Pubco 'not guilty' verdict confirmed

Pub companies have been given a virtually clean bill of health by the government following the MPs' inquiry into the industry.

Neither the Department of Trade & Industry (DTI) or the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) have recommended any firm action against pubcos after the investigation, which was completed on December 21 2004. And the OFT has reiterated that there is no evidence of anti-competitive behaviour in the beer market. The response suggests that the Trade & Industry Select Committee's six-month inquiry has virtually come to nothing. Most of the 33 recommendations of the inquiry - including the call for an end to the AWP machine tie - have gone unanswered with the pubcos asked to regulate themselves.

Licensee Mike Bell, of the Portobello Gold in West London - who formed the Freedom For Pubs Association at the height of the inquiry - said his members would be devastated.

He said: "This is not good for the brewing industry. Anyone who's tied has less incentive to buy beer and more incentive to buy other products."

Ted Tuppen, chief executive of Enterprise Inns, said that the committee had done "a good job". He said: "The committee shone a light into dark corners - and the fact is it didn't find anything."

A Punch spokesman said: "Punch is delighted with the results of the inquiry and is also delighted to be able to once again be able to focus on its retailers."

Nick Bish, chief executive of the Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers, said the industry, including tenants, should breathe a "collective sigh of relief" that the government had not decided to interfere with the pub trade.

The responses coincide with a decision from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to drop reforms to the leasing system, which could have seen a ban on upward-only rent reviews. "Government interference is usually more of a hindrance than a help," said Mr Bish. "It's down to tenants to take up their concerns and issues with their company. It's a free market and they can always switch to another pub company if they are not happy."

But David Bishop, head of parliamentary affairs at the Federation of Small Businesses - which sparked the original inquiry with complaints from licensees - claimed the fact that the DTI had neglected to mention most of the other recommendations meant that it was a "rubber stamp" of them.

"The pubcos now have no excuses and they should not delay in putting these recommendations into practice," he said. "The industry has got to get on with it."

The FSB said that talks over a revised code of conduct governing the relationship between pubcos and tenants - the only concrete recommendation to emerge - must include tenants' organisations.

The British Beer & Pub Association (BBPA) said that its own code of practice was already regularly updated. "Our code is constantly under review, to keep up-to-date with the developments in the pub trade," said Mark Hastings, BBPA communications director.

Related articles:​

New challenge to pub industry following inquiry (16 March 2005)

Committee response to pubco inquiry expected (24 February 2005)

Trade & Industry inquiry responses due (17 February 2005)

Pubcos off the hook on beer tie (21 December 2004)

Committee targets BBPA code (21st December 2004)

Mixed reaction to pubco investigation (21st December 2004)

Trade and Industry Committee criticises CAMRA (21st December 2004)

MP quizzed over report (21st December 2004)