HC Deb 24 January 1973 vol 849 cc200-1W
Mr. Crouch

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he expects to publish the report on the Monopolies Commission on the supply of asbestos and certain asbestos products.

Sir G. Howe

The report is being published today. The commission found that monopoly conditions prevailed in the supply of asbestos products because at least one-third of all these goods supplied in the United Kingdom were supplied by Turner and Newall Limited. They concluded that Turner and Newall's monopoly position did not, in itself, operate against the public interest. The commission reached this conclusion after taking account of the considerable reduction in the company's share of the market—brought about by the competition to which it was exposed—and the efforts it had made during recent years to improve its efficiency.

The commission did, however, find that three of the company's practices operated against the public interest. These were:

  1. (1) an agreement between the company and Tunnel Cement Limited, under which the company distributes Tunnel's output of asbestos cement to the extent of a quota related to its own sales;
  2. (2) in the asbestos textiles, packing and jointing fields, the policy of acquiring competing manufacturing businesses and excluding the former competitors for unreasonable periods of time from re-entering the fields, and
  3. (3) in the same fields, the policy of acquiring customer businesses or making agreements with customers which restrict them from buying certain goods from its own competitors or from selling any such goods which are not made by the company itself.

The commission therefore recommended that:

  1. (i) the agreement with Tunnel should be terminated on 31st December 1975—when the five years' notice given by Turner and Newall will expire—and should not be replaced by any similar agreement or understanding;
  2. (ii) the covenants, incorporated in agreements with George MacLellan, Albion Asbestos and Cape for the sale to Turner and Newall of certain businesses, under which the former proprietors or specified companies or persons undertake not to carry on similar businesses for specified terms, having run for substantial periods, should now be terminated;
  3. (iii) the provisions in the agreements with Bestobell, Beldam and Nelson relating to supply in the United Kingdom which prevent them from buying certain goods from a supplier other than Turner and Newall or from selling such goods not made or supplied by Turner and Newall should be terminated as soon as possible or at such dates as the Department of Trade and Industry may direct or determine;
  4. (iv) in the fields of asbestos textile products, packing and jointing in the United Kingdom Turner and Newall should not in future, unless with the consent of the Department of Trade and Industry, acquire any competing manufacturing business or any customer business, or enter into any agreement or arrangement with any customer business which prevents that customer from buying goods from a supplier other than Turner and Newall or from selling goods not made or supplied by Turner and Newall.

So far as the supply of asbestos fibres is concerned, the commission found that although technical monopoly conditions prevailed because one company, Central Asbestos Limited, supplied at least one-third of all the asbestos fibres supplied in the United Kingdom, this did not in the particular circumstances of the case raise any issues in relation to the public interest.

I accept the commission's recommendations and am seeking appropriate undertakings from the companies concerned.