BOOTS LTD.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13091, 26 October 1935, Page 5

BOOTS LTD.

[CHAIN STORE PHARMACIES.

GOVERNMENT’S ATTITUDE. Electric Telej.M'apTi— Tress Association WELLINGTON, Last Night. I he following statement‘was made in the House by Hon. G. W. Forbes to-night: “During - the x>resent session numerous petitions have been addressed to the Legislature bv pharmaceutical chemists resident in afferent parts of the Dominion. These petitions were prompted by knowledge ot 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 Nc" Zealand on the chain store principle. The Engli-h firm in question was Messrs Boots (Chemists) Ltd.

, " I fie .prayer of the petitions was that this House should ‘introduce ftectivo legislation to protect retailers from the relentless competition of chain stores, of which Messrs Boots (Chemists), Ltd., is only one ; others will almost certainly follow. J

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 such amendment being to protect retail chemists against the operation ot trie chain store principle.

‘•Communications have recently passed between a representative of Boots, Ltd., and myself with satistactory results. I was, therefore ole to inform the latest deputation r pharmaceutical chemists, received by me on the 23rd inst., that: As a result of my discussions with Boots representative, an undertaking has been given by that firm that it would not further extend its operations in New Zealand (it had already acquired properties in Weiii; toil and Auckland) until a, representative liad conio to New Zealand md interviewed the Government and nterested parties. ”

Mr T orbes read the correspondsin e that had passed between him nti solicitor, in which it was “You may assure your client that the Government of New Zeaiml will not permit your client’s 1 ndertaking to he exploited to its rantagj by competitive con- ' i'lis. Any attempt made by a rival trader to enter the field voluntarily vacated by your client would be rei by the Government as nniair and prompt measures would be taken to deal with it, as, for example, by legislation, having, if necessary, a retrospective effect. Ihe question of whether the Pharmacy Act should be so amended as to make the conduct ot a pharmacy a wholly personal and indivimtal enterprise is a difficult one, b, in fairness to all parties interested (in which the public must he included), ought not to be decided until the whole matter has -ten considered by a Pariiamentarv b-ct Committee. Only when such committee has made a report to Parliament after hearing the difr. nt interests affected, and considering all the evidence available, will tin- Legislature l>e in a position to come to a just decision on the matter. Meantime the status •;h(‘ is, as far as practicable, being n.nintaincd until a decision of the Legislature ca.i be reached.”