CHEMISTS’ SHOPS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22712, 26 October 1935, Page 8

CHEMISTS’ SHOPS

THE CHAIN STORE PRINCIPLE ENGLISH FIRM’S OPERATIONS STATEMENT BY PRIME MINISTER (IPbom Oms Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, October 25. The following statement was made; in the House of Representatives by the Prime Minister, Mr G. W. Forbes, tonight;— During the present session numerous petitions have been addressed to the Legislature by pharmaceutical chemists resident in different parts of the Dominion. These petitions were prompted by a knowledge of the intention of a certain English firm of drug manufacturers to commence business in New Zealand as pharmaceutical chemists, and in so doing to open a series of pharmacies throughout New Zealand on the chain store principle. The English firm in question wa a Messrs Boots Chemists, Ltd. The prayer of the petitions was that this House should "introduce effective legislation to protect the retailers from the relentless competition of the chain stores of which Messrs Boots Chemists, Ltd., is only one. Others will almost certainly follow.” During the past month I have received several deputations urging the introduction of legislation by way of an amendment to the Pharmacy Act, the purpose of euch amendment being to protect the retail chemists against the operation of the chain store principle. Communications have recently passed betwen a representative of Boots, Ltd., and myself with satisfactory results. I was therefore able to inform the latest deputation of pharmaceutical chemists received by me on October 23 that “as a result of my discussions with Boots, Ltd., representative an undertaking had been given by that firm that it would not further extend its operations in New Zealand (it had already acquired properties in Wellington and Auckland) until its representative had come to New Zealand and interviewed the Government and other interested parties.” Mr Forbes read correspondence that had passed between him and Boots, Ltd., solicitor, in which it was stated “ You may assure your client that the Government of New Zealand will not permit your client’s undertaking to be exploited to its disadvantage by competitive concerns. Any attempt made by a rival trader to enter the field voluntarily vacated by your client would be regarded by the Government as unfair, and prompt measures would be taken to deal with it, as, for example, by legislation having, if necessary, a retrospective effect. The question whether the Pharmacy Act should be so amended as to make the conduct of a pharmacy a wholly personal and individual enterprise is a difficult one which, in fairness to all the parties interested (in which the public must be included), ought not to be decided until the whole matter has been considered by a Parliamentary Select Committee. Only when such committee has made its report to Parliament after hearing the different interests affected, and considering all the evidence available, will the _ Legislature be in a position-to come to a just decision on the matter. Meantime the status quo is as far as practicable being maintained until a decision of the Legislature can he reached.”