No U turn on essential goods ban

[lisvaneblue]

Which part in particular do you think Drakeford is breaching?

If anything Article 82 (c): 'applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage' seems to read that Drakeford has ensured that he's actively adhered to the law with his current rules that restrict the sale of items in supermarkets that other vendors cannot sell at present.

Thoughts?

You are thinking of other vendors in Wales, I’m thinking of on line competitors in particular. The act is uk wide / eu wide actually

The customer is king,he can’t buy at the supermarket even though it’s in stock for no other reason than the Senedd wants to be fair to shops closed for public health reasons so has banned the item from sale. The customer can wait two weeks or buy on line.

I predict we will see a softening this fternoon with no banned items, maybe just restricted items, a bit more difficult to purchase.

[Heisenberg]

You are thinking of other vendors in Wales, I’m thinking of on line competitors in particular. The act is uk wide / eu wide actually

The customer is king,he can’t buy at the supermarket even though it’s in stock for no other reason than the Senedd wants to be fair to shops closed for public health reasons so has banned the item from sale. The customer can wait two weeks or buy on line.

I predict we will see a softening this fternoon with no banned items, maybe just restricted items, a bit more difficult to purchase.

What do you mean by your first sentence? Can you clarify it for me, please?

Also, which part(s) of Articles 82/83 in particular were you suggesting Drakeford has gone against?

From what I've read and how I've interpreted it, it suggests the opposite of Drakeford breaking any laws.

Every retailer is entitled to sell their items online, so the market is fair for everyone - so unless I'm missing something glaringly obvious, it looks like he's done nothing wrong by not allowing supermarkets to sell non-essential items during a pandemic when high street shops are closed.

[lisvaneblue]

What do you mean by your first sentence? Can you clarify it for me, please?

Also, which part(s) of Articles 82/83 in particular were you suggesting Drakeford has gone against?

From what I've read and how I've interpreted it, it suggests the opposite of Drakeford breaking any laws.

Every retailer is entitled to sell their items online, so the market is fair for everyone - so unless I'm missing something glaringly obvious, it looks like he's done nothing wrong by not allowing supermarkets to sell non-essential items during a pandemic when high street shops are closed.

In my book he’s distorting competition. The Senedd is a dominant entity managing 5% of uk population. Assuming that supermarkets are spread evenly across the uk population, at a stroke he’s reduced the availability of a significant range of goods across 5% of the UKs supermarkets. He’s not done it for public health reasons, he’s done it to be seen to be fair, or level things up for non essential closed shops in Wales and to protect them from competition while closed. Ie Commercial reasons. I don’t think this is in the Senedd remit, and if you are interested have a look at the particular responsibilities dominant entities have in Competition law. This is why I think the whole thing will be softened once he has met with the supermarkets

[Vindec]

In my book he’s distorting competition. The Senedd is a dominant entity managing 5% of uk population. Assuming that supermarkets are spread evenly across the uk population, at a stroke he’s reduced the availability of a significant range of goods across 5% of the UKs supermarkets. He’s not done it for public health reasons, he’s done it to be seen to be fair, or level things up for non essential closed shops in Wales and to protect them from competition while closed. Ie Commercial reasons. I don’t think this is in the Senedd remit, and if you are interested have a look at the particular responsibilities dominant entities have in Competition law. This is why I think the whole thing will be softened once he has met with the supermarkets

Let's hope people in North Wales don't pop across the border to Warrington to buy "inessential items". Warrington has a high level of infection and has been given tier 3 status today.

I'm more and more convinced that the Welsh government is needing to suppress the virus by locking down early because the Nightingale hospital in the Principality Stadium has been decommissioned before the replacement facility in the Heath is completed. I presume the Principality Stadium facility has now gone as there is a match there on Saturday. Not good planning but hopefully luck will be on their side.

[Rjk]

In my book he’s distorting competition. The Senedd is a dominant entity managing 5% of uk population. Assuming that supermarkets are spread evenly across the uk population, at a stroke he’s reduced the availability of a significant range of goods across 5% of the UKs supermarkets. He’s not done it for public health reasons, he’s done it to be seen to be fair, or level things up for non essential closed shops in Wales and to protect them from competition while closed. Ie Commercial reasons. I don’t think this is in the Senedd remit, and if you are interested have a look at the particular responsibilities dominant entities have in Competition law. This is why I think the whole thing will be softened once he has met with the supermarkets

Wouldn't a dominant entity usually be someone operating in that market and with a large proportion of the market?

If the Senydd sold a line of cheaply made clothing then you may have a point, but as far as I'm aware they don't

[lisvaneblue]

What do you mean by your first sentence? Can you clarify it for me, please?

Also, which part(s) of Articles 82/83 in particular were you suggesting Drakeford has gone against?

From what I've read and how I've interpreted it, it suggests the opposite of Drakeford breaking any laws.

Every retailer is entitled to sell their items online, so the market is fair for everyone - so unless I'm missing something glaringly obvious, it looks like he's done nothing wrong by not allowing supermarkets to sell non-essential items during a pandemic when high street shops are closed.

And I should have added that he’s done this to a population who are in lockdown and unable to easily source alternatives other than on line.