Debate on the Bill is to conclude within 45 minutes. Deputies Jim Higgins, Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin, Flanagan, O'Sullivan and Collins have made contributions.
Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1999: Report Stage (Resumed) and Final Stage.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 2.
In page 3, between lines 9 and 10, to insert the following:
1.–Section 2 (inserted by section 25 of the Act of 1988) of the Act of 1927 is hereby amended in subsection (1) by the deletion of ', or between the hours of two o'clock and four o'clock in the afternoon' in paragraph (b), and the said subsection (1), as so inserted and as amended by section 2 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1995, is set out in the Table to this section.
TABLE
(1)Save as is otherwise provided by this Act, it shall not be lawful for any person to sell or expose for sale any intoxicating liquor, or to open or keep open any premises for the sale of intoxicating liquor, or to permit any intoxicating liquor to be consumed on licensed premises–
(a)on any weekday, before the hour of half-past ten o'clock in the morning, or
(i)during a period of summer time, after the hour of half-past eleven o'clock in the evening, or
(ii)during a period which is not a period of summer time, after the hour of eleven o'clock in the evening,
or
(b)on any Sunday, before the hour of half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon or after the hour of eleven o'clock in the evening, or
(c)on St. Patrick's Day, where that day falls on a weekday, before the hour of half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon or after the hour of eleven o'clock in the evening, or
(d)at any time on Christmas Day or Good Friday:
Provided that where in any year the 23rd or 24th day of December falls on a Sunday, then the provisions of this subsection which relate to a weekday during a period which is not a period of summer time shall apply to such a Sunday as if it were such a weekday.
(Deputy Higgins,Mayo.)
I support amendment No. 2 which seeks to reinstate the good points in the Minister's initial Bill, while amending the 36-hour drinking binge provision. I cannot understand why the Minister will not accept this amendment and introduce legislation to allow for drinking. Some of his proposals are open to amendment if he wishes to bring them back to Committee Stage so we can introduce legislation which provides for drinking time up to 1.30 a.m. at weekends, and reduced drinking time during the rest of the week.
When he announced this legislation last sum mer the Minister said that he was serious about promoting tourism and that this proposal would be a kernel of that objective. There is no guarantee that this legislation will be in place for the summer, but this amendment would ensure that the new drinking laws are in place for the tourism season. That would give us a better opportunity to debate the other legislation when it comes before the House.
It is also important that we use this opportunity to abolish Sunday afternoon closing. The current situation is ludicrous and out-dated and a change would offer an opportunity for publicans to provide an additional service on Sunday afternoons when soccer matches and so on take place. People cannot watch such events in pubs because of the laws.
The Minister announced this legislation last summer and, on the advice of the Millennium Committee, proposed to introduce 36-hour drinking. It is ludicrous that he is now not willing to give one or one and a half hours to the public and that this measure will only apply to millennium night. Some of the Millennium Committee's decisions regarding candles and taxis have raised serious questions, but we have an opportunity to amend this legislation and introduce realistic drinking laws which apply not only to one night.
We are very disappointed with the Minister's proposals on this Bill. The Minister knows that every publican and nightclub owner was expecting far more fundamental legislation. Heretofore, we were going to allow 24-hour drinking on new year's eve, but this was rejected by the vast majority of people, publicans and nightclub owners. The current proposal is to allow drinking until 1.30 a.m., but only new year's eve. It is disingenuous of the Minister to introduce this unnecessary legislation. We need proper legislation to extend drinking time so that people are dealt with as mature people who can go to public houses and nightclubs and act properly.
The Minister should have included the introduction of a national identity card scheme in this legislation. Under age drinking is a huge problem. The lobbying by the drinks industry has been ignored which is disappointing. The Minister has acted badly. He gave the impression that he would introduce substantial legislation to modernise licensing hours. Pubs must still close between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Sunday which is ridiculous and unnecessary. It is essential that the Minister introduce proper legislation. I do not know why he has even introduced this Bill. We have heard the song "Banana Republic" but this is going too far – we are more like a nanny State. We are mature enough for the introduction of proper drinking laws. The new millennium was an excellent opportunity to do that and the Minister did not take it.
Amendment No. 2 provides for the abolition of Sunday closing between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. in licensed premises such as public houses. On Committee Stage, the House agreed with my view that the provision should be deleted from the Bill, on the basis that it would be more appropriately dealt with in the comprehensive and wide ranging No. 2 Bill on opening hours and other matters which is being drafted and will be introduced early in the new year with a view to enactment before the summer recess. Amendment No. 2 seeks to reinstate that section of the Bill which was deleted on Committee Stage. It seems that I must put the matter in context yet again for the Opposition.
The Bill was first published following calls from various sectors, not least in this House, for something to be done in respect of the hours between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Sunday and Saturday night exemptions to assist the last summer tourist season. It was also proposed by the National Millennium Committee that I introduce special hours of opening on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day. I was open to making the various changes, as I indicated on a number of occasions. However, what happened subsequently is clear. I have already dealt in detail with the circumstances which arose when the Bill was previously before the House.
The Minister did not. His backbenchers dealt with it comprehensively outside the House.
There is no need for this legislation.
I do not intend to go through that again. The Dáil went into recess and the Bill stayed before the House. Due to the passage of time, the most reasonable action to take was to amend the Bill and provide solely for the eve of the millennium. This is the form of the current Bill. I realise Deputy Reynolds is a new customer. However, it would not be fair to the other customers who were here on the last occasion for me to go back over that again.
This amendment, together with amendments Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 11, intends to go against the form which the Bill now takes. Their substance has been debated in great detail on Committee Stage and the only purpose they serve is a repetition of that debate. This is especially the case if the same Deputies who spoke on Committee Stage propose to speak on these amendments – many of them have taken the opportunity of doing so. Deputies will have many opportunities to discuss the details of the No. 2 Bill, which will include the measures which are the subject of these amendments. It is clear and simple.
Pie in the sky.
The provisions in that Bill relating to opening hours between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Sundays, the issue of special exemptions for Saturday night and Sunday morning and the position of licensed restaurants and registered clubs will form a new code of licensing laws together with the other important provisions which will, in large part, implement the work of the Oireachtas committee on licensing laws, of which—
It will have to bring in Deputy Healy-Rae to do that.
—Deputy Flanagan was chairman. I compliment the Deputy and acknowledge the work of that committee, many of whose recommendations I have taken on board in the new legislation which will be brought before the House. I look forward to the debate on that Bill.
The urgency of some of the provisions last summer no longer applies. On a technical point, Deputies should be aware that, as the earlier motion to reinstate section 1 of the Bill as initiated, relating to definitions, has not been accepted and as such a section would be a necessary companion to the present and subsequent amendments, they are now flawed. However, I do not reject them on that basis but for the other reasons I gave ad nauseam on Committee Stage. It would not serve any worthwhile purpose for me to go into that debate again.
Last Tuesday night I had a meeting not too far from here. As I walked back to Leinster House at 10.50 p.m., before the pubs closed, I counted 62 people waiting for a taxi at St. Stephen's Green. What provisions does the Minister plan to make for the millennium given his rejection of these amendments? This Bill is a figleaf of legislation, dealing with one night. What steps will the Minister take to ensure there will not be a swill of people on the streets when the pubs close as he has refused to accept any recommendation which would allow for the staggering of closing time? How will the Minister deal with the fact that during the Christmas period, hundreds of people will enjoy nights out without any possibility of getting public transport or a taxi home?
The Deputy is moving away from the substance of this section.
Hours of trading and the consequences.
The amendment relates to trading hours on Sunday afternoon.
And evening.
(Mayo): The Minister said he is not prepared to accept these amendments which effectively represent the legislation which was so important last June. It is important no longer and can wait until the introduction of the No. 2 Bill. Will the Minister give the dates for its publication and enactment? We will co-operate with him. How can he expect us to accept his bona fides given that he has already promised a sex offenders Bill, which has yet to be published and turned down a Private Member's Bill; that he has already promised a private security Bill which has yet to be published and twice turned down a Fine Gael motion and Bill; that he has already promised anti-corruption legislation and turned down a Private Members' Bill; and that he has already promised an attachment of earnings Bill and rejected an Opposition Bill? In the context of at least four broken promises and his somersaults and U-turn on this Bill, how can we be expected to believe that he has any intention of introducing the comprehensive reforms about which he is talking? Will he give us a definitive date?
In reply to Deputy Flanagan, the National Millennium Committee asked if I would agree to all-night opening on New Year's Eve into New Year's Day. I was open to that proposal. However, afterwards, many publicans indicated they would probably not open for the evening. The next recommendation I received was that it would be best if I would agree to amend the previous decision and agree to have public houses open until 1.30 a.m. on New Year's Day, to which I was open and amenable, which demonstrates how open and amenable I am.
What about the Kilgarvan factor?
That stays open all night.
With regard to the other two proposals in the original Bill, I am beginning to think that Deputies are confusing their seasons. Those proposals were in the context of the summer – this is the winter. The proposals will be contained in the more comprehensive legislation which will be discussed in detail prior to next summer. I have indicated that to the House on a number of occasions. There is no great mystery – if there is one, I cannot identify it.
With regard to Deputy Higgins' question on various Bills, being a modest person, I am loth to remind him that the legislative programme introduced by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in the past two and a half years is the equivalent of all the legislation passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas. There are approximately 28 Bills in the course of preparation and 12 Bills before the House. No doubt, in due course, we will get around to dealing with the legislation referred to by the Deputy. As to why it was considered urgent at the time, I explained the difference between the seasons to Deputy Higgins and there is little point in my expanding any further on that matter. One either knows or does not know it is winter.
The Minister is in the autumn of his tenure.
Is the amendment being pressed?
(Mayo): Yes.
Question, "That the amendment be made" put and declared lost.
Amendments Nos. 3 to 6, inclusive, and 11 are related and will be discussed together by agreement.
(Mayo): I move amendment No. 3:
In page 3, between lines 9 and 10, to insert the following:
"1.–Section 5 of the Act of 1927 is hereby amended in subsection (3) (inserted by section 29 of the Act of 1988) by the deletion of 'for any time on a Sunday or' and the said subsection (3), as so amended, is set out in the Table to this section.
TABLE
(3)No special exemption order shall be granted for any time between one o'clock and half-past ten o'clock in the morning on a Monday.".
This is a straightforward amendment to section 5, special exemption orders, of the Act of 1927. Effectively, this amends section 5 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1927, by the deletion from subsection (3), inserted by section 29 of the Act of 1988, of the text which prohibits the granting of a special exemption order for any time on Sunday. In other words, it is no longer necessary in the context of what is now proposed. I ask the Minister to accept my amendment given that he elaborated in considerable detail on Committee Stage in June that he accepted the spirit of this measure.
We will not convince the Minister that now is an opportune time to introduce this legislation. The Minister has promised to publish a new consolidation Bill in the new year. Will he guarantee that the Bill to be published in January will deal with between 33 and 34 previous Acts dating back to the 1830s and that it will go through both Houses of the Oireachtas before next June? Given that this is a comprehensive item of legislation, will the Minister guarantee that it will be enacted before the change in the licensing laws due to take place in the summer? I do not think it is possible to give such a guarantee.
The Minister had an opportunity today to introduce the additional hour. This would give publicans and the general public an opportunity to extend the licensing hours. The Minister is in favour of this. It is ludicrous, given that earlier this year he was talking about 36 hours and we are now talking about an additional hour, that the Minister is not willing to introduce this measure. This is a straightforward amendment. We have an opportunity to ensure that the legislation is passed here today and is in place for the summer. This comprehensive legislation should not be rushed through the House. I do not believe the legislation will be in place for the summer. I hope the Minister will prove me wrong.
We have reasonable grounds to be concerned at the length of time it may take for a comprehensive item of legislation to be put on the Statute Book. As the Minister rightly said, he has a lot of Bills on his plate at the moment. There are a large number of Bills promised and in the course of being enacted. With respect, the Minister can only do so much work and I am sure he would agree that a lot remains to be done. This is just one of the many tasks he and his Department must carry out. The Minister said he is an open and amenable person. We want the pubs to be open and amenable as the public wish. In reality, there is now a great temptation to break the law, particularly in relation to Sunday afternoon closing.
The Minister said that the main purpose of the legislation introduced last summer was to deal with the summer season. I put it to him that there are good reasons in the winter season to change the two hours on Sunday afternoon as soon as possible. People to into pubs following various sporting activities. If one walks on the hills of Clare, Kerry or Limerick during the winter, it is fairly dangerous to be out after 3 o'clock in the afternoon. Following these walks, people like to be able to go into the pub before it gets too dark to change into their dry clothes in the heat. This usually happens before 4 o'clock. Given that people are involved in walking and other activities and some families like to go out for family lunch, there tends to be a great temptation to break the law or to encourage the publican to break the law.
While the summer season may be the main reason for the introduction of the legislation, it should also apply to the winter season and the whole year. We tabled these amendments to try to ensure that legislation suitable to modern life is put in place as soon as possible. Deputy Higgins asked when the legislation will be enacted fully so that we can have modernisation of the licensing laws.
It is not what the Bill provides for, rather what it does not address that prompted my participation in this debate from the outset. I am not opposed to the millennium provision proposed by the Minister. However, I have no particular enthusiasm for it and I do not think any Member necessarily has. My decision to contribute on Report Stage has been determined by the Minister and Deputy Collins's response last week to earlier contributions.
I am disappointed by the Minister's decision to signpost a two-tier approach to late opening times when the main Bill is introduced in the House. That is my opinion to which I am entitled and which I hope will be respected by Members on all sides. In relation to a three day by three day set of opening hours, I am not opposed to the sense of that approach, other than the point made by Deputy Collins that there is no demand on the part of the vintners or the vintners' bodies.
I have two reasons for pursuing my particular interest in this issue. It is essential that we address the Intoxicating Liquor Acts to help create a more mature approach and understanding of alcohol, its use and abuse.
The other issue relates to the whole sector of the exploitation of young people, in particular through the various entertainment locations, the late licensing of same and the use of these venues by people who are clearly only intent on securing additional alcohol. This has resulted in tremendous disquiet and a great deal of suffering and hardship for many people. I might like to see freer opening times than these amendments would allow if they were adopted or included by the Minister in a substantive Bill to come before us, hopefully early in the new year.
These are very important issues. The extension of the hours along the lines included in the amendments initially tabled by Deputies Higgins, Flanagan, O'Sullivan and myself are reflective of a good sense approach because they are not compulsory, they do not have to be adhered to by those at the coal-face of delivering alcoholic beverages and, despite the Minister's dismissal of our claim, they are also reflective of a lobby and an interest from within the profession. I refute the Minister's claim that the amendments tabled by myself and other Deputies are personal positions only. They certainly reflect my position, although I would be prepared to consider even freer proposals.
I made the point last week that the document I hold in my hand, distributed by the Vintners' Federation of Ireland, was directed to the Minister in June of last year. It carries amendments (a) and (b) as suggested methods of address of the deficiencies in the Bill then before the House, and that is exactly what I have presented in my amendments. I believe they are important.
I am disappointed by this Bill and its failure to include the substantive issues at the core of this debate. The millennium is but a distraction and of little importance in my book. I would like to see the measures that we have mooted here in various amendments incorporated in the Minister's substantive legislation and in the absence of argument that supports, in a very real and acceptable way, the earlier closing hours on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, I hold to the view that it is better that we free up right across the board, Monday through Saturday.
I want to refer again to the argument put by Deputy Collins last week that, as guests of hotels, tourists have the right of access to service. It is important that we acknowledge that the tourist market addresses not only the visitor from overseas, who may be able to afford to stay in our hotels, but also many Irish tourists, the indigenous market, who utilise the services of bed and breakfast accommodation which has no licence provision. They enjoy, as I would, the opportunity for a late drink on any evening of the week by choice. It is critically important that we create and provide choice. It does not hold up to narrow the sense of the tourist market in the way the contribution last week sought to do. Thankfully, it is a much wider appeal.
I support the amendment as presented by Deputies Higgins, Naughten and O'Sullivan, and I hope the noted acrimony that entered this debate in the recent past will not discourage the Minister from considering the salient and important points Members argued for the inclusion of these changes when the substantive Bill comes before us.
I find it difficult to understand what is taking place in so far as we seem to be repeating what was said last week, although the Opposition members are not as cross or as personal as they were last week.
We mellowed over the weekend.
Carlow-Kilkenny): Perhaps Deputy Collins will keep it mellow.
I am a mellow person by nature, Chairman, but when I am roughed up the wrong way I can show my teeth, as Deputy O'Sullivan might be able to confirm.
The Deputy should keep an eye on his own lads, not the Opposition.
The Deputy said that I said last week that there was no demand for this measure from the vintners. There is no demand, and there is no demand for it from the public. We are elected to serve the public and if the demand existed, we would hear from all sides, irrespective of the parties we represent.
The Bill is merely a millennium provision. I do not understand this debate because we have got a guarantee from the Minister that he will bring a comprehensive Bill before the Dáil early in the new year. He stated that Sunday night closing time will remain as it is – 11 p.m. with 30 minutes' drinking up time. Closing time on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday nights will be 11.30 p.m. with 30 minutes' drinking up time, and on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights closing time will be 12.30 a.m. with 30 minutes' drinking up time. I do not understand why there is so much filibustering because both the Dublin and the country licensed vintners have accepted the Bill, and I do not know who the Members opposite are speaking for on this issue.
I have already dealt with the substance of my opposition to these amendments in the debate on amendment No. 2. Amendments Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 11 are inter-related because they all provide in one form or another for extension of opening hours of licensed premises such as hotels and licensed restaurants and for registered clubs. Amendment No. 3 allows for special exemption orders to be granted after midnight on a Saturday. The other amendments, Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 11, are consequential on acceptance of amendment No. 2. As amendment No. 2 has been defeated, it is illogical that these amendments should form part of the Bill. They would give to clubs, hotels and restaurants Sunday opening hours more favourable than pubs currently have.
I repeat what I said in relation to amendment No. 2. On Committee Stage, the provisions to which all of these amendments relate were debated and the House agreed with my view that those provisions should be deleted from the Bill. This was on the basis that they are more appropriately dealt with in the comprehensive and wide-ranging No. 2 Bill on opening hours, to which Deputy Collins referred, and other matters, which is in the course of being drafted and which will be introduced in the early part of the new year with a view to enactment before the summer recess. Amendments Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 11 now seek to restate those sections of the Bill which were deleted on Committee Stage. I cannot accept the amendments as proposed.
The split week, which was referred to during the debate, is something which Deputy Flanagan's own committee proposed. I am not saying Deputy Flanagan was critical of it – he was not – but it is what his committee proposed.
Deputy Ó Caoláin spoke about a failure to deal with the main issues. I have explained that more comprehensive legislation will be brought forward in the new year. It is true that the Bill does not deal with the whole question; it deals only with the night of the millennium. There is no compulsion on anybody to go into a public house on the night in question but I am merely trying to facilitate people to do so if they wish. That was on foot of a recommendation I received from the millennium committee and I have outlined already how I was amenable and open to any suggestions. It would be a fallacy for me to pretend this legislation was anything other than a small amendment to the licensing laws to facilitate people having a night out on new year's eve.
Deputy Naughten proposed that we could consolidate the intoxicating liquor laws. Intoxicating liquor law in this country is spread across about 70 different statutes. Consolidation of those statutes would be a mammoth task. It would take several years and I do not have the time or the resources to do it at this point. The last consolidated Act was in 1830 and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no attempt at consolidation since then. It leads me to the historical fact that the first statute dealing with intoxicating liquor was enacted in 1635. If one considers that there was only one consolidating Act since then, one can appreciate the type of task it must be. As I said, much drinking up time has gone under the bridge since 1635.
Deputy O'Sullivan raised the issue of winter time and why we cannot abolish the 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. closing during winter time. I accept people find it awkward that they are not in a position to go into public houses between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on a Sunday afternoon and that is why I wanted to leave that to the more comprehensive Bill in the new year. I want to deal with that and the other matter in the comprehensive Bill because the summer season is gone. It is best I deal with all these matters together rather than in a piecemeal way at this time of the year.
In any event, this Bill is to facilitate people having a night out on the eve of the millennium. Knowing the vagaries of the parliamentary draftsman's office and so on, I cannot say the legislation will definitely be on the Statute Book by the summer, but I am doing everything—
The Minister is slipping away.
I am doing everything I can to try to make absolutely sure the legislation is on the Statute Book before next summer. Everything possible is being done within the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the parliamentary draftsman's office to try to make sure of that. We can have a full debate on all these issue when the Bill is before the House.
Amendment put and declared lost.
(Mayo): I move amendment No. 4:
In page 3, between lines 9 and 10, to insert the following:
"1.–Section 56 (inserted by section 26 of the Act of 1988) of the Act of 1927 is hereby amended in subsection (1) by the deletion of ‘or between the hours of two o'clock and four o'clock in the afternoon' in paragraph (b), and the said subsection (1), as so inserted, is set out in the Table to this section.
TABLE
(1)In order that a club may be eligible to be registered under the Registration of Clubs Acts, 1904 to 1986, the rules of the club shall (in addition to the matters mentioned in section 4 of the Registration of Clubs (Ireland) Act, 1904) provide that, subject to the exceptions specified in subsections (1A), (2) and (3) of this section, no excisable liquor shall be supplied for consumption on the club premises to any person (other than a member of the club lodging in the club premises) or be consumed on the club premises by any person (other than a member of the club lodging in the club premises)–
(a)on any weekday, before the hour of half-past ten o'clock in the morning, or
(i) during a period of summer time, after the hour of half-past eleven o'clock in the evening, or
(ii) during a period which is not a period of summer time, after the hour of eleven o'clock in the evening,
or
(b) on any Sunday, before the hour of half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon or after the hour of eleven o'clock in the evening, or
(c)on St. Patrick's Day, where that day falls on a weekday, before the hour of half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon or after the hour of eleven o'clock in the evening, or
(d)at any time on Christmas Day or Good Friday.".
Amendment put and declared lost.
(Mayo): I move amendment No. 5:
In page 3, between lines 9 and 10, to insert the following:
".–Section 13 of the Act of 1927 is hereby amended by the deletion of the following:
‘(c)unless his licence is a six-day licence, on any Sunday, between the hours of two o'clock and three o'clock in the afternoon, or'.".
Amendment put and declared lost.
(Mayo): I move amendment No. 6:
In page 3, between lines 9 and 10, to insert the following:
"1.–Section 14 of the Act of 1988 (as amended by section 6 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1995) is hereby amended in subsection (1) by the deletion of ‘, or between the hours of three o'clock and six o'clock in the afternoon,' in paragraph (ii), and the said subsection (1), as so amended, is set out in the Table to this section.
TABLE
(1) It shall not be lawful for any person, in any premises to which a special restaurant licence applies, to—
(a)sell or expose for sale, or
(b)open or keep open the premises for the sale of, or
(c)permit the consumption on the premises of,
any intoxicating liquor—
(i) on any weekday or on a Sunday which falls on the 23rd or 24th day of December in any year, between the hours of half-past twelve o'clock in the morning and half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon, or
(ii)on any Sunday other than a Sunday to which paragraph (i) of this subsection relates, between the hours of half-past twelve o'clock in the morning and half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon or between the hours of eleven o'clock in the evening and half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon of the next following day, or
(iii)on Christmas Day, between the hours of half-past twelve o'clock in the morning and one o'clock in the afternoon or between the hours of three o'clock in the afternoon and seven o'clock in the evening or between the hours of ten o'clock in the evening and half-past twelve o'clock in the afternoon of the next following day, or
(iv)at any time on Good Friday or between the hours of twelve o'clock midnight and half-past twelve o'clock in the morning of the next following Saturday.".
Amendment put and declared lost.
Acting Chairman
Amendment No. 8 is an alternative to amendment No. 7 and both may be taken together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
(Mayo): I move amendment No. 7:
In page 3, between lines 9 and 10, to insert the following:
"1.–Section 2(1) of the Act of 1927 (as substituted by section 25 of the Act of 1988 and as amended by section 2 of the Act of 1995) is hereby amended by the deletion of the words from 'licensed premises – --' to the end of the subsection and the substitution therefor of the words 'licensed premises during the period between 12.30 a.m. and 10.30 a.m. on any day, the period between 11.30 p.m. on 24 December, and 10.30 a.m. on 26 December, and the period between 11.30 p.m. on the day before Good Friday and 10.30 a.m. on the day after Good Friday'.".
In one neat amendment, we seek all year round opening until 12.30 a.m. which is a sensible measure. I cannot see why people say it should only be at weekends or for three or four days, making it complicated.
We seek to regulate the discos. There is an anomalous situation in that every disco which does not serve a substantial meal is operating in a twilight zone and illegally. By not accepting this amendment, between now and the time the House enacts the new legislation proposed by the Minister, the majority of discos will be acting illegally, can be brought before and are amenable to the law and are, in most cases, flouting the law.
We seek to regulate the situation as regards St. Patrick's Day which should no longer be treated as a Sunday but would have the standard opening hours. We wish to do away with the holy hour on Sunday which was the kernel of the Minister's proposals. Last but by no means least, we wish to ensure that on two days of the year we do not have the 12.30 a.m. opening, that is, on Christmas Eve and Holy Thursday – in other words, that we do not trespass onto Good Friday or Christmas Day.
These are sensible measures which wrap up in a neat bundle the kernel of what the Minister was supposed to achieve but did not and which would make much sense and would ease considerably the legislative burden imposed on him as a result of the commitments he gave on 12 October.
I thank the Minister for being honest when answering the question whether this legislation would be in place by next summer. The problem is the Minister cannot guarantee this legislation will be in place next summer. I would say to Deputy Collins that we are all in agreement about the changes that need to be made. The only dispute is when they should be implemented. Last summer it was urgent that we introduce this legislation because of the tourism season, and the Minister promoted it. Tourists do not come to Ireland in the summer months only. We now have an all year round tourism industry, with many people coming here during the winter months.
Will the Minister not consider extending drinking hours for those tourists or will they be discriminated against? I cannot understand why the legislation was urgent last summer but now the Minister cannot guarantee it will be in place by next summer. The current legislation encourages people to break the law – I am sure the Minister has broken the liquor licensing laws and that Deputy Collins has done the same. It is also a huge drain on Garda resources. Will the Minister reconsider his decision, accept this amendment, introduce the legislation now and give us an opportunity to resolve this problem?
I would like to make one point in response to Deputy Collins. There is no obligation on publicans to open until 12 a.m. on the earlier days of the week – there will be discretion. At the same time, if our amendments were accepted they would have the opportunity to open late everyday. In some circumstances – Deputy Ó Caoláin made the point about tourists from here and abroad – there are genuine reasons people might wish to have a drink late at night earlier in the week and at weekends. I do not want to take up too much time on this issue because we have repeated ourselves. Publicans will not be forced to stay open at times they do not want to stay open.
One talks about the relevance of the Dáil to the activities of the citizens on a daily basis and public representatives complain that their voice is not being heard, but we are being treated to high farce this afternoon by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I refer to his press release which stated: "O'Donoghue announces major package of licensing law reform measures". It stated that it is proposed to introduce the following arrangements: normal opening times of licensed premises 12.30 a.m., Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays, and on Sundays holy hour is to be abolished. This is not dated.
It might be a forgery.
I am not sure if it is deliberately undated.
Is it signed?
It is 12 October. The Minister is about to vote against his proposal. It is unprecedented. I see the emergence of the Minister for Finance. Perhaps that will allow for a U-turn on the part of his colleague, seeing as we are in that season. It is ridiculous. Nobody in this House, to the best of my knowledge, is against this amendment. Everybody in the Minister's party, as his backbenchers testified throughout the summer, the four wheels of the Government and those who normally sit beside Deputy Ó Caoláin, have indicated their—
No, they do not.
I will not associate the Deputy with them. I am merely pointing out that they usually sit in close proximity to the Deputy. Those Deputies, particularly Deputy Healy-Rae, have indicated acceptance of this amendment, yet we will press it and the Minister will vote against it. It is crazy.
Acting Chairman
The time permitted for this debate having expired, I am required to put the following question in accordance with the order of the Dáil of this day: "That Fourth Stage is hereby completed and the Bill is hereby passed." Is that agreed? Agreed.