This debate is to conclude at 5.50 p.m. Deputy Kehoe is to resume his speech. He was sharing time with Deputy Deenihan. Fourteen minutes remain.
Intoxicating Liquor Bill 2003 [ Seanad ] : Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Perhaps, a Cheann Comhairle, you might be so good as to tell me when I have spoken for four minutes.
Very well.
I am delighted that the Minister is in the House. I hope that he does not carry on as he did yesterday, laughing and sniggering at everyone on this side of the House. When I was in school, there was only one place for the sniggering people, and that was the backbenches. Deputy Ring said that was where the Minister should be, since he has failed in his job over the past 12 months. There are still people of 14 and 15 years of age out on the streets falling round drunk, and the Minister has done nothing on the issue, except talk endlessly. As Deputy Ring said yesterday, the Minister has been on every radio station in Dublin and around the country saying what he will do, without acting on one bit of it. I think everyone on this side of the House would agree with me.
The Minister talks about the ID card system.
The Minister was back on the radio again this morning.
Was he telling us about the laughing and the sniggering that he was doing?
He was telling us that he was going to stay around the House for eight more days to pass this legislation.
That is good. Perhaps he will come in—
He will come in—
Allow Deputy Kehoe to speak.
Perhaps he will come in to answer the questions that he was meant to answer here a few weeks ago. I make regular night-time visits to pubs and clubs, and the number of young people getting into them is unbelievable. They are being allowed to drink alcohol between the ages of 14 and 16. Perhaps parents allow their youngsters to go out now at that age, but it is terrible that the Minister has not done one thing to introduce a proper ID card system. I know that it is a very difficult task, but currently young people can trace or copy any sort of ID in existence. If the Minister wishes to come up with some serious proposals, he has the job, the resources and the people to do so. However, he has failed.
Deputy Ring spoke about having young people out of pubs by 9 p.m. I disagree with the rule that when people holiday in the west of Ireland or in my own county of Wexford and have a meal with an under-age child, they must be out of the pub by 9 p.m. I ask the Minister to explain how he came up with such a proposal. He will have to look into it, for it will seriously damage our tourism trade. I know that Deputy Deenihan will speak on that too.
There are many matters on which I would like to speak, and CCTV cameras are important in Wexford. On the main street of Wexford, there has been a great deal of vandalism, crime and young people brawling. Not enough money has been put into CCTV cameras. One must invest to stop the crime on our streets, and CCTV cameras are the only thing that will do that. I do not want to see gardaí going around like tourists with video cameras trying to do the job of a CCTV camera. There are not enough gardaí on our streets. The Minister promised an extra 2,000, and I would like to see where they are. We cannot have gardaí going round with video cameras trying to film what is going on. They have enough of a job guarding our streets and ensuring that they are safer for everyone.
Some of the Deputies on the other side of the House, including Deputy Andrews, spoke about young people drinking. There is only one reason that they have such drinking habits: there are not enough amenities for them. This Government is not investing enough money in youth organisations to bring amenities to rural and urban Ireland to stop young people from drinking on the streets by ensuring that they have plenty to do. We suffer from a lack of resources for younger people. When they do not have anything to do between the ages of 14 and 16, they go out and binge drink.
The Minister has failed over the last 12 months in the job which he was supposed to do. I ask him to get out on the streets at night and see exactly what is happening. If he did, he would know the true story and be able to react to it.
The four minutes are past.
At the launch of the Fine Gael action plan on alcohol abuse on 15 April, Deputy Kenny stated:
We need action on alcohol abuse that is not simply concerned with issues like competition, price and choice. Instead, we need action that safeguards public health, ensures the law is upheld, protects families and strengthens communities. We must ensure that children know the dangers of addiction, that young people take responsibility for their behaviour and all of us are aware of the consequences of our actions.
That just about sums up our approach to the whole issue. It is about more than law or law enforcement. The whole package must be cross-departmental, and there must be an overall approach to the problem. The Department of Education and Science has a critical role to play. The health education programme in schools is ad hoc and there is no continuity. Usually what happens is that an expert on alcohol or drug abuse is brought in and the programme ceases thereafter. The message about the dangers or the over-use of alcohol is not reinforced each day or each week. It is a major health issue, yet the Department of Health and Children and the health boards are not doing enough to emphasise the damage drink is causing to all the population and especially to young people.
One of the reasons the Minister is here today is because of the statistics for drunkenness and associated crime and the reaction to what is happening on our streets at night. Last year, I conducted a survey on public order in Tralee. It was clear from the parents who responded that they were concerned about the safety of their young people on the streets at night. In his response to the survey, the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, said it was balderdash but the people in Tralee knew better and it has become a major issue there. According to preliminary Garda figures for 2002, there are 25 assaults on our streets every night, representing a total number of more than 9,000 per year. The Garda had to deal with 33,792 cases of public drunkenness and 22,404 cases of threatening or abusive behaviour. Alcohol-associated crime is up 50% in one year. Some 42,755 offences of public disorder were committed in 2001, compared with 16,384 in 1996, an increase of 161%. I am sure the number of offences has increased during the past two years. Statistics show that drink-related crime and public disorder are on the increase. The Bill is a response but it must go further.
The Minister will be aware of the media reaction to his proposals and newspaper headlines to the effect that the liquor laws are not being enforced so the Minister decides to introduce further legislation; that the liquor licensing Bill is a wash-out; and alcohol abuse is bringing Ireland to its knees. Enforcement is crucial, as numerous speakers have mentioned. As it stands, the law could be effective but it is not being enforced.
The Minister will be familiar with Dr. Anne Hope's commentary on the legislation. Dr. Anne Hope who is the national policy adviser at the Department of Health and Children said alcohol consumption has been increasing steadily since 1990, to such an extent that Ireland had a really wet culture when it came to drink. Irish people consume 11.4 litres of pure alcohol per head each year. The amount consumed per head in 1990 was eight litres. This increase has occurred here while consumption levels have decreased in other EU states. Dr. Hope agreed with all the legislative measures being proposed but said they would be pointless if not rigorously enforced. She also said they should be implemented as simultaneously as possible and that existing laws were not enforced with sufficient rigour. For example, a law which provides that a person should not be served alcohol if they are already drunk is not being enforced. Asked which was the top measure which would reduce alcohol related problems, she said enforcement of that law would cut down on the level of drunkenness on our streets, particularly at weekends. Enforcement is a major issue.
I realise more expansive legislation is coming before the House next year when the Minister will codify the entire liquor licensing law. Perhaps the Minister would define what constitutes a drunken person. On what criteria can a bar proprietor or bar worker decide a person is drunk? It is a subjective matter. Depending on a person's drinking experience, he or she may be able to consume varying amounts of liquor. A bar person cannot say he will not serve a customer because he thinks the customer is drunk. When is it definitive that a person is drunk?
While local authorities are seeking that powers be devolved to them, I do not see this provision working in local authorities. I will continue to be a member of a local authority for the next few months and I foresee problems with issues such as planning. Adjudication on exemptions could prove complex. Will the Minister explain how this provision will be put in place?
As spokesperson on tourism, I wish to raise two issues, the concerns from the Irish Hotels Federation and other groups. In the past, these people have responded to changes in the law and to the tourist industry. The first issue of concern to them is the ban on children accompanied by parents or guardians from the bar area of a hotel after 9 p.m. and the obligation on everyone under 21, unless accompanied by parents or guardians, to carry valid evidence of age while in the bar area of an hotel or licensed premises after 9 p.m.. The Minister has received an amendment to this proposal. While I agree with the legislation being put in place, a tight regime is required if we are to win the battle against alcohol abuse. I would listen carefully to what those people have to say as they have genuine concerns. If there is some way of making provision on a premises where young people can be close to the bar and where the parents might be able to get drink from the bar, but in a different part of the premises, this should be done.
Those under 21 travelling from the UK and other countries to matches and other sporting events here who may not have identification with them will face major problems. This will be especially the case with people from the UK because there is no passport arrangement and they may have no identification. I foresee that issue leading to a bureaucratic nightmare. Perhaps the Minister will respond to these issues.
I wish to share time with Deputy Callanan.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
We need to face the facts regarding the abuse of alcohol and other substances. We have a massive problem arising from the abuse of alcohol. The problem manifests itself in many ways: social, medical, financial and so on. We cannot continue to bury our heads in the sand and deny the problem exists. Those involved in education say young people come to school with a hangover while those in the health care area are well aware of the problems which arise, particularly at accident and emergency units. That used to be a Saturday night difficulty but now it is happening on Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. The problem also affects the health care area.
A story in my local newspaper last week concerned a consultant giving evidence about 14 to 16 year olds in hospital after drinking binges who were either self-damaged or battered. The first case concerned a 14 year old boy who was waiting for his mother outside the disco. He was abused by an older teenager who had consumed three bottles of wine and a bottle of vodka. We must try to deal with this crazy situation.
The Oireachtas should compliment RTE on the programmes it has shown recently to highlight this problem. Many members of the public were disturbed to see young people lying comatose on the streets or hospital floors as a result of consuming liquor. The cameras did not lie. Without the evidence of the camera, many people would argue that the problem is being exaggerated. We have heard that in the past. It was the knee-jerk reaction of many over the years. Until we accept that we have a serious problem, nothing will be done about it. When we accept the truth, we will be able to try to rectify the problem.
I am also concerned about the reaction of contributors to this debate. Some people have tried to ridicule many of the Bill's proposals. Deputy Deenihan adopted the fairest approach of all of the Opposition contributors I have heard so far when he stated that he would support the legislation. Others have tried to ridicule it. Whether it concerned the involvement of local authorities or the identification of off-licence suppliers, they gave examples of how it would not work. Some of last night's contributions were off the wall.
All the proposals in the legislation emanated from the Commission on Liquor Licensing. It is the commission's proposals that are being ridiculed, not the Minister's.
Blame the commission.
Using the commission to have a go at the Minister, as happened last night, will not help to deal with the problem.
I am also concerned by the reaction of some interest groups, be they off-licence operators, club owners or hoteliers, to any suggestion of action being taken. Over the years, they have seemed content to blame each other. The bottom line is that all of them will be affected if we do nothing. Having said that, I understand the concerns of hoteliers on the legislation. The Minister outlined yesterday the definition of a bar and the exclusion of other parts of a hotel. This area needs further examination on Committee Stage. The Minister should examine the information that has been presented in this regard.
Some people have expressed concern that the proposed legislation will have a negative effect on tourism. I am concerned that if we do not do something quickly about the problem, tourists will be afraid to visit the country. This is not a figment of my imagination. Any good, efficient foreign travel agent will look at what is happening here and advise potential tourists of difficulties. It is up to us to clean up our act and get it right, at least on the liquor abuse situation. I do not suggest that all of our social problems are drink related but drink has a huge impact in many instances.
Some previous speakers were critical of the Minister for some provisions and also for some things that were omitted. They must be aware that the major changes needed will be included in the 2004 codification Bill. Many issues need to be addressed. The codification Bill will have the opportunity to rectify any imperfections that may arise from this one. I accept that we made a serious mistake when we extended drinking hours in the recent past. I include myself in those who accepted those changes but, in our defence, we believed one of its results would be to do away with the scoffing down of three, four or five drinks in the last quarter of an hour of drinking-up time. We got that wrong, as has been proved since. We need to redress that situation.
It has also emerged, whether people are side-tracking the issue or using it for another agenda, that there is conflict between parts of the Equality Act and the liquor law requirements. The requirement to run a bar in a particular way and the difficulty arising from not having the right to refuse admission can make a publican's life impossible. A publican has a huge responsibility and must be helped in every way possible. It is becoming more difficult to run a drinks supply business, whether an off-licence or any other. We must support any changes required.
Many changes are proposed in this legislation. Although the Minister has been accused of doing nothing in the past 12 months there seems to be little appetite among the Opposition, with the exception of Deputy Deenihan, for the changes proposed here. I know there are interest groups out there which try to pressurise everybody. However, we must be responsible and accept that we have a problem.
Recently I was told, when I accepted part of the responsibility for the extension of hours and the new difficulties it created, by a spokesperson for one of the drinks federations that I was too old to become involved in this area and did not know what was happening down town. I was told I was living in cloud cuckoo land. I invited him to attend the accident and emergency ward of Cork University Hospital on any given night. He informed me that the group had a great arrangement with the local Garda Superintendent and that everything was slap-happy. By coincidence, the city council had a meeting the following Monday with the same Garda Superintendent. He could not believe what I repeated to him.
Cork City Council is trying to work with gardaí and Cork has given a lead on this issue. One of my colleagues, Deputy O'Flynn, was responsible for the introduction of by-laws to control drinking on the streets. This was successful and is now being copied by other towns and cities. A number of colleagues have also asked for the details. We cannot cure all the ills but we have a responsibility to do whatever we can.
There are signs that some good is being done. I received information in the post this morning from MEAS, a group which promotes responsible drinking. They sent me eight questions and I am sure many people would have difficulty in answering more than half honestly as they would give stereotypical answers. MEAS and the No Name Clubs encourage the kind of action that is required. We must encourage people not to start drinking until they are older. Anybody over the age of 18 is entitled to make up his or her mind but anybody under that age needs encouragement to abstain until they are older.
People often quote the Italian or French regimes where people are taught to drink moderately and responsibly at home from a young age. That is a different culture. We could probably point out many areas in which we are better than the French, Italians or anybody else. Our culture is different. Unfortunately, the abuse of alcohol is deeply embedded in our culture. The only change is that the number involved in the past was lower. We have had difficulties regarding liquor laws since the time when a person could drive three or four miles from town and drink to his or her heart's content. This Bill repeals laws which are 170 years old, which just proves how we have failed to come to grips with the issue over the years.
This Minister is making a genuine attempt to address the problems. My one concern is in regard to hotels. Some of my own constituents have said that if one was dealing with a wedding party, all the children would have to be thrown out at 9 p.m. I told them I thought few wedding parties would be held in the bar of a hotel. However, I appreciate that hotels set up bars, according to their definition of a bar. If they set up a bar of any type and drink is served across the counter, children have to be removed. It would be a pity if this Bill was badly received simply because of issues concerning the running of hotels. People were wrong to label the Minister as being anti-family simply because they had a problem with this. A much more positive approach could have been taken and they could have come forward in a more constructive fashion and put proposals. They are doing so now, but they got it wrong at the outset.
We could examine a plethora of areas which need change. However, we must implement the laws. Other Deputies have argued that more education is needed. That goes without saying and we are putting money into that area. We are the legislators and this Bill is about the abuse of alcohol, particularly and specifically by young people and we would be failing in our duty if we did not support it. The Bill is correct, with the one exception I have outlined. There is a difficulty with club owners with regard to alcohol being consumed within 100 metres of a premises. Much of the difficulty can be traced back to off-licence involvement. All sections of the drinks trade have a responsibility. Some Deputies referred to the fact that older people bought drink for young people. That is now in the past because the Minister has provided for such people to be made responsible and prosecuted. That is the reason for putting the label on drink in order that it can be traced back to a particular off-licence.
That sounds like fun.
This Bill is critically important to the future of this country and our young people. It requires constructive debate, rather than smart comments about at what time of the day the Minister should be smiling. I would like the issue with regard to hotels revisited on Committee Stage or before, although I do not have an alternative proposal.
I welcome this Bill and congratulate the Minister for bringing it to the House and for the fine work he has done since becoming Minister. I especially welcome identity cards for young people under 21 years of age. This measure is badly needed because under-age drinking must not be allowed to continue. Improvements will come from the new penalties on publicans and parents. I welcome the new penalties for publicans who continue to serve drink to people who are already drunk. It is about time this legislation was introduced. The problem of our drink culture is a serious one. Everything revolves around the pub and excessive drinking is causing significant problems in society. The accident and emergency units of our hospitals are busy every weekend with drink-related problems. Many parents and spouses stay awake at night worrying if their sons, daughters or spouses will come home safely from the pub, if at all.
The Bill has not gone far enough as regards off-licences. Many off-licences have signs advertising that they are open until 11 p.m. or 11.30 p.m. This gives every opportunity for young people to buy cans and drink them later. These off-licences should be closed whenever the shop itself closes at 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. I fully support and praise the people who have organised the No Name Clubs and the gardaí who have worked hard to ensure that they work as they should. I welcome the earlier closing hours on Thursday nights and feel that closing times for the rest of the weekend should be strictly implemented since they are probably too late at the moment. The onus for closure must be on the publicans since it is not possible for the gardaí to check every pub every night.
I have concerns about serving people cocktails of drink which served together can contain very high levels of alcohol. Some of these drinks can be dangerous. The section of the Bill which does not allow children into hotels after 8 p.m. needs clarification. Children, properly supervised by parents, should have access to hotels where food is served after 8 p.m.
If the whole drink culture is to change, we need to come up with entertainment that is better and more attractive than drink. We need to conduct urgent research to this end. We should support all the sporting bodies which are trying to keep people out of pubs. I commend the Bill to the House.
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on the Intoxicating Liquor Bill 2003. I have a slightly different view on the debate. It is one from which all sides of the House can learn, rather than use as an opportunity to ridicule or attack personalities. Rather, the debate is about this Bill and that is what we should focus on.
While I welcome the debate on the issue of alcohol and abuse, this Bill is not well thought out and lacks real substance in dealing with the issue. The Bill is anti-youth, anti-children, anti-family and anti-common sense. The Bill claims to be concerned with combating drunkenness and disorderly conduct as well as addressing the problems of under-age and binge drinking. We all agree that we have a major problem and that urgent reforms are needed before we pass more laws that the vast majority of people know will not be enforced. We need to look at causes and come up with creative ideas about binge drinking and under-age drinking.
It is wrong to blame all our young people and other adults who drink in a moderate manner and obey the laws of the land. We are too quick to label people and, at the same time, allow the anti-social elements set the agenda on this issue. We should always remind ourselves that they are a minority which needs to be tackled. However, to blame all sections of society in such a manner is a recipe for disaster.
I strongly disagree with section 10 and the amendment of prohibited hours on Thursdays. It is time to grow up. I do not want to live in a nanny state. I have listened to all the views on this issue and I am more determined to oppose the sections of the Bill which are not rooted in common sense. Anti-social behaviour is a community and policing issue and must be dealt with in such a manner. Throwing people onto the streets at the same time is a recipe for disaster. We need to stagger our closing times.
Section 12 on drinking-up time is off the wall. For me, it is a matter of personal choice. We all know that the vast majority of people behave in a responsible manner coming out of pubs and clubs at different times. We need full co-operation between the publicans, the night-clubs and the Garda. If clubs are allowed to stay open later, until the streets are cleared from the pubs, they will have a significant input into the problem of public disorder. We need supervision and control. I have met with publicans and night-club owners over the last few days and, having had a cynical view, I found them to be reasonable people, as opposed to the cowboys many people think they are. They too want a proper legislative base. They want top-quality public safety and responsible leisure activities, something with which I am sure the Minister agrees. People who get involved in binge drinking have a deeper problem. The way to deal with this is through educational and personal development and support at an early age. We have to look at the person, the issues of self esteem and male aggression in society. If we do not tackle these issues, we are going nowhere in this debate. The message from an early age has got to be of respect and awareness of the dangers of alcohol with the continued emphasis on moderation. This is done in other countries, so there is no reason it cannot be done here. Bringing it in in any state is not part of the solution.
I urge the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to look again at aspects of this Bill. He must show a common sense approach and then we all win. I do not blame the Minister for all the ills in society and neither do I blame all bar staff. The blame lies with the individual and his responsibilities. People make choices and let us zone in on the reason they have made bad choices, whether through binge drinking or kicking someone to death on the ground. It is a problem for the community, for the family and policing and justice. That is the way we must tackle this issue.
On the question of justice, we have seen today the tragic case of a disgraceful verdict with regard to a man being kicked to death. I understand the hurt and the anger of the family in that particular case and I give them my support. They feel they did not get justice.
I worked in inner city Dublin for 20 years, where most of the kids came from some of the poorest backgrounds. Despite the massive poverty and disadvantage, 85% of them did not get involved in drugs, binge drinking or anti-social behaviour. It does not take a social scientist to see why. The reason is, despite the poverty, the social disadvantage and the negative surroundings, the family unit was solid and the extended family was supportive. The 15% that got involved in binge drinking and drugs came from dysfunctional family backgrounds. We can all learn from good parenting and quality family units. By family unit, I mean all sorts as there were many forms of it in the school where I worked. The key point was that if the parents were solid, in single or double family units, the children came to school, did their work and got on with their lives. These solid parents taught me a lesson which is one wider society should learn.
It is not all bad news. We have problems and we need a response. However, I urge the Minister to consider some of the ideas I have put forward. Deputy Dennehy referred to the excellent project in Cork city where two or three nights a week, 1,200 under-age people are brought together in an alcohol-free disco. It is supervised and policed properly between the club and the Garda. This project has proved a major success and delivered necessary services to young people.
I disagree with Deputy Dennehy when he refers to our pub culture as the basis of the problem. We can have an impact on our culture and alcohol consumption. If one is brought up among a family or neighbours who are moderate drinkers – I am one – and made aware of the danger of alcohol, one will learn positively from that. The French have given us an example of this. From the day children enter pre-school, they are given this sense of civic responsibility. They are taught this in pre-school to junior infants, right up to society. When I was sitting on a beach on Bastille Day with thousands of teenagers, there were no bottles, cans or anti-social behaviour, just people enjoying themselves. This is the ethos we should foster and learn from. When we talk about republicanism, that kind of civic republicanism is the way forward. I urge the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to consider my views.
I will cut to the chase even though I wish to say many things about the Bill. Suffice to say there are many aspects to the Bill that are agreeable. I have no problems with sections 20 and 21. Section 17 is not particularly enforceable, but I have no problem with it. I acknowledge that in his speech the Minister alluded to the forthcoming codification Bill. He also acknowledged that the Ministers for Transport and Health and Children will both bring in legislation that will tie in with drink-driving and alcohol advertising and sponsorship. However, it is a long time coming and I hope it comes soon.
This Bill is a holding exercise and it has several flaws. I am saying this to be constructive and not get back at the Minister for accusing me of having constituency envy in a previous speech. I will do that another time as this is a more important issue we are discussing. Section 14 on the 9 p.m. ruling raises a number of issues. Although the definition of a "bar" is taken from the Intoxicating Liquor Act 1988, the issue of what constitutes a "bar" is crucial. If one has a function room with a bar, then one cannot have people of a certain age after 9 p.m. even though it is primarily a function room. I point this out in my capacity as spokesperson on tourism but also in the context of families who attend weddings in hotels. Many hotels make their profits out of these types of functions where the function room doubles up as a bar. It is not unreasonable to have under-age people in a function room with a bar given the large number of responsible parents there. This section needs to be looked at again.
I refer to section 9 and the one chance rule where the Minister does not believe even one chance should be given. If the rule is broken that should be it. Obviously, the introduction of new rules will have teething problems. This is an issue of enforcement. If someone makes a mistake once, it is pointed out. If there is stringent enforcement then he or she will not get away with it the second time. It is not a matter of pubs feeling they will get away with it the first time because, as in many cases relating to the law in this State, then they feel they will get away with it numerous times. However, if there is proper stringent enforcement, then the one chance rule should remain.
With regard to section 10 on Thursday night closing time, I do not agree with the Commission on Liquor Licensing on this or the Minister's use of it in the Bill. As Deputy Finian McGrath said, it is a social issue where people should have personal responsibility. Why people get drunk and engage in violence is not impacted on by Thursday night closing time or agreeing with Deputy Deasy and extending this to Friday and Saturday nights.
Section 12 relates to entertainment during drinking-up time. This is a ludicrous proposal. Staggering is not what a Deputy does coming out of the Dáil bar after an Adjournment debate. It refers to varying the closing times of night-clubs where one night-club can close at one time and the next can close at another. By giving them a variance of a half hour between times, people will not be coming out of them at the same time. There are a large number of people who do not drink. I am not a teetotaller but I do not necessarily drink to excess. I have often gone into a night-club because I enjoy dancing and have not drank because I was the designated driver. This proposal in the Bill is discriminating against non-drinkers in stopping the entertainment. It also encourages people to drink quicker and leave the premises whereas if the dancing is still on some will stay while others go. People go to night-clubs primarily to dance while others do so to drink.
I did not study Latin in second level so I hope I am correct in interpreting the old saying in vino veritas as meaning when drunk, the truth. In many cases when people have a few gargles, it exacerbates fundamental personality traits. As Deputy Finian McGrath has said in areas where people have the backup of family and the community – a stable background – they are less likely to engage in anti-social and violent behaviour, exacerbated by alcohol. In a large number of situations people have been beaten badly or even killed arising from corner boys who have been drinking. However, the corner boys are not the ones drinking in the pubs, but the ones lying in wait whose hobby is beating the hell out of those who drink in pubs. It is to satisfy their sick minds, exacerbated by the effects of alcohol. The illness that makes them want to do that in the first place relates to other social issues.
Other actions can be taken, such as an investigation of the continental approach, because we might be able to deal with being given responsibility if more gardaí are on the streets and there is proper enforcement. In terms of alcohol consumption leading to violence, the demolition of community employment schemes, bad planning and an education system that does not invest in primary level cause the conditions that lead people to exacerbate their anti-social tendencies through alcohol. If these were dealt with rather than an attempt being made to be the policeman for responsible drinkers, we might solve the problem.
Unlike Deputy Gogarty, I am not prepared to let bygones be bygones quite so quickly. The Bill has three characteristics of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, with which we are becoming all too familiar, namely, the lawyer's craft in finding ways to use legislation to undermine civil liberties, the eye to the public relations stroke, and disregard for the proper scrutiny of legislation by the Oireachtas.
This hugely controversial legislation, which was only published on 19 June, is being forced and railroaded through the Oireachtas this week. Normal procedures are being set aside and it is intended to press it through Committee Stage within hours of the conclusion of Second Stage. I already voiced my objection to this on the Order of Business.
This is the type of legislation that brings the Oireachtas into disrepute. The Minister needs to be seen to be doing something about drink-related assaults, so this Bill has been cobbled together. With the provisions regarding alcohol, we have dangerous and regressive sections which undermine the rights of the citizens and the role of the Equality Authority in vindicating those rights. This is a Bill on which I have no doubt most people will have an opinion. For good or ill, alcohol forms a huge part of the social life in Ireland. There will be many different views on the measures proposed, yet even the range of views in the Oireachtas will not be properly aired nor the Bill properly scrutinised. That is why I say the legislation and the method of its passage through the Oireachtas brings the process of passing legislation into disrepute.
There is an assumption underlining the Bill that needs to be challenged, namely, that alcohol abuse and alcohol related crime are predominantly issues for young people. I dispute that; it is a myth. It is hypocrisy for this predominantly middle-aged assembly to lecture young people on drink when the abuse of alcohol is a problem for every generation and when young people follow what I can only regard as the well trodden path of their elders. The truth is that young people have been let down by the failure of the older generation to develop a more mature approach to alcohol in society and to address other deficiencies in terms of social choice and options.
Section 2 is unworkable and will not be popular with the Garda Síochána. It is a recipe for conflict between gardaí, patrons of licensed premises and publicans. I can envisage a few token efforts to enforce it and when its folly becomes clear, it will be quietly dropped. It is folly for legislation to attempt to define drunkenness as the Bill does. There will be cases where courts will be asked to decide, on the opinion of a garda, whether a person was drunk. Under the definition in the Bill, the decision will be based on the perception of a garda that a person "might endanger himself or herself or any other person". This is ridiculously vague and is clearly open to abuse by gardaí.
We are all familiar with the phenomenon, especially in rural areas, where a system of favouritism often exists regarding the enforcement of licensing laws. Certain publicans are favoured by gardaí and a blind eye is turned to infringements of the licensing laws. Others who are out of favour can be subject to what I regard as an over the top approach, and section 2 pro vides, regrettably, yet another outlet for that abuse.
I welcomed and supported the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2000 and am not present to provide opposition for oppositions sake, rather to scrutinise seriously what the Minister proposes. That Act extended opening hours in a sane and sensible way. I made the point that it was simplistic to make a direct link between opening hours and alcohol related problems. The Bill brings about yet another change with closing time on Thursday reverting to 11.30 p.m. from the 12.30 p.m. provided. Does anyone on the Government side really believe this will achieve anything except further confusion and annoyance for the many people who know how to behave and handle their drink? It is very frustrating and will have a deleterious effect in terms of visitors to the country.
The Irish Hotels Federation has raised serious objections to the sections that deal with the presence of people under 18 years on licensed premises. It believes the legislation has the potential to damage the tourism industry, and there is some validity in its arguments. The rushing through of the Bill does not allow proper consideration of the federation's concerns or the expressed concerns of other representative groups.
By far the most serious aspect of the Bill is the undermining of the Equal Status Act and the Equality Authority. My party opposes the removal in section 19 of the jurisdiction of the Equality Tribunal to hear complaints of discrimination by licensed establishments and the exemption of licensees from the Equal Status Act. The objections of civil liberties and human rights groups to this section have been dismissed and that is a mistake. I deplore the attitude of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to these groups who are broadly accepted as watchdogs of our democracy. He referred in a recent contribution on another Bill to such people and others who keep an important eye on human rights as the "modern human rights babble". That outlook underlines the Bill and is something of which the Minister should be ashamed. I call for rejection of the Bill.
I wish to share my time with Deputies Batt O'Keeffe and Hanafin.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
The Bill is being introduced to deal with the increasing level of alcoholic intoxication occurring in society. This is due to a variety of factors, most if not all of which have been alluded to by previous speakers. This alarming increase in alcohol intake is a cause of grave concern to us all. Of particular concern is the obvious increase in alcohol consumption among the young. There is no doubt that children as young as 11 or 12 drink alcohol, and there is compelling evidence that a certain number of them drink to excess.
Frequent reference is made to the growing drug problem in society, especially among the young. Let us not forget that alcohol is a drug, albeit one licensed by the State. While it can be enjoyed in moderation by the vast majority of people, for some reason, Irish people appear to have a predilection in engaging in excessive alcohol consumption. Whether this is genetic or multifactorial in origin is open to debate, but it is the case.
This is a factor that wreaks havoc on an increasing section of the population. The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children is investigating the problem and we have heard evidence from the drinks industry, manufacturers, publicans and accident and emergency consultants whose hospital departments see the consequences of excessive alcohol consumption every day and especially every night. The investigations we have undertaken are not yet complete but the evidence so far indicates that there is a serious problem. This Bill is the start of a process that will deal with some of the aspects of this problem, particularly the legal aspects concerning the availability of alcohol.
The Bill is radical and timely and the Minister is to be congratulated for responding to this growing social menace by introducing it so promptly after receiving the report of the Commission on Liquor Licensing two months ago. Many of the recommendations contained in the commission's final report find expression in the provisions contained in the Bill.
Sections 4 to 10, inclusive, deal with the requirements of the holders of the licence of a public house to maintain an orderly house. Most publicans will welcome the ability to refrain from serving persons who are drunk. They now have the right, backed by the law, to refuse to serve alcohol to persons who are intoxicated, although most publicans already do this. Alcohol is a drug and the publican, as the holder of a State licence, has a duty and responsibility to the person serving alcohol in his premises and to other customers in the public house to maintain an orderly house. If excessive alcohol is consumed, drunkenness will ensue and that person will be a danger to themselves and to society at large. The right to hold a licence for a public house carries responsibilities with it and this Bill clearly illustrates those responsibilities.
Section 11 is a new departure for the licensing laws in this State. There is now a role for local authorities in the determination of the duration of special exemption orders in their administrative areas. There has been a lot of talk about increasing the role and powers of local councillors and some of that talk is hot air, but this is a positive development. Local authorities must now consult the gardaí and others, including publicans and health professionals, before adopting resolutions regarding special exemption orders. The District Court still has the final say in the granting of the orders but now local people have an input into decisions in their own areas. This is a positive step forward for local democracy.
There is considerable debate on the changes proposed in section 12 to the 30 minute drinking up period. The commission recommended that no entertainment be provided during this time so the original purpose of an orderly clearing of the premises is allowed to occur. Some groups, including night club owners and hoteliers, argued that prohibiting people from dancing during this period will result in a mass exodus on to the streets at the same time, thus increasing the risk of disturbance, but the purpose of this section is to allow patrons of bars and dance halls a period of time to finish their drinks leisurely to avoid a mass exodus. Some people will leave immediately the entertainment stops and others will do so during the remaining half hour. This will allow a controlled exit of patrons and should help to reduce the risk of civil and public disorder.
Sections 13 to 16 deal with under-age drinking, a very important issue. It is not fair for publicans to have to estimate a person's age solely by their appearance – a method of identification is essential. There is a worry that falsification of the age card could occur. Perhaps co-operation between the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the Department of Foreign Affairs is needed so that a card clearly identifying the holder by date of birth, photograph and PPS number, backed up by the authority of the State, could be produced.
Plain clothes gardaí will now have the same powers to enter a public house as uniformed gardaí. This is a major change in our law and must be carefully considered by the Minister. I support the concept of plain clothes gardaí enforcing the law but their authority to do so must come from a superintendent or higher ranking officer. Distinction must be maintained between a garda on duty, in uniform or plain clothes, and an off duty garda, otherwise confusion will reign and civil rights could become hopelessly compromised. The sections of the Bill referring to the procedure of special promotions are also to be welcomed.
Concerns have been expressed by hoteliers who worry about the sections of the Bill that prohibit the presence of people under 18 years of age in public bar areas. This should be examined in greater depth and a previous speaker alluded to the need for legislation to distinguish between a bar area and a lounge area. I welcome the Bill.
This Bill would not be necessary if personal responsibility was taken by brewers, publicans, parents and those involved in public order offences. In Cork a young man died as a result of an unwarranted attack. After that attack, I asked a senior garda about rostering and he told me that 60 gardaí were tied up in the District Court the following Monday morning dealing with minor offences. We must consider allowing a senior officer to take those cases to court so the 60 gardaí could be released for duty on the streets.
It is ironic that publicans employ security who throw on to the street people who have taken too much drink and the publican is no longer responsible.
The Minister has shown great courage in introducing measures that are absolutely necessary to deal with a situation that has led to a major increase in public order offences. Anyone who witnessed the presentation of the accident and emergency consultants before the Joint Committee on Health and Children would have been alarmed at the details of young people being brought in comatose, developing liver problems at an early age and being abandoned by their friends when they fall down in the streets.
Everyone is aware of the code of advertising of the drinks industry and how it was observed in the breach. We are all aware of the unacceptable promotional practices of the drinks industry and they cannot be allowed to continue. The Ministers for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Health and Children are absolutely correct in outlawing happy hours and ensuring that the breweries do not have people working for them on campuses to encourage young people to drink in the early afternoon.
When people are disorderly in pubs, there should be an onus on the publican to ensure that the gardaí are informed before these people are thrown out. This Bill goes a long way to ensure that this will happen.
It is about time publicans were brought to book about selling drink to drunk people. They serve too much drink and then protest, asking how they are supposed to know that a person is drunk. It is clear to most publicans. There is much that is positive in this Bill for them and the Minister should place an onus on them to refuse service to those who are obviously drunk.
Acting Chairman
There are eight and a half minutes left.
I heard somebody mention the prohibitive hours earlier. Most people are now paid on a Thursday evening and the Minister is correct to ensure that the hours on Thursday night are prohibitive.
It will make a major difference.
It will make a difference in terms of absenteeism and other problems that we used to associate with Monday mornings.
Acting Chairman
Sorry, Deputy, I misled you on the time remaining. There is less than five minutes left.
There is a case to be made about allowing under 18s on premises. We should look again at the case of families out for the day in the summer who want to go to a pub for a meal but who will now have to leave the children in their car while they are having that meal. A mechanism can be found by which we can accommodate both situations.
I chose to speak on this Bill because, first, I believe it is important legislation and, second, it is based on the commission established to examine the abuse of intoxicating liquor by youths to which I made a personal submission. I did that because I am conscious of the fact that alcohol is having a serious effect on the lives of young people.
I welcome the Bill because it is not about trying to curtail young people enjoying themselves. It is about ensuring that one person's good time will not lead to another person ending up in hospital. It is about ensuring that young people do not drink themselves into oblivion and that we tackle the negative social and health effects of the Irish love affair with alcohol. This Bill goes some way towards addressing that, although I accept it will take much more than just one legislative measure.
We have all seen evidence of random assaults. We have also seen the accident and emergency statistics where one in four cases now relates to alcohol. We have seen young people who cannot be responsible in any way for what they do but who become involved not only in violent behaviour but in risky sexual behaviour. They are then incapable of facing up to the consequences in terms of public order and health.
I am aware the Minister for Health and Children is examining issues regarding advertising, which is to be welcomed, but this particular legislation aims to ensure that young people cannot get access to alcohol. It will penalise the licensee and the customer if they aim to contravene the new regulations, all of which I welcome.
There would appear to be no effective barrier currently to young people having access to alcohol. If a 16 year old can be in a bar legally up to closing time, how is any garda meant to know whether they are drinking coke or vodka and coke? It is impossible for anybody to be able to identify that. The Commission on Liquor Licensing pointed out that the proofs necessary were unreasonably onerous but the new proofs will make the job of enforcement easier. The fact that young people cannot now be in the bar after 9 p.m. is to be welcomed. Like everybody else, I have had correspondence from the hotels and I believe the Minister addressed some of their concerns here last night. What we are talking about is not just keeping young people out of pubs. We are trying to change a culture where everybody believes that the only entertainment is in the pub. The very same people who would talk to us about the need for early intervention in health, education and family support should say to us now that what we need in this area is early intervention to ensure that from a very young age children can be excluded from pubs. In that way, they will not accept that the pub is the only culture or form of entertainment.
It is obvious that many licensed premises throughout the country do not feel under any threat from a potential closure. When one compares the number of convictions and prosecutions in Dublin to those in Mayo, for example, it is obvious that cases are not being brought forward. If the law is to be enforced properly and is to be successful, it must be done uniformly throughout the country.
I am aware the Minister is examining the whole idea of a labelling scheme for off-licence products. Even in my own constituency, I am aware of the difficulties in that area. If young people are drinking on the beach in Killiney or on Killiney Hill, who is to know from where they got the drink? It might not be evidence in itself but at least it will ensure that those people who are irresponsible will be caught.
This legislation is crucial in so far as it tackles the issues of young people and the fact that they are able to get drink easily and are availing of that opportunity. I welcome the legislation as a contribution towards curbing the problems of excessive drinking.
Acting Chairman
I now call on the Minister to reply.
I wish to make a contribution to this debate.
I will give the Deputy some of my time.
Two of us want to make a brief contribution. Perhaps we could have three minutes each, if the Minister is agreeable.
Acting Chairman
The Minister has up to 15 minutes to reply.
I will give the Deputies three minutes each.
Acting Chairman
Is it agreed that the Minister will give three minutes each to Deputies Crawford and Sean Ryan? Agreed.
I thank the Minister. I appreciate the opportunity to say a few words on the Bill, with which I am very disappointed. The Minister spoke a great deal about what needed to be done and we believed his commitment was sincere. The Minister said the Bill was an interim measure and it certainly needs to be beefed up in a major way in the not too distant future. I am aware that other Ministers deal with issues such as driving licences and the implications of drink for young drivers, and the advertising issue is possibly a job for the Minister for Health and Children, but it is unfortunate that these issues were not linked to deal with this serious problem. I listened to one of the Independents talk about the creation of a nanny state. That is a joke. We have to realise that alcohol abuse is a very serious problem which must be dealt with in a serious way.
We extended the opening hours, although I was one of the few people who spoke against that at the time, but it is a joke that we are addressing the Thursday night hours and not those of Friday or Saturday night. Those are the nights I get the telephone calls from the elderly and others who suffer abuse. They are the nights that cause the problems in the accident and emergency departments. They are the nights when the deaths from road accidents occur. That is an area to which the Minister must give serious consideration.
On the whole issue of the family structure and objecting to somebody being on the premises, I know the Minister has changed the time from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. but there is a whole grey area in terms of the definition of a function room, pub or club. Those are the issues that need to be clarified in order that there will not be an abuse of the system. I was in a public house in Canada not long ago which had a rule about smoking, yet it provided an open area outside the premises. I thank the Minister for the opportunity to say a few words about the Bill.
I thank the Minister for giving me the opportunity to speak on the Bill. There is no doubt that the drinking pattern of parents influences the attitudes of children towards drink. It is very difficult to get teenagers to accept the slogan, "Don't do as I do, do as I say", especially if parents or guardians are excessive drinkers. The old attitude of tolerance of excessive drinking and drink-related offences must be replaced by a new attitude of responsibility. That responsibility must be shared by everyone – the Government, by means of taxation legislation, those who produce and sell alcohol and those who consume it. Society must create the environment and introduce the measures which will help to change the existing pattern of behaviour. Alcohol advertisements deliberately set out to reinforce the link between drinking, socialising and the belief that the use of alcohol contributes to social and sexual success. That issue must be addressed.
The problem of young people binge drinking at weekends must be addressed. As somebody who represents Dublin North, I had representations from members of Neighbourhood Watch, which represents a population of up to 30,000, in regard to late night drinking at weekends. They said that there is a wider dimension to this issue. Everyone, whether a drinker or licensee, has to take responsibility for bringing the problem under control. We must also reduce its effects on residents of adjoining communities. Unlike Swords, many towns do not have bar extensions.
I welcome the provision to reinstate 11.30 p.m. and 12 midnight closing times on Thursday nights and favour considering the possibility of extending them to Saturday and Sunday nights. This is not provided for in the Bill. In continental countries and Britain people do not drink late into the night. In the past five years consumption of alcohol here has rapidly risen to the top of the European league due to affluence. We must all accept responsibility for this.
Many people argue there is sufficient legislation to address the issue. I want this legislation enforced to allow people in communities to address the issue and ensure their social lives are not destroyed. If we do not work together to change attitudes, there will be a sorry tale of woe further down the line.
I thank Deputies for their contributions to the debate. There is general, though not universal, agreement that a change in the law was needed in certain respects. With a number of Deputies taking polar opposite views of what should be done, we have the full gamut of opinion in the House. Deputies Crawford, Deasy and others in the Fine Gael Party stated the Bill does not go far enough and much more serious measures must be taken, especially on licensing hours. Others, with equal vehemence, have argued that it would be a strategic mistake to attempt to tinker with licensing hours and we should not become hung up on the question, but instead allow people to drink until whatever time they like in the evenings and owners of premises to run them on that basis. I am fairly sure about one issue – I do not say this glibly – namely, that when one is under attack from both ends of the spectrum, there is some consolation in thinking one cannot be entirely wrong on an issue.
Deputies Deasy and Crawford and other members of the Fine Gael Party have taken the view, echoed to an extent by Deputy Sean Ryan, that we should consider making a change to closing times on Friday and Saturday. The real problems in terms of disorder, youngsters being involved in terrible car crashes and so forth arise between 3 a.m. and 4 a.m., whether on the streets of Dublin, Cavan or elsewhere, as people leave clubs and congregate. This is the time when public disorder, fatalities, sexual assaults and all the other activities occur. The 11.30 p.m. or 12.30 p.m. closing time is not relevant in this context, which is my worry. Under the law, as it stands, special exemption orders operate with effect from whatever is the closing time of the premises in question until 2.30 a.m. As far as the behaviour of people coming out of clubs is concerned, therefore, the normal closing time for pubs does not matter. The real problem is what happens at 3 a.m. and 4 a.m., which is decided by reference to the time the late night places close.
Deputy Deenihan and others raised the issue of forgeries. I accept there will probably be attempts to forge identity cards. The Bill introduces an obligation on people in the 18 to 21 years age band to produce identity cards. As these will be police cards, persons in this age group will not be able to enter a premises by waving student identification cards at security staff or barmen. Only one document will be accepted and it will be a serious criminal offence to make dishonest use of it or create one dishonestly. This is as much as I can do on this issue.
I accept the points made by Deputies opposite that the scheme will not be fool-proof and the ingenuity of young people will be used on occasion to attempt to find ways to circumvent this law – this should not happen. Given that publicans back the measure and are in favour of it being mandatory, I have no choice but to make it mandatory to use the official card.
Some Deputies raised the fact that the Bill does not include measures on advertising or the Road Traffic Act. Although these areas are not my ministerial responsibility, they are under consideration. The Government is not thinking in separate channels. Discussions are ongoing between the relevant Ministers on to health, education, advertising, motor law and the provisions of the Bill. The legislation is only one part of a broader response.
Since I published the Bill a few weeks ago, I have met various interested parties and lobbies. Each group started by telling me it recognised the extent of the problem and fully supported the general thrust of the Bill, but then followed this up by stating it had a problem with section X or subsection Y, which it would like amended or removed and, furthermore, an important matter had been overlooked and a new section Z was needed to address it. This is the kind of response I have had. I have stated repeatedly that I accept the good faith of all those I have met, some of whom have made valuable comments on the Bill. However, this legislation is a measured, balanced response to current circumstances and has not been introduced to satisfy one interest rather than another.
Next year's codification Bill will offer us an opportunity to reconsider the questions of opening hours, boutique pubs versus super-pubs and the size of pubs. These issues could not be adequately discussed and one could not arrive at a view on them in the few short weeks which have elapsed between the fourth report of the commission and the publication and passage through the House of the Bill.
A number of Deputies described the role envisaged for local authorities as unworkable, unreasonable, unacceptable or in even tougher terms. On 20 January 2003 the secretary of the Association of Municipal Authorities in Ireland wrote to me congratulating me on the proposal to give local authorities a role. We cannot have it every way. Perhaps the association in question misjudged some of its members views, but not everything we have done is wrong.
The Minister should consult us.
I will comment on an issue, on which the Fine Gael Party supports me, namely the issue of children and licensed premises. If we do not have a rule that at some point in the evening under age persons must clear a premises, there is no point in requiring people of an older age to carry any card at all. If they are mixing in licensed premises and the bars of licensed premises with large numbers of 16 or 17 year olds, the law would fall into complete disrepute.
I have been listening carefully to the debate on the question of what is or is not a bar. If there is any way in which I can make the law clearer, I will do so. Hoteliers should be aware that I will not open up a loophole which would allow them to place a "Function Room" sign in front of a bar and bring in 16 and 17 year olds without evidence of age cards to drink in it as if it were a bar. Whereas I am open to tightening and refining the definition of "bar" in the course of the debate on the Bill, I will not accede to the general proposition, which I regard as wrong, that this Bill is in principle anti-family or that it is somehow pro-family to allow youngsters to hang around bars between 9 p.m. and 11.30 p.m. I will not accede to the general proposition, which I regard as wrong, that this Bill is, in principle, anti-family—
It is also anti-tourist.
—or that it is somehow pro-family to allow youngsters hang around bars between 9 p.m. and 11.30 p.m. I do not think that is pro-family, it is pro-hotelier, and that is significantly different.
Question put: "That the words proposed to be deleted stand."
Tá
|
Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, Barry.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Niall.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Seamus.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe. |
Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Cassidy, Donie.Coughlan, Mary.Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Curran, John.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dempsey, Tony. Dennehy, John. |
Tá–continued
|
Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fleming, Seán.Fox, Mildred.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Hoctor, Máire.Jacob, Joe.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Seamus.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McDowell, Michael.McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael. |
Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M. J.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donovan, Denis.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Peter.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V. |
Níl
|
Boyle, Dan.Broughan, Thomas P.Burton, Joan.Costello, Joe.Crowe, Seán.Cuffe, Ciarán.Ferris, Martin.Gilmore, Eamon.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Gregory, Tony.Harkin, Marian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.McGrath, Finian. |
Morgan, Arthur.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.Pattison, Seamus.Penrose, Willie.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sherlock, Joe.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
The Bill is declared to be read a Second Time in accordance with Standing Order 119(2)(i). I understand it is proposed to refer the Bill to the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. Does the Minister wish to move the motion of referral now?