The Central Statistics Office (CSO) has accused the Competition Authority of basing its case against the controversial Groceries Order "largely on assumptions".
Separately, consultants retained by an Oireachtas committee have said the Competition Authority's case contained "errors".
The political row over the Rip Off Republic television series presented by Eddie Hobbs has been prompted in part by the programme's argument against the Groceries Order, which was based on a Competition Authority report.
The consultants told the Oireachtas Enterprise Committee yesterday that they were concerned that the authority was selecting CSO statistics "to suit the case the Competition Authority is making".
The CSO stressed yesterday that it had no opinion on whether the Groceries Order was scrapped. However, the case made by the Competition Authority was "based largely on assumptions".
Minister for Enterprise Micheál Martin yesterday played down reports of Government anger at RTÉ's Rip Off Republic series.
"There has been a certain attempt to whip up a storm between the Government and Eddie Hobbs, and that is not going to happen," he told the Last Word programme on Today FM.
The Competition Authority had called for the scrapping of the Groceries Order, describing it as a relic of protectionism which maintained high prices, damaged employment prospects and was bad for the consumer.
However, Fine Gael TD Phil Hogan told the committee it was clear that statistics compiled by the CSO had been "managed" by the authority.
Kieran Walsh, of the CSO, told Mr Hogan that while the CSO had supplied statistical information on a wide range of grocery prices, the Competition Authority had chosen to focus on just a selection. The effect of this was to make inflation appear more severe on goods covered by the Groceries Order.
Donal Garvey, director general of the CSO, said while it would not be appropriate to criticise another body's work, certain tables and comparisons in the authority submission were not comparing like with like.
While he stressed it was not the role of the CSO to become involved in controversy in relation to another body's use of statistical information, he said assumptions had been involved in making the Competition Authority's case.
Mr Garvey said the authority takes prices for June of each year, whereas the CSO takes the overall 12-monthly average.
"But the basic story is the same . . . Over the 18-year period inflation in the items covered by the Groceries Order was about 9 per cent higher than the other items not covered".
He acceded to the committee's request that his office compile new comparisons on the effect of the Groceries Order "based purely on a scientific approach".
Outlining his consultancy report on the Competition Authority submission, business consultant Myles O'Reilly said there were a number of "errors in the Competition Authority submission".
He was concerned the CSO statistics were being used "to suit the case the Competition Authority is making".
He particularly did not accept the conclusion in the authority report that the Groceries Order resulted in a net cost of €577 million each year. "€577 million is incorrect. There are errors here . . . it just isn't credible".
The Oireachtas Committee is considering submissions on the Groceries Order, and will in turn made a submission to Mr Martin on the desirability or otherwise of the order.
