Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 Apr 1988

Vol. 379 No. 9

Private Members' Business. - Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1988: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The principle of giving bona fide restaurants facilities to provide drink with a meal is one with which I can readily agree. However, I do not want to see this exercise develop to a stage where in issuing special restaurant licences we are creating another pub. That is my dilemma with regard to that aspect of this new legislation. The Irish publican, and especially the rural publicans has for generations played an important part in Irish life. Many of these public houses are family concerns and the purchase and development of these premises have cost those people dearly. After all their expenditure and years of providing a service, with all that it entails in terms of long, unsociable working hours, it would strike me as being a grave injustice if other pubs could materialise on their doorsteps in the guise of licensed restaurants. This injustice would be compounded by allowing the new pub to come into being for what I consider the paltry sum of £3,000. This proposed initial fee should be substantially higher. I fully realise that the Minister, in putting together this legislation, has included control mechanisms geared to prevent such abuses and irregularities, but it is the question of the actual implementation of these controls that fuels my apprehension. Perhaps on Committee Stage there will be an opportunity to elaborate further on this aspect.

In Part III of the Bill the Minister is introducing some welcome innovations in the area of prohibited hours. In the past year or so there has been much speculation and diverse suggestions by interested groups on the extent to which hours of business should be increased. There have been suggestions that any increase in these hours should vary in accordance with the location of the premises, that is, whether they are in holiday resort areas and so forth. In this regard the Minister, in his quest for and commitment to achieving some level of uniformity in closing times, has got this one right. He proposes to let the status quo obtain in the period from Monday to Saturday and also to continue with the winter-summer situation, with one important alteration, in the area of drinking-up time, which he has increased to a half-hour instead of the ludicrous ten minutes which currently obtains. This will bring about a far more acceptable situation at closing time for both drinker and vendor. There currently exists a practice of purchasing and stocking up drinks immediately prior to closing time. The efforts of publicans to clear the premises in the ten minute period can be both futile and irritating. The extension of Sunday opening hours from 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. is also a very sensible move. It can be exasperating for people, particularly in summer and at holiday time, to be ousted from their drinking place at 10 o'clock on Sunday night. Any publican will confirm that Sunday night is the most difficult time to effect a clearance of the premises.

Among the many positive aspects of this legislation is the proposal to improve the situation with regard to the running of clubs. This is an area in which there exists and has existed gross abuse. Some clubs are, in effect, running their bars in the same way as do pubs. The only difference is that they are afforded far greater leeway with regard to inspection and control. Sections 40 to 42, inclusive, of this legislation herald major improvements in this entire area. Henceforth clubs will be subject to the same level of Garda inspection and control as licensed premises. Up to this time pubs which operated in other than a proper and legal manner openly flouted the law in the secure knowledge that there was little danger of their being apprehended or penalised. Local residents, and particularly local business people, were loth to tender objections. The Minister's introduction of the provision to allow any person, that is persons other than those resident in the particular parish, to lodge objections to the renewal of club certificates on any of the grounds of objection specified will introduce a measure of control which is sadly and amazingly absent at present.

I should like to comment briefly on sections 30 to 39, inclusive, which deal with provisions relating to persons under the age of 18. The previous speaker, Deputy McCartan, was loud in his condemnation of the peddlers of alcoholic drinks to under-age people and I, I am sure like all other Deputies, will likewise condemn that despicable practice. This is a serious and complex problem and, it would appear, a growing one. While we must provide appropriate and adequate legislation in this regard, one could legislate until the cows come home without making substantial improvements in the situation unless the problem is tackled in a number of other areas. Education on alcohol and making the child aware of the implications of drinking is the crucial requirement. This must be tackled primarily in the home and the schools and, indeed, all adult members of the community have a role and a responsibility in this.

I believe that the vast majority of people and, in the context of this legislation, the vast majority in the business of selling alcoholic drinks, are responsible. In particular, most publicans want to run their premises in a proper and honourable manner. Most are parents themselves and know only too well their responsibilities in this regard. However, as in all trades and professions, there exists a minority of unscrupulous cowboy operators who will not take the responsible approach. It is the responsible and honourable publican that I have in mind when I question the proposal of removing the word "knowingly" from this legislation. Here I would take issue with Deputy McCartan. This change is putting a huge onus and responsibility on the genuine publican, particularly if it is done without the simultaneous introduction of some kind of identification mechanism. I am not all that convinced about the potential success of an ID system and have my own reservations about its effectiveness. However, in my constituency at present a pilot scheme is being launched in the town of Arklow and I shall be watching this with great interest. We are putting a major, and perhaps an unjustifiably heavy, onus on the genuine publican by removing that important terminology without introducing some ID system or other substitute.

There is a change with regard to the admission of children to licensed premises. There is varied opinion as to the propriety or otherwise of this change. As a parent and as a member of the licensed trade I agree that it can be a good thing to allow children to be present from time to time in licensed premises, in the company of their parents. It helps if children are exposed to the dangers. Know thine enemy is the key phrase. There is a certain mystique and a macho image attached to drinking. If children are introduced in a controlled, orderly and responsible fashion in the company of their parents to drink, it will help to remove that mystique and the erroneous concept that can lead them into serious and sometimes fatal situations.

The Minister's careful research and his communication with relevant parties in preparing this legislation has resulted in his achieving a well balanced Bill which will substantially improve things for both the publican and the trade.

I, like every other Deputy in the House, welcome this Bill. While some of us have reservations about the Bill, the Minister has brought forward legislation which has been requested for a considerable length of time and which seeks to achieve a balance between the expressed fears of a number of organisations and the needs of the trade.

In relation to the question of under-age drinking I commend the Minister for taking on board many of the suggestions made by interested organisations and by Deputies and Senators. The Minister has made an honest effort to control a problem which has been increasingly difficult to control and which has caused alarm to parents, teachers and organisations set up to deal with under-age drinking. I was a member of the committee of the House which met a delegation from County Mayo on this question. This delegation was formed by interested people, both lay and clerical from all over the county, people who had strong reservations about what was happening in the county. What is happening in Mayo is mirrored to a greater or lesser extent in other counties. This Bill makes a reasonable effort to come to grips with the problem of under-age drinking.

Apart from the legislation, parents have a tremendous responsibility in this area. Parents have the first obligation. They should know where their children are, they should be happy with the company they are keeping and with the places to which they go. If the public know there are abuses by any publicans they should inform the Garda. A number of schools at this time of year hold graduation dances and the school authorities owe it to their pupils to ensure that only minerals or soft drinks are available at such functions. I am glad that a number of schools in my county have adopted that practice.

The question of extensions is one on which there has been a considerable amount of correspondence with the Minister, and on which the Minister has consulted with many groups. It is curious that people who have no affiliations with a club or a political party or with a charitable organisation will attend a function run by a club or party if they know there is an extension. The Minister should have another look at the whole question of special exemptions and it should be mandatory that a proper meal be served, not like what has been happening over the last number of years where as someone described it, what was offered was a meal comprising a bit of lettuce and some see-through ham. I welcome the Bill.

Having grown up in a public house I know of the problems a publican has in trying to clear the house in ten minutes. It is not physically possible to do so. Therefore, I am glad that the Minister proposes to give a reasonable amount of time to the publican to clear the house. Most publicans should be able to do so within 30 minutes and the excuse, legitimate let me add, which was usually given to a garda who came on the premises at ten minutes past or 15 minutes past 11, taking closing time as being 11 p.m., that they could not clear the premises should no longer be accepted from now on. As I have said, the Minister has been very reasonable in the amount of time he has proposed for a publican to clear his premises.

Some people will probably quibble with the provision in the Bill which will not allow a 15½ year old person to clear up glasses. Members of the family of a publican have up until now, particularly at busy times, helped to clear up glasses but under this Bill it will be an offence for someone under the age of 16 years to do so. Even if the Minister suggested the age of 17 someone would still say that that is too young but on balance I think he has come up with welcome changes in the legislation.

Quite a number of organisations have said that the extension of opening hours will lead to an increase in drinking but I do not believe it will. Particularly in recent years people have been going into public houses later and I think that the extension of the opening hours will give publicans, particularly at the better known holiday resorts along the western coast a chance to carry on a reasonable trade up to a reasonable hour. It is very important that the legislation should be enforced and it should not be the case that the extra half hour would be used as an extension.

The Minister said that the general public interest must of course be paramount and that, accordingly, he trusts he will receive a considerable measure of agreement from all concerned for his proposals. In fairness, the Minister has achieved a reasonable balance. Many people will agree with him but of course those who would like to see the opening hours restricted and those who would like to see them extended would disagree with him.

One of the sections of the Bill which has given rise to a fair amount of controversy is the section that deals with the purchase of restaurant licences. The Vintners Federation have said that there are enough licences in the country and that these should be sold prior to any others being granted. I have no objection to these licences being granted. However, it is important that those who purchase the new restaurant licences would be subject to the same restrictions as the ordinary publican.

Some people will probably see the abolition of the so-called "holy hour" as a bad thing. In many cases I do not think people left licensed premises at all during that hour and therefore I do not think it will make any real difference.

An unfair abolition.

Some varying views have been expressed on this point. As I have said, the Minister, having weighed up all the arguments from the pro and antilobbies has come up with a reasonable compromise. Probably there are many things which one could quibble with and there are a number of things which I certainly could quibble with but, as I have stated, because of the efforts which the Minister has made, particularly in regard to under age drinking, I think there will be a general acceptance of this Bill.

I note that the Minister is now proposing making it an offence for a person under the age of 18 to purchase intoxicating liquor. This is a step in the right direction. One of the biggest lobbies against teenage drinking in County Mayo stressed to me that not only should the publican be fined but also the person who pretends to be 18 or over. This provision will be welcomed by many people because it will place an onus on the young person himself and it will help the publican in many cases, particularly in city areas, who has the problem of trying to decide whether a person is under or over 18 years of age. At a time when modes of dress have changed considerably it is very hard to know whether a young person is under or over 18 years of age.

The Minister is also to be congratulated for grasping the nettle because, quite frankly, the Intoxicating Liquor Acts have been lying dormant for a considerable length of time. As he said in his speech, the last major piece of legislation to be introduced in this area was the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1962. Many values have changed since then and the time is now ripe for a review of the legislation. I do not want to go over any of the points which have been dealt with in detail by the Minister and the various other spokespersons but I think the Minister is to be congratulated for coming forward with a reasonable compromise. If he were to look again at the question in regard to special exemptions I think the vast number of people in the country would be satisfied with this legislation. While the licensed trade will probably find some sections of this Bill that they will not like, the anti-drink lobby will also find sections that they will not like. It is the Minister's job to come up with a compromise that is workable and just. He has done that and he should be congratulated on it.

Taking this legislation at face value, I see many sections in it that I agree with. I would describe it as a theme with variations. Far from tackling the dreadful scourge of under-age drinking it is likely to increase the many casualties which unfortunately occur in the late teens. I agree with the requirement that no drink should be served to people under 18 years but does anybody here really believe that it will be implemented? Has it ever been implemented in this country, a country that takes a very ambiguous approach to the question of drinking? The problem of under-age drinking is now out of control. The next generation will reap the whirlwind of the wind sown by the seduction of children by breweries in the last 20 years. There is no doubt that the young people of Ireland have been singled out as the target area for the profits of breweries. One has only to go into a public house any evening of the week to see that the people there are not middle aged or elderly but young people, people of very tender ages. Publicans have been very successful in their targeting of the young people as the people who have the money and are prepared to spend it.

Drink has been glamorised out of all proportion. It has been done by the programme of seductive advertising on television. Continual advertising is beamed directly into the homes of young people day after day. They cannot escape it. From the formative years of eight, nine or ten, they see the advertisements, they are indoctrinated and they believe that is the thing to do. More and more young people are now crowding into the public houses with very tragic consequences for society in general and for many unfortunate individuals in particular who fall victim to the scourge of drink. We, in Ireland, are particularly susceptible to the scourge of drink. Whatever is in the Irish make-up it makes us particularly susceptible to drink. Maybe it is in the Celtic race but certainly the figures for alcoholism in this country are great. The breweries have won the battle. They have targeted a vulnerable and soft sector, a sector that undoubtedly has money to spend. Many of them are not burdened with mortgages or family commitments. They are spending their money freely and gaily every weekend.

Successive Irish Governments have turned a blind eye to what is happening. I have to indict the Catholic Church who for years were the bulwark in the fight against alcoholism but who have been very silent in recent years. Many people have opted out of the Pioneer movement and that body has weakened as a result of neglect over the years. Recently the Catholic Church have recognised the problem but it did not materialise overnight. It has been many years agrowing and was clearly chronicled in the last 20 years. The rise in the numbers of under-age drinkers was apparent a long way down the line and nothing was done to stop it. Many unmarried mothers, who constitute a large number of people in this country at present, get into their predicament after a visit to the local pub or hotel as the case may be.

The other area I would like to address is the extension of opening hours for an extra hour on Sunday nights. I would pose the question, will this make for an increase in Monday absenteeism. We are actually giving an extra hour and a half for drinking, bringing the closing time very close to midnight. We all know there is a high level of absenteeism, particularly on Mondays, and that is likely to increase now.

I accept that there is a need to grant licences to responsible restaurants. We have to cater for the tourist trade. We have to bring ourselves into line with what pertains on the Continent and provide facilities, particularly in the summer season, so that people can avail of the benefits of having a meal and a drink together. That situation should be carefully monitored because otherwise eventually fish and chip outlets in vans will be queueing up in the future for licences to sell liquor.

I would like to put in a plea for the hapless owners of ballrooms which are now lying dormant. These were an integral part of rural life and they were suddenly blitzed by the appearance on the scene of hotels who have the opportunity of selling drinks. These ballrooms are now closed and this was a great disaster to many of their owners. They are entitled to the same slice of the cake as hotels. The closure of these ballrooms has hit employment in the dance industry which has been swamped by the disco scene. There is a genuine case for equal treatment for ballrooms in every part of Ireland.

I note that the Government have abolished the age limit at which children can be admitted to a public house and some of the reasons given are ludicrous. The Minister suggests that children should be allowed to stay in a public house while they or their parents are waiting for a bus or waiting to go to the dentist. That is a ludicrous statement and he should come clean and not introduce those ridiculous asides.

In many cases the Government are leaving themselves open to a charge of false pretences by introducing this legislation ostensibly to stamp out under-age drinking. How will the Minister implement these laws? The Garda do not have the time nor the resources to enforce them. We all know the Irish nation has double standards when it comes to the abuse of drink. All over the country pubs are open until 3 o'clock, 4 o'clock or possibly 5 o'clock——

Not in Tipperary.

Maybe not in Tipperary, but it happens in other counties. Pubs are open all hours of the day without the Garda doing anything to implement the law. There is pressure on the Garda at present in fighting the high level of crime and this makes it virtually impossible for them to implement the laws.

The real answer to underage drinking was found in America where they issued ID cards. If this is successful in a vast area like America, surely, too, in a small country of 3,500,000 people such a scheme could be introduced successfully? Because of the powerful lobby of the drinks industry, the very ambiguous approach of all Governments to drinking and the tolerance level for drink in our society, that scheme has not been introduced. To me it is an obvious answer and I exhort the Minister to bring in that simple remedy to prevent young people succumbing to the dangers of drink.

First, Sir, I thank you for a marvellous reception for the Australian delegation and I congratulate you on your excellent speech at the function last night.

This Bill is to be welcomed but there are some areas which might have been approached from a different angle. It is to be welcomed that restaurants will have to be licensed. This is the only tourist area I can see where there will be potential for growth over the next few years, and it would be ridiculous to have good quality restaurants without licences. I am sorry the fees will be minimal. I appreciate the Minister must take into account the fact that an excellent restaurant in a rural area may get the same volume of business as a similar restaurant in Dublin.

I note that there are many dead licences throughout the country and these licences could be taken over when granting licences to restaurants. I say this because I fear that this privilege being granted to restaurants may be abused later when it will be much more difficult for the Garda Síochána to investigate compared with a pub where the abuse may be more obvious.

I am happy the Minister has covered the waiting area, no bar and table service, but I hope the licences will be granted to restaurants of very high standard only. I am satisfied these licences will be supervised by the Department of Justice to ensure that standards are maintained. I am also happy to note that the local superintendent can object to the reissuing of a licence.

The most important sections of this Bill deal with underage drinking. For the past number of years, especially in urban areas, young people of 16 years of age — and under — often as young as 12 or 13 — have been drinking. This is frightening. Most of the under-age drinking is not done in public houses. Under-age drinking takes place at parties. Where do these people get the drink? Not for one moment would I say that all licence holders are responsible people, but 99 per cent are. It is the 1 per cent I cannot and will not defend.

In my view, the main suppliers are the supermarkets where the price of drink is very attractive. In supermarkets drink is displayed to the same extent as sugar, tea, coca cola and normal household goods. I want to complain that this Bill does not set a standard for supermarkets selling drink. The young girl at the cash desk may be harassed throughout the day. She has to watch change, know prices and so on. If a person comes to the check point with £10, £50 or £100 worth of groceries, and bottles of drink, to her they will be just more items to be added to the grocery list. She is not paid to take the responsibility of checking if the customer is under age. The £50 fine proposed for selling drink to people who are underage is nothing to a supermarket. At present, drink is sold in supermarkets when they open at 9 a.m. The law should apply, too, to the supermarkets and licensed premises. Alcohol should not be on sale before 10.30 a.m.

Every supermarket should have a special and separate section for selling alcohol and one mature, responsible person should be in charge of that section. This is an area about which we must be very specific. As I said, under-age drinkers are getting their alcohol from the supermarkets because they are selling alcohol at very competitive prices to encourage people to buy other items. I hope the Minister will introduce an appropriate amendment to see to it that supermarkets have a separate area on their premises for the sale of drink.

I agree with the decision to remove the word "knowingly" from the Bill. Any publican who sells drink knowingly to a person under 18 years of age should have his licence removed and not be allowed to hold a licence again. The premises should not be licensed again. The penalty for such an offence should be severe. I have a vested interest in this in that I was brought up in the licensed trade and I am the holder of a liquor licence. I am aware that only a small number of publicans sell drink to under-age people. Mature people like to go to a public house to have a drink and conversation with their friends and they do not want under-age drinkers on the premises. Certainly, they do not want young people creating noise and fuss on the premises.

I appreciate that the Minister has made it an offence for a young person to buy intoxicating liquor and I should like to suggest to him that he consider introducing a provision under which parents of such young people can be prosecuted. They at least should be brought before the court to answer for the behaviour of their children. I accept that the responsibility lies heavily with the publican but parents must share some ot it. Judges, when dealing with such cases, should also take into account the responsibility of parents. There is no excuse for parents who abandon responsibility for their children under 18 years of age and blame their condition on a licensee. I accept that at times it is difficult to judge the age of a young person because, depending on their style of dress or the amount of make-up they wear, they may look at lot older. For that reason the Minister should consider introducing an identity card system.

It is ridiculous to think that a driving licence produced to a garda does not prove the identity of the person who produces it. There is no photograph attached to it and when one produces a licence the garda presumes that the holder is the person to whom the licence was issued. I could produce my grandfather's or my son's driving licence and it would not matter unless the garda asked me to produce the licence again at a local station. Publicans must question young people about their age before serving them intoxicating liquor. An identity card would be a help in that regard. A system of identity cards will have to be introduced whether by parents, through the schools, local authorities or the Licensed Vintners Association. They should be produced by young people seeking admission to discos.

There is no question but that under-age people drink at discos most of which are attended by 2,000 to 3,000 people. What amazes me is that those young people can afford to pay £6 or £7 to a disco where, it is alleged, a substantial meal is served. However, the meal turns out to be watery mash, a couple of peas, a bit of a chicken, a burger or a sausage. The substantial meal for £2 does not exist. In my view a meal is not provided for the majority of people who attend discos. The first 200 people may get what is termed a meal and that is only available between 10.30 and 11.30 p.m. When discos fill up after the pubs close food is not served. I appreciate the Minister's decision to describe a substantial meal as one costing £5. One will get a reasonable meal for that amount of money. Some may call it blotting paper or soakage but it will be a reasonably substantial meal. However, I doubt if it will be supplied after 11.30 p.m.

The Garda Síochána, and the public, encounter most trouble after discos have closed. The windows are broken and the violence occurs after those events. It is a laugh to think that the fine for an offence of being drunk and disorderly is £2. I have written to the Minister about that fine and I have received an acknowledgement from him. The person who takes a lot of drink can be one of two types. He may be the type of individual who having consumed a lot of drink will fall down and, in fairness, such a person will only do harm to himself. The second type is the individual who is violent and aggressive and gardaí may not be able for such headbangers. Such people if prosecuted are fined £2 for being disorderly. The Minister should consider increasing that fine to at least £100. The cost involved in arresting such people and the damage caused to squad cars and Garda stations should be taken into account when such people appear before our courts.

I appreciate the decision of the Minister to bring the closing hours of discos back to 1 a.m. — it appears that there was a slight error made in his speech today in regard to this. People are being asked to pay £6 or £7 for one hour or one hour-and-a-half of entertainment at a disco. The prices people are charged for drink at discos should be investigated by the relevant authority, £1.80 for a pint and £1.80 for a large bottle. Those prices are ridiculously high. I am shocked that young people have so much money to spend on discos and on drink. There is no way a young man will go to a dance with a young girl and get away with only spending £20. The prices at discos are exorbitant because they are the only places of entertainment open for young people late at night.

I am delighted the Minister has extended the time for drinking up because it is very hard to swallow two pints in ten minutes at 11 o'clock.

If a publican is caught serving after 11 o'clock he will be in trouble.

I appreciate that and I agree with the Minister's decision on this.

It is all right as long as the queue is not too long.

The Minister must be aware, because of the general recession as it applies to drinking in pubs, that people have been coming in later because they do not have the same amount of money to spend. They come into a pub at, say, 10.30 p.m. wanting to have two or three pints and go home. However, they may get into good company, be discussing the victory at the hurling match of the previous Sunday or the potential of the local team. Deputy Cullen will know that the last time there was a politician on a Waterford hurling team was in the time of poor Fad Brown, who was a decent man.

One can have any discussion one likes but not after hours.

I am delighted that the Minister has extended opening hours to 11 p.m. on Sundays. It is reasonable to accept that being put out of a pub at 10 o'clock on a Sunday evening just is not on, particularly in summer time when daylight will prevail both on entry and exit.

There were some rumours that the Minister had intended to impose a minimum fine of £400. I am delighted that that fine is not statutory. I am indeed glad that such rumours proved to be false and that the Minister did not intend to impose such a minimum fine. I am also glad to learn that the Minister has allowed the discretion of the justice in that area.

If one is observing the law one will not need to worry about fines.

None of us is perfect; there are days when we all make mistakes.

Even the good man fell ten times.

That is true. I hope the Minister will recall or make allowance for the fact that, even in his student days, he might have been guilty of some such offences.

Indiscretions.

We do not have indiscretions in our part of the world. We call them scandals.

I might revert to the £2 fine for being drunk and disorderly, which is ridiculous. As you and I know, a Cheann Comhairle, there is need to have that fine reintroduced and substantially increased. This is necessary even if only in the interests of safeguarding the Garda who must put up with the hassle and violence on the part of somebody who is aggressive while drunk and who, when brought to court, is fined a mere £2. It is just not good enough. The fine must be much more substantial and be more rigorously imposed.

We shall have to discuss the issue of identity cards so that a publican when in serious doubt may demand of a young person some proof of his age. Surely some such system can be devised. While it is the duty of a publican to ask a person, about whom he has a serious doubt as to his age, if the companion or companions of the person involved say: yes, he is over 18 years of age, then such has to be accepted as the law obtains. If a publican is to be prosecuted in respect of having served drink to such a person at least he should have recourse to having an identity card produced. That would be the ideal solution, whether such an identity card be issued by a relevant students' union, local school or whoever, showing clearly that the person is over 18 years of age. In such circumstances the relevant publican would be exonerated provided he had sought reasonable proof of age.

I would advocate much heavier penalties in respect of those who deliberately sell drink to people under 18 years of age. We are all aware that there are publicans in all constituencies at such a low ebb of business they are prepared to sell drink to persons of any age. I am also glad to note the prohibited licensing hours to obtain in clubs. While it may not be popular to say so, I do not see any reason for people who are not dependent for a living on the sale of alcohol being treated more selectively or enjoying a more exclusive position than the traditional family publican. Such clubs have been selling drink until 3 a.m. or 4 a.m. on the basis that no garda inspector would visit them. It must be remembered that in most Garda sub-districts there is one inspector only. However, that practice is now being changed.

We have not even the garda now never mind inspectors.

Where Deputy Sheehan lives, it does not matter, they would not need them anyway; I was up that boreen 25 years ago. I am also glad to note that the same laws will be applicable in all sectors. We are aware that the licensing trade is experiencing a particularly rough period because of the non-availability of money, on account of people's stringent financial circumstances.

Their reduced purchasing power.

This has caused many problems for publicans because the temptation is that, if one does not engage in a little business after hours, one's counter-part up the road will do so and will reap the benefit. Provided the provisions are enforced effectively and equally among all publicans I have no doubt about their acceptability.

I would hope that the matter of the serving and entry age into discos would be taken seriously by the Minister and those who will enforce the provisions. It is my belief that 99 per cent of publicans accept that there should be no under-age drinking and that an identity card system would be of enormous help to them in so ensuring.

I would strongly recommend that there be a closed-off area in supermarkets with a mature, responsible person selling alcohol there, thereby obviating the possibility of under-age persons taking bottles of alcohol off shelves and taking them to the relevant cashiers. I might reiterate that there should be identity cards devised and the fines in respect of being drunk and disorderly considerably increased to the tune of, say, between £50 and £70 so that they would actually hurt, rather than the meagre present £2 fine which represents the price of a packet of cigarettes or one-seventh of people's expenditure on smoking in any week. It should be remembered that the Garda are finding themselves confronted more and more by such aggression, with their lives being threatened for the sake of a mere £2 fine.

The latest tendency which worries many publicans is that those proprietors who do not sell alcohol to persons under the age of 18 years have found that such people come into their premises, order an orange or coke and supply their own drink, under the counter or away from the publican's view — with a naggin of vodka, whiskey, bacardi or whatever being tipped into the orange or coke. In such circumstances I would hope there would be a reasonable understanding that, as long as the alcohol had not been supplied by the relevant publican, he would not be prosecuted. It should be remembered that a publican cannot have his eyes on every part of his premises at all times. I would hope that the law would not deteriorate to such an extent. I should say that the imposition of a £50 fine on a large supermarket means nothing to them.

Indeed, they would merely get more publicity from the imposition of a fine. The fine for serving those who are under age should be substantially increased, to £100. Anything else is derisory and would not deter those who sell in multiples to young people. If a publican has two or three convictions in this regard within a certain period he should lose his licence forever because that is the only way to prevent it.

Parents cannot shirk their responsibilities in regard to under-age drinking. If an under-age person is brought to court charged with buying drink, the parents or guardians should also be in court to explain to the judge their position, role, or problem. Perhaps before Committee Stage, some of these recommendations will be included or considered further by the Minister and the departmental officials.

I welcome the Minister's initiative in bringing forward this Bill as promised a few weeks ago. He has also kept faith with the ideas promoted by the Fine Gael spokesman on Justice, Deputy Seán Barrett, who published an under-age drinking Bill which is, by and large, incorporated in the Minister's Bill. I thank him for underlining the problems raised by Deputy Barrett when he published his Bill.

I hope this Bill gets a speedy passage through the House. For a long time people have been asking for reform in this area. As I said when I spoke on Deputy Barrett's Bill, a committee of the previous Dáil examined in detail the problems of under-age drinking and other areas of the licensing laws. It is only from meeting people concerned about the abuse of alcohol that one forms an opinion on how the sale of this drug should be conducted. The Bill is also a tribute to the former Minister for Justice, Deputy Dukes, who published a Bill late in 1986 which is almost word for word the Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1988. There are one or two changes and improvements which will be dealt with later on Committee Stage.

From surveys, especially of tourists, it seems it is a good idea to give a special restaurant licence to people serving food. They cannot understand why only wine is available and this has not helped to give their holiday a special Irish flavour, especially in regard to the sale of Guinness, which has an international reputation as tasting better in Ireland. Perhaps it is the water from the Liffey that makes it a quality drink. Anyway, it has an international reputation and Guinness brewed in London does not have the same superior value as that produced in Ireland. Tourists look for this beverage and it is right that a special licence should be granted to restaurants.

The Minister has acted fairly in regard to the limited opening and closing hours. He has also acted fairly in relation to Christmas Day and St. Patrick's Day. The time of employees and customers is rather limited on these days and he has recognised that such days are important. However, people in the trade are fearful that an enormous number of licences will be issued. They also fear that their trade, which has been contracting, will contract even further. Of course, this change in the law has been signalled and the publicans' associations should have been moving in the direction of providing food in public houses. Many public houses in various areas have shown that they are well able to provide food when they put their minds to it and some of the tourists coming to my area — the mid-west region — look for particular public houses that have acquired a reputation for special dishes and good value. I commend the publicans who showed this initiative. Nevertheless, there is a demand for Irish cuisine in restaurant style and the Minister was right to grant licences.

I question whether the terms in the Bill about the annual inspection by Bord Fáilte are strict enough. Guidelines should be issued prior to the passage of the Bill, because the instructions to the inspectors should be comprehensive. It is not sufficient to put a notice of intention to apply for a licence in the national newspapers. As in relation to planning laws, an advertisement should also be inserted in the local newspaper because that is where most of the development proposals appear. If there is to be a change of use or a development of this nature, local people will expect to be informed of it by the local newspaper. Therefore, the Minister should insist on the local newspaper requirement.

I have already complimented the Minister on his initiative in introducing this Bill and I must also commend Deputy Seán Barrett for raising the issue of identity cards. He had the courage to say in the House that we should introduce identity cards. Various voluntary bodies have suggested this over the years but no other Member of the House suggested that the identity card system should be seriously considered and put into force. Since he made that statement I have heard very favourable comment about this in my constituency, and parents and youth leaders are anxious that some system be devised by which control can be exercised. After all, we will be changing the law by including the word "knowingly", by providing that the publican knowingly sells drink to under age people, and we are making people more responsible. As Deputy Davern requested, parents should have some responsibility and in the area of identity cards parents can be made responsible. When people can be challenged by way of ID card parents will participate. I know there is a certain hesitancy on the part of people in this high technology age about having too much information given to Big Brother, but in regard to under age drinking we must come to grips with the dilemma, and this is the way it should be tackled.

My attitude to the hours of opening and closing has changed. I appreciate what the Minister is doing in extending the times for Saturdays and Sundays throughout the year but, the Council on Alocholism at meetings we attended, criticised the availability of alcohol. I have a reservation about the abolition of the "holy hour". I support our spokesman, Deputy Seán Barrett, who suggested that maybe the Minister would consider the non availability of alcohol for one hour during the day nationally in all public houses. There could be a break from, say, 3 p.m. to 4 p.m.; the drinking-up period could begin at 2.30 p.m. so that people would be free from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. It is very desirable especially in depressed areas where people are badly affected by unemployment and have a great deal of time on their hands and find it easier to stay in the pub all day than go home, that there be such a break. Rather than hanging around waiting for the pub to reopen such people could proceed home, and the break would be effective. It should be easy for the Minister to bring in this measure now because a national agreement exists between the publicans who themselves perhaps would like to have this arrangement. I believe it is socially desirable that the owners of licensed premises, particularly family owned premises, have a break at this time. Consider the wife of a licensee operating at home when she has young children. If she has free time from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. she would know she could look after her own children and get the food for them. That is the social aspect from the point of view of the licensee.

A number of things have been said in this Chamber about intoxicating liquor so I am not going to add any pearls of wisdom, but I understand that the alcohol in supermarkets can be sold only from a restricted area. I would like the Minister to confirm that. The Bill as I understand it now requires alcoholic goods to be contained in a special area of the supermarket. If that is not true I request the Minister to amend the Bill to provide for that. The main criticism that under-age drinking draws is in regard to easy access. A railed off area for the purchase of alcohol operating in the same opening and closing hours as the rest of the licensed trade would be a measure to control some of the abuses that have taken place in this regard.

I am disappointed that this Bill was not introduced before now, but I welcome it and I thank the Minister for introducing it. I hope the provisions of the Bill will go some way towards curbing abuses particularly in the area of under-age drinking. There is a wide concern in this country about that problem. Abuse of alcohol is a major problem today and 15, 16 and 17 year olds indulge in it. The Irish Council on Alcoholism have produced figures and facts which indicate that the problem of under-age drinking is growing. More and more young people are starting to drink early in life and on the law of averages many of them will become heavy drinkers and the chain of misery will grow. Innocent people whose only crime will be falling in love with drunkards will have their own lives clouded with misery. This need not be so because if we get a grip on the problem we can support young people in their determination to be sober.

The council on alcoholism have indicated that the age at which people start to drink has gone down drastically in the last 20 years. In 1970 the figure was one in ten under the age of 17 who drank regularly; now the figure is one in three. The question is often asked, "where do these young people get the money for drink". It appears nobody is able to give the answer. It is said they get it from parents or older brothers and sisters and that some of them are involved in part time employment.

I am disappointed with one aspect of this Bill, the extension of hours of drinking. The proposal in the Bill is to extend the hours during which alcoholic drink can be consumed. Public houses will be committed to remain open until midnight on weekdays and 11 p.m. on Sundays. We have heard of absenteeism from work, a problem that is widespread in this country. It has affected business and industry because the hangover on a Monday morning is a regular occurrence. The extension of drinking hours will make that problem worse. Under the Bill 11 p.m. is the hour until which the publican will be allowed to sell drink but there is to be another half hour drinking up time.

Earlier this evening Deputy McCartan welcomed the proposal to extend the hours of drinking but he also expressed concern about the staff employed in public houses having to work longer hours. There is no doubt that this will be the case. Many people who are employed in public houses have spoken to me about the hours they will have to work. Many publicans are of the opinion that in order to operate properly they will have to introduce a shift system. The hours of work will affect the social life of staff and they will have little time to spend with their wives and children. Serious problems will be caused both for management and staff. There is no point in welcoming longer opening hours and then expressing concern about the staff. We cannot have it both ways.

The Minister has outlined the trend in the various Acts passed since 1924 towards a gradual liberalisation to reflect the change in public damand in the use of alcohol. He also claimed that there is public demand for an extension of drinking hours. I have never got that impression. Most people go to the pub about 10.30 p.m. for the last hour of opening. Now they will go at 11 p.m. because they have only so much to spend and the opening hours do not make any difference. I am concerned, however, that the extension may make a bad situation worse.

People in public life often express concern about the number of people who have lost their lives since the troubles started in the North of Ireland in 1969. We are all concerned about the number of innocent people who have died through violence but the figure does not compare in any way with the number of people who have lost their lives in the Irish Republic as a result of drunken driving. I am concerned that the extension of drinking hours may make the situation far worse. The Minister said that both he and his predecessor met various deputations. I know that the Pioneer Association and the Irish Council on Alcoholism met the Minister and his predecessor and expressed concern about the points I have been making. They spoke about drunken driving, the numbers killed on the roads and under-age drinking. Another problem is bar extensions, about which concern has also been expressed. These two organisations will be greatly concerned about the proposed extension of drinking hours.

The idea behind the extension is to facilitate tourists and many people are of the opinion that people come to this country just to drink. I do not agree. I believe people come to visit the beauty spots. There are many attractions other than drink. When I spoke last week on Deputy Barrett's Bill I pointed out that a person from the North of Ireland or England would not come here to drink. An English visitor went into a hotel in Dublin and asked for a pint. He left a pound note on the counter. The barman was looking for almost another pound while the tourist was looking for change from the first pound. The extended hours will not encourage these people. A woman married to a man who is fond of drinking may be used to seeing him in the afternoon when the public houses are closed but now that they are to be allowed to remain open he will be able to stay there throughout the afternoon.

In England the drinking hours are far more restrictive than they are here. On weekdays public houses close at 3 p.m. re-opening at 7 p.m. and closing at 10.30 p.m. Nobody can get a drink after that time. Sunday opening hours are from noon to 2 p.m. and 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. I do not see any need for us to extend opening hours.

There is, however, a necessity to extend licences to restaurants but the Vintners' Association are concerned that they will be operating at a disadvantage because restaurants will be allowed to remain open longer. I agree that there will be unfair competition as a result. If restaurants can remain open later than public houses it will not worry somebody to have to pay £5 for a meal. At present such a person pays £5 to go to a club where he will not get a meal.

There is an obligation on us and on the Minister to educate Irish people on how to drink. We have a completely different attitude towards drink from that of people in other countries. In many other countries people drink for pleasure, moderately and with meals, but people in this country boast the next day about how much they had to drink the night before. People in other countries do not do that. They go out every night for a few drinks and for enjoyment and I believe that is the way alcohol should be used.

I have no objection to restaurants being granted licences provided, of course, that they operate during the same hours as public houses. I agree with the restriction of these licences to restaurants which serve a substantial meal. I do not believe that all restaurants should be granted such a licence, particularly those restaurants which serve fish and chips or chicken and chips. I fully agree with the Minister that only the restaurants which serve substantial meals should be granted licences.

I agree with what Deputy McGahon said in his contribution about the extension of the opening hours on Sundays. He spoke about the problem of absenteeism. Over the past few months all of us have been lobbied by the ballroom association. Every Deputy has received several comprehensive documents outlining why they should be granted a licence. I sympathise with them in a way because they are competing in a very unfair way with discos which are allowed to have licences while they are not. I believe that none of them should have licences, particularly the discos to which very young people go. I know that people as young as 14 or 15 years go into discos where there are bar facilities. As I stated earlier, it would be better if we could encourage people to go out for a night's enjoyment and not drink or use drink as a crutch or to give themselves false courage. Many years ago there were no bars in ballrooms and people were able to go out and enjoy themselves. It is a great pity that that day is past and gone. The Minister proposes that all these clubs will now close at the same time as public houses and that the Garda Síochána will be able to inspect those clubs. That is very welcome.

I have not seen anything in the Bill which deals with hygiene in public houses. There are some beautiful public houses in Ireland but there is a great lack of hygiene in many of them. The Minister should have dealt with this in the Bill. It is a shame when tourists go into a public house and see how dirty it is. There should be an obligation on publicans to keep their premises clean and tidy. That is not the case in some parts of the country. This does not happen in rural Ireland only. In parts of the city some public houses are also not up to standard.

Deputy Davern spoke about the sale of alcohol in supermarkets. I agree with what he said in that respect. A young girl at a check-out has not got time to check the age of a person who buys drink. Many young people buy their drink in supermarkets. There is a serious problem in Dublin in relation to off-licences where cider can be purchased. All Dublin Deputies are aware of the cider parties that are held and the vandalism that is caused by teenagers who are drunk. Bus crews and people who use the buses late at night have been subject to attack. Deputy Davern said that special buses should be put on to take people home. I suppose it is a good idea but I would not like to be the person who has to operate some of these buses at night. I met people quite recently who suffered severe attacks and had to take a lot of time off work as a result.

I know some very genuine people operate off-licences but there are some cowboys in the business who would sell drink to anybody. All they are concerned about is the money. I would like the Minister to deal with the granting of a licence to an off-licence. Last week when I was speaking in Private Members' time on Deputy Seán Barrett's Bill I referred to a case in the Phibsboro area where the Garda went to court and objected to an off-licence licensee being granted a licence because they had evidence that he was selling drink to very young people. The Garda were successful and the justice did not grant him a licence. The licensee appealed against the decision of the justice and, according to the law, when you appeal a case — and Deputy Cooney will know this because he is a member of the legal profession — you can operate your business until the next court case is heard.

In my own constituency the tenants' association in south Finglas brought a case against a public house owner. It cost them a few hundred pounds to do this. They had the support of the Garda who stated that this publican was selling drink to young people. The Garda lodged an objection to the renewal of his licence but the justice said he was granting the licence because the evidence before the courts was not sufficient and the Garda or the tenants' association should have photographs of the young people coming out of his pub. That is what the Garda are up against. Some people say the Garda are not operating the law but this is the sort of thing they are up against and sometimes it is difficult for them to enforce the law.

I am in favour of identification cards. I see nothing wrong with everybody having to have an identification card. I always carry one and I find nothing wrong with it. It is of great help to me sometimes and it would be of great help to the Garda. I would welcome it if the Minister introduced identification cards.

There has been a lobby from the cider manufacturers who believe that their beverage is in no way responsible for the parties and the vandalism. But I am very concerned about the availability of cider and have asked the Minister in my private capacity to agree to ban the sale of cider altogether because it is cheap and it is effective. If these young people want to get drunk, cider is far less expensive than beer or any other type of drink. So I would not be sorry to see the Minister banning the sale of cider altogether.

Under the law the obligation is on the publican to clear the pub. The Minister proposes to change that to provide that rather than a publican losing his licence he will be fined £400 and a person in a public house after hours will only be fined £25. I would be happier to see that fine raised to £50 which would be more effective. One would not find so many people in the pub after drinking hours if the fine was £50.

Deputy Davern expressed concern about the present fine on a person found drunk. I agree that the fine is not adequate. A fine of £2 at present is ridiculous and I feel it should be not less than £100. I hope the Minister does something about that, maybe not in this Bill but in other legislation.

I agree with Deputy Davern that young people who go to discos are overcharged and that there should be some price control. Young people must pay £8 or £10 to enter a disco, and as well as that they have to get a taxi home so a night out will cost at least £20.

I know there are other Deputies who would like to contribute so I will conclude by saying that I hope the Minister will accept the constructive criticisms I have made. I welcome the Bill and hope it will get a speedy passage through both Houses.

Like the previous speakers I welcome this Bill. It is long overdue. I would have preferred if the Bill had gone further, particularly in relation to hygiene and standards. Perhaps a further Bill could deal with this whole area. The standard of hygiene in various premises around the country leaves a lot to be desired. There is much scope for improvement and I would instance the condition of toilets, ashtrays, glasses and so forth. There is a need for provisions in the Statute Book to ensure the highest standards. What is good enough for us may not be good enough for tourists who are accustomed to very high standards on the Continent and in America. When they come to Ireland many are disgusted by our standards.

In regard to the extension of drinking hours some provision could be made for a further extension especially at seaside resorts. I realise that this may be difficult because in addition to seaside resorts we have inland resorts. Most towns, cities and villages could probably be classified as tourist resorts during the summer. But resorts along the sea coast enjoy just a few months of business during the summer and it is an opportunity for them to make their living and pay their rates for the rest of the year as was the case in 1985 and in 1986 when the weather conditions were very poor. The fact that they cannot open until 2 o'clock certainly reduces their income and inhibits them from making a decent living. Tourists themselves would enjoy a greater latitude in the laws. The congestion that usually prevails when people descend on the streets between 11 and 12 o'clock, and the resulting traffic chaos could be avoided. If the hours were extended much street brawling could be avoided in addition to traffic accidents. As far as drunken driving is concerned it would be up to individuals themselves not to drive if they are drinking late. A case could be made for the extension of licensing hours in tourist resorts. This argument has been put forward in the past and perhaps the Minister would consider it in the future or at least make a comment on it. Perhaps he would explain why he has not included an extension of drinking hours at tourist resorts in this Bill.

I am very interested in the whole area of under-age drinking. Before I came into this House I taught for seven years and, in my work as a PE teacher, I put a lot of emphasis on health education. We had a very good health education programme in Tarbert comprehensive school for some time before such programmes became popular. I always emphasised the value of educating young people about the use and abuse of drugs, alcohol, tobacco and so on. We need a comprehensive approach to health education here; we need a new programme. The health education bureau must be complimented on the great work they have done in the past. But it is obvious, since we have such a problem at the moment, that their work has failed. Otherwise we would not have the problems we have today. We have to reassess our whole attitude towards health education and the teaching of it, not alone in our second level schools but in our primary schools, because it is there that the problem starts.

When people say young people under the age of 12 are drinking it is very hard to believe them but that is the case. They could start at home perhaps at Christmas time, at parties or at weddings but most young people start at that tender age. That is the reason we must inculcate values in young people at a very early age regarding the dangers of the abuse of drink. Not only children but also adults need to be made aware of the dangers of drink because, let us face it, we do most things by copying other people and by modelling ourselves on other people. Usually sons will model themselves on their fathers and in many cases where there is an alcoholic father a son follows in his footsteps at some stage. I know there are cases where a son would be abhorred by the behaviour of his father but generally speaking, especially in working class families, the reverse is the case. The son usually models himself on his father just as a daughter, perhaps, would model herself on her mother. Our health education programmes should be concentrated not only on schoolgoing people but also on the community in general. There is need at this stage for such a programme. I should also like to comment on the influence of the media. When we talk about——

I am sorry to interrupt the Deputy but perhaps he would now move the Adjournment of the debate.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share