A good-behaviour code has been agreed for the major supermarkets. It will only apply to those with over 8% of the market, in other words just Asda, Safeway, Sainsbury and Tesco. It details how these supermarkets should conduct their business with farmers, food manufacturers and other suppliers. The Office of Fair Trading code was recommended by a report from the Competition Commission and is legally binding. There is widespread disappointment that following consultation few, if any, changes were made. In addition to covering aspects for agreeing prices and conditions of purchase, the code prohibits the former practice of charging suppliers for displaying their goods in favourable positions or for the cost of 'buy one, get one free' promotions. How this will affect the introduction of new products, for which supermarkets have charged firms in the past; remains to be seen. Though the code promotes independent arbitration to deal with disputes or infringements, the stores can themselves choose the arbitrator, which seems rather strange. The Director General of Fair Trading will monitor the working of the code.
It took five years for Staffordshire Trading Standards Department, working with the police, to put an end to a series of homeworking scams. The partners were said to have preyed on the most vulnerable, and in over five years had probably collected more than £31 million from their various schemes and swindled at least 100,000 people. The scams included envelope addressing, artificial tulip making and paintings by numbers. The firms demanded fees of around £20 in advance and then more for the kits. When the completed work was returned it was rejected on two consecutive occasions and no payment made. The perpetrators then had the audacity to suggest that the failed applicants tried another of their kits 'more suited to their skills' with, of course, a further fee of £40 to £60. It seems fitting that two of those prosecuted have received sentences of five years in jail. It is to be hoped that 'Stop Now' notices (page 2) will have a quicker effect in future.
The selling of voters' lists by councils was considered to be a breach of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act in a case where a voter voluntarily removed his name from the electoral register by not returning his registration form and thus denying himself a vote and laying himself open to prosecution. The local council had refused to promise him that it would not sell his name and address to commercial organisations. Selling copies of the register dates from at least 1918, but probably as far back as 1832. Councils are now legally obliged to sell to anyone who asks. It is hoped that legislation will be introduced to compel local authorities to put an opt-out box on future electoral registration forms so that one can have one's details removed from any register that is to be sold.
The role of the Commission for Integrated Transport was defined in a White Paper as providing independent advice to the Government and to monitor developments across transport, environment, health and other sectors with specific targets as defined. It will 'continue and refresh the transport debate'. Other vague roles include 'fostering consensus among practical providers, identifying and disseminating examples of best practice and advising on existing and emerging technologies'. After the last few years of
comparative inaction what is needed now is something practical to really integrate our rail and bus services and their timings. Should you feel you have something to contribute, their address is CfIT (they have acquired the small f from NfCG now we no longer need it) at Romney House, Tufton Street, London, SW1P 3RA. E-mail
cfit@dtlr.gsi.gov.uk
The latest example of business taking precedence over convenience to the consumer is in the UK Government's attitude to new EU legislation seeking to limit 'spam' (unsolicited e-mail sent to personal addresses by computer). The European Council discussed an opt-in system where e-commerce businesses would be allowed to send unsolicited messages only if the recipient had previously ticked an opt-in box. The UK representatives consider that an opt-out system would better suit British business. Firms would then be able to freely litter the IN boxes of our computers until the recipient objects. We would then be the ones paying for the time it takes the messages to be downloaded over the telephone line onto our computers: no doubt it would not be long before the firms found a way of getting us charged at premium rates for the privilege. Firms that already send us messages from America never appear to remove our names despite ticking the box to request this. They merely regard an answer as confirmation that there is someone at the other end for future messages. We are advised never to reply to such messages in any form.
A recent Office of Fair Trading report has looked into those flight supplements from regional airports. Despite the reduced landing costs compared with Heathrow or Gatwick, the OFT has decided there are no grounds for further action under competition law. It states that on average the difference between Scottish and English flight supplements reflects differences in the airline's costs. This depends on the time; day and date of the flight and on the extra distance flown from the UK airport used. The supplements are also used to balance supply and demand at different times of the year.
back to menu
Click Logo to Return to
Main Magazine Index