national campaign on home working. We share the condemnation of the abuse of home workers and we believe that the national campaign will offer real protection by ensuring that people are steered towards projects of proven worth, not projects such as the hon. Gentleman refers to.
§ Mr. Andrew Reed (Loughborough)I know that the Minister is aware of the difficulty that many of my constituents have had resulting from international lottery draws, whereby individuals are targeted from abroad for lottery winnings. Those are, of course, largely fraudulent acts. I believe that the Advertising Standards Agency has no rights in that regard. Will the Minister turn his attention to such acts originating from Australia, the far east and eastern Europe, to protect consumers in my constituency and throughout the country?
§ Mr. GriffithsI am glad to have the opportunity to warn every member of the British public against falling for these unfortunate scams. We are seeking international co-operation on advertising, and in this case the abuse of advertising, to ensure that such scam schemes are prohibited from entering Britain and are put out of business altogether.
§ Mr. Christopher Chope (Christchurch)Why is the Minister so sickeningly self-satisfied? May I draw his attention to two examples of failure—first, his refusal to respond to the request of the Consumers Association to add consumer issues to the remit of Action 2000 and, secondly, his absolutely supine attitude in Europe? Not long ago, he boasted at a conference that he had contributed strongly in the Consumer Council towards the aim of creating a people's Europe. How is that rhetoric consistent with today's European Court of Justice ruling preventing ordinary people from having access to the designer clothes so beloved by Labour MPs?
§ Mr. GriffithsI suppose that the hon. Gentleman is entitled to two questions because both were so poor.
To tackle the first question, given that the present Government have spent 70 times the amount that the previous Government spent on the Action 2000 campaign and on fighting the millennium bug, it is ridiculous that the hon. Gentleman should criticise us on that.
As for today's decision of the European Court of Justice, one of my first acts as a Minister was to invite some of Britain's leading retailers, some of our most successful companies—people who had never been 568 invited under the previous Administration—to come to the Department of Trade and Industry to discuss the very issues that have come up today. We deplore any action that prevents British retailers from providing British consumers with foreign-manufactured goods at reasonable prices. Although it is important that trademarks are protected, a balance must be struck between the right of those who hold trademarks and the right of consumers. It is unfair that British consumers should have to pay inflated prices, and we have taken action to get the European Commission to investigate pricing across all the EU states, because we believe that, in too many areas, British consumers are paying far too much.
§ Mr. Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield)Does my hon. Friend agree that the criticisms of Opposition Front Benchers would have rather more weight if they had not sat on their hands and allowed their Back Benchers to derail the Fireworks Bill? The CBI said that the derailing of that Bill was likely to lead directly to an increase in firework-related injuries. Will my hon. Friend ask Opposition Front Benchers whether they will now co-operate in ensuring that the Bill comes back to the House and is given a "fair wind", to use their words, so that the number of firework-related injuries continues to go down, rather than going up again as a result of their irresponsible actions?
§ Mr. GriffithsThis should not be a party political matter. I invite Opposition Members to reflect on it and to support any such Bill. It is noticeable that there were more Opposition Members in the House to block that Bill than the 13 or 14 Back Benchers present this afternoon to discuss that issue and other important matters, such as British manufacturing. They simply do not care.