asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will give an assurance that the Restrictive Practices (Groceries) Order 1973, which prohibits bulk buyers from receiving special discount advantages by virtue of their sizeable orders, will not result in the general shopping public paying more for their purchases.

I should like to make clear what the Restrictive Practices (Groceries) Order, 1973 does and does not do in the matter of quantity discounts. The order does not prohibit a supplier from allowing reasonable discounts for bulk orders or deliveries. What it does forbid is the granting of unreasonable discounts, over and above what is economically justifiable, which some large distributors were able to extort by reason of their purchasing power. The overall cost of deliveries to distributors should not be affected by the order, and there is no reason to fear that it might result in the general shopping public paying more for their purchases.

The Minister, then, is giving an assurance that, because the larger increase is no longer available, the retail prices of goods from these supermarkets will not be affected?

No. The order was introduced originally in February last and the amending order was introduced by the present Minister. The order endeavours to prohibit large purchasers of goods, because of their ability to buy in bulk, from going to manufacturers to seek extra discount on the threat of taking away their trade from the manufacturers. It is also to ensure that there is as equitable a price structure as possible at all levels of the trade.

Would the Minister not agree that, while some of these discounts may have been passed on to the consumer, this did not happen in other cases?

I do not know.

There is an important point here. What would the Minister define as "an unreasonable discount"?

That would seem to be a separate question.

It is.

I cannot think of any such definition.

It is an unreasonable discount.

I did not hear the Minister.

It seems to be a separate question.

The Minister used the term in his reply.

With respect, it is not a separate question. It is related to this whole matter.

Would the Deputy please repeat the supplementary question?

Will the Minister define the term "unreasonable discount"?

What is meant by an unreasonable discount in this context is the ability of large purchasers to get from manufacturers what is considered to be an unreasonable discount and they can get this because of their ability to buy in bulk and on the threat of taking their business elsewhere.

Therefore——

We must pass on to the next question.

I have not received an answer to my question.

The Chair has no control over that.

The Minister should have at his disposal the definition of an "unreasonable discount".

The Deputy is entering into argument now. Question No. 42.

I have told the Deputy what, within the context of this order, is unreasonable discount.

The order as it stands——

Is this not a statement, Deputy?

——is dependent on legislation. Can the Minister say when his colleague proposes to introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to the order? It has been delayed for too long already.

I think it will be introduced within the next month.