Commerce Bill criticised

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33664, 14 October 1974, Page 5

Commerce Bill criticised

<X.Z. Press Association) WELLINGTON, Oct. 13. Businessmen who made proposals to the select committee of Parliament would be disappointed with the reintroduced Commerce Bill, said the executive director of the Retailers’! Federation (Mr B. I. Purdy).

“Considerable improvements have been made in minor technical issues in the bill, which will probably ease its administration. However, the very wide powers taken by the Minis-! ter and given to the secre-i tary of the department re-1 main. The Government is I relying too much on regu-j lations, and not debating the issues in Parliament,” Mr Purdy said. The secretary of the department should not have authority to seize any documents in any company almost at whim. Under the present Trade Practices Act such power of inspection and seizure was limited to documents related to the matter under inquiry, and this protection should be carried into the new legislation. POWER TO PUBLISH “Why should the secretary, even with Ministerial concurrence, have power to publish documents or information he may come across during the course of an investigation?” asked Mr Purdy. The business community could not accept assurances that these powers would not be abused, particularly when there was wide power to delegate many powers. There was too much experience of more junior officers misunderstanding their authority, exceeding it, and causing considerable harassment of conscientious and innocent traders. Business morality in New Zealand was of an extremely high order, and the whole slant of this legislation was written on the assumption that businessmen were rogues, said Mr Purdy. “There are inadequate legal protections for those who will be expected to govern their trading decision in accordance with its provisions.” MERGER PROVISIONS . “The provisions on merg- ■ ers represent an outright |

attack on the life savings of a great number of small i businessmen. If the bill is i passed in its present form, ,jthey will find it infinitely .more difficult to realise on their lifetime’s work by sellling their busiftess, or merging with even a medium-1 I sized partner,” Mr Purdy! said. '; Prospective buyers of! |businesses were unlikely to! ,!be prepared to go through:

’ the procedure of investigation before getting approval to purchase. The bill must be debated more fully in Parliament before being passed, he said. “As a consolidation of the ■ number of acts that it ! covers it can only be classed as a failure, because it is • jmore difficult to understand ,’than the statutes already in i existence,” said Mr Purdy.