HC Deb 31 July 1956 vol 557 cc99-102W
Mr. Mathew

asked the President of the Board of Trade when the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Commission's Report on the supply of certain rubber footwear will be published; and if he will make a statement about its contents.

Mr. P. Thorneycroft

The Report was published today.

The Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Commission find that the conditions to which the Monopolies and Restrictive

Practices (Inquiry and Control) Act, 1948, applies prevail as regards the supply both of rubber boots and of canvas footwear because

  1. (a) more than one-third in quantity and value of each description of goods supplied in the United Kingdom is supplied by the members of the Rubber Footwear Manufacturers' Association and the members of the Association of Hong Kong Rubber Footwear Importers together, and the members of each association so conduct their affairs as to restrict competition in connection with the supply of each description of goods, and
  2. (b) more than one-third in quantity and value of each description of goods supplied in the United Kingdom is supplied by members of the Rubber Footwear Manufacturers' Association alone.

The conditions prevail as regards the supply of rubber boots for the additional reason that the Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. alone supplies more than one-third in quantity and value of this description of goods supplied in the United Kingdom.

The Commission's conclusions and recommendations are: (a) Practices of the Rubber Footwear Manufacturers' Association

  1. (1) The Association's price consultations and the understanding among members not to negotiate special prices with traders for large orders without notifying each other, operate and may be expected to operate against the public interest. Members of the Association should cease to consult one another about prices of either rubber boots or canvas footwear, and they should be free to negotiate special prices with traders for large orders without notifying each other.
  2. (2) The understanding between members of the Association not to change their prices during the currency of a season operates and may be expected to operate against the public interest. This under standing should be discontinued for future seasons.
  3. (3) If effect were again to be given to the understanding between members of the Association to allow 101 compensation to traders in accordance with a uniform practice when prices are reduced, it might be expected to operate against the public interest, and it should not be revived.
  4. (4) Provided that the Association's price consultations are discontinued the Commission do not consider that the uniform terms for prompt payment may be expected to operate against the public interest.
  5. (5) The Commission do not consider that the maintenance of resale prices of rubber footwear by members of the Association, in the manner and to the extent that they maintain them at present, operates or may be expected to operate against the public interest.
  6. (6) The Classified List of Traders entitled to wholesale prices and terms operates and may be expected to operate against the public interest. The list, along with the arrangements for administering it, should be discontinued, but the Commission would see no objection if the Association circulated to members a recommended list of traders suitable for wholesale terms, provided that the Association did not consult the distributive trade in compiling it and made it clear that members were under no obligation to observe it.
  7. (7) The collective selection by the Association of users entitled to special terms operates and may be expected to operate against the public interest. The arrangements should be discontinued.
(b) The Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. The Commission do not find that otherwise than as a member of the Rubber Footwear Manufacturers' Association the Dunlop Rubber Co. does, as a result of or for the purpose of preserving its "monopoly" position, anything which operates or may be expected to operate against the public interest. (c) Practices relating to imports from Hong Kong
  1. (1) The Commission do not find that the existing arrangements between the Association of Hong Kong Rubber Footwear Importers and certain exporters and the Association's 102 restrictions on the admission of new members operate or may be expected to operate against the public interest. But if the scope of the reciprocal agreements were greatly extended the position should be re-examined.
  2. (2) The Commission do not find that in present circumstances the understanding among members of the importers' association to sell only to wholesalers and multiple retailers with at least six shops operates against the public interest, but they would see serious objection to the introduction of an exclusive list of traders, or to any understanding by traders to buy Hong Kong rubber footwear exclusively from members of the importers' association.
 So far as action on the Report is concerned, as indicated during the Second Reading debate on the Restrictive Trade Practices Bill, the Government do not propose to take action on matters which will be subject to the jurisdiction of the proposed Restrictive Practices Court.