Sir (North East Somerset)
(Con):...There is also what I would call the
Tesco amendment. The Tesco
amendment is one about which my right hon. and learned Friend the
Member for South Swindon and I have written to Ministers to say
that this Bill, as it is currently phrased, would allow
Tesco to be designated. Tesco
is not by and large a digital company, but it has a lot of
digital activities—people may buy their baked beans or their Bath
Oliver biscuits from Tesco online—and that
potentially brings Tesco within scope. We have
had a marvellous reply from the Department—and I look at my right
hon. and learned Friend as I say this—predating my hon. Friend
the Minister, who I do not think would have signed such a letter.
The marvellous reply says, “Don’t worry because the CMA and the
DMU won’t do this. We may be giving them the power, but don’t
worry your little heads about it because they won’t do it.” That
is bad legislation, or a bad structure to legislation. Surely we
have learned in this House—and let us hope that the other place
has learned if we have not—that when we legislate, what we put in
law is what we think may happen. We do not put things into law
that we do not want to happen in the hope that somebody, out of
good will, will not use that power. That is bad legislation, and
it simply should not be in the Bill. An amendment has been
provided, and if it is not accepted tonight, it should be
accepted in the other place.
It fascinates me, after the Labour party has had a go at the
Government for sittings ending early, that there is only one
Back-Bench speaker from the Labour party, the hon. Member for
Easington (), on a Bill running to
hundreds of pages. [Interruption.] This is so important when we
are scrutinising legislation. We have already had three speakers
from the Government Benches, but it is the job of the Opposition
to hold the Government to account. It is not for Government Back
Benchers to hold the Government to account; it is for the
Opposition to do so. On a Bill of this importance, only one
Opposition Back-Bench speaker—a very admirable and a very
diligent one, it has to be said—has wanted to come and diligently
go through it, which is what we should be doing. [Interruption.]
Was that a V-sign from the hon. Member for Hove () on the Opposition Front Bench?
Madam Deputy Speaker, we will need to pass around the smelling
salts if this sort of thing carries on. On Report, we need to be
going through the amendments one by one, looking at the details
of the Bill, and amendment 178—the Tesco
amendment—does exactly that. It is looking at a flaw or a lacuna
in the Bill, and trying to close that hole. That leads to the
construction of better legislation, which will have a better
effect in the courts...
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science,
Innovation and Technology ():...My right hon. Friend the
Member for North East Somerset and my right hon. and learned
Friend the Member for South Swindon talked about
Tesco. I think that we have clarified that
issue, but to clarify it further, for a firm to be designated by
the DMU, it has to satisfy three fundamental points: it has to
have digital activities, it has to have substantial and
entrenched market power, and it has to hold a strategic position
in the market. I do not want to pre-empt what the CMA or DMU may
do in terms of Tesco’s designated status; that
is not my job today at the Dispatch Box. However, I hope that the
tests that I have set out reassure Members that companies such as
Tesco will not fall under this measure because
they have highly competitive markets, including in the online
world...
Sir :...A final thought before I
conclude is on petrol stations. This is very good news. Why is it
that the Tesco’s in Paulton is more expensive
than the local service station in Ubley? I use the local service
station in Ubley because it is better value for money, but
Tesco’s in Paulton is more expensive than the
Tesco’s on the outskirts of Bristol. That is
very unfair on my constituents and I want it to bring its price
down...
