Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 14 Oct 2014

Vol. 854 No. 1

Financial Resolution No. 1: Tobacco Products Tax

I move:

(1) THAT for the purposes of the tax charged by virtue of section 72 of the Finance Act 2005 (No. 5 of 2005), that Act be amended, with effect as on and from 15 October 2014, by substituting the following for Schedule 2 to that Act (as amended by section 52 of the Finance (No. 2) Act 2013 (No. 41 of 2013)):

"SCHEDULE 2

RATES OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS TAX

(With effect as on and from 15 October 2014)

Description of Product

Rate of Tax

Cigarettes …. .... .... ….

Cigars .... .... .... ….

Fine-cut tobacco for the rolling of cigarettes .... .... .... .…

Other smoking tobacco .... ….

Rate of tax at­-

(a) except where paragraph (b) applies, €255.69 per thousand together with an amount equal to 8.85 per cent of the price at which the cigarettes are sold by retail, or

(b) €289.98 per thousand in respect of cigarettes sold by retail where the rate of tax would be less than that rate had the rate been calculated in accordance with paragraph (a).

Rate of tax at €295.350 per kilogram.

Rate of tax at €273.177 per kilogram.

Rate of tax at €204.902 per kilogram.

"

(2) It is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act 1927 (No. 7 of 1927).

This resolution provides for excise duty increases on tobacco products with effect from midnight. The increase amounts to 40 cent, inclusive of VAT, on a pack of 20 cigarettes in the most popular price category together with pro rata increases for other tobacco products, with an additional 20 cent increase on a 25g pouch of roll your own tobacco. The price of a pack of 20 cigarettes in the most popular price category, assuming the increase is passed through to the final retail price, will increase to €10. The excise duty component of this price will be €6, and the total tax, inclusive of VAT, will be €7.87, which represents nearly 79% of the price.

The price and tax component of cigarettes in Ireland is among the highest in the EU. The high rates of tax prevailing here reflect the long-standing commitment of successive Governments to use taxation as an instrument to discourage smoking, especially among younger people. These increases will ensure the tobacco tax continues to play an important role in discouraging consumption of tobacco products.

The quantity of roll your own tobacco consumed in Ireland has nearly tripled since 2008, although it still represents a relatively small percentage of the tobacco smoked in Ireland. The additional increase in the tax on roll your own will bring the tax on that product more in line with that on cigarettes.

The Government recognises that high prices and taxes make Ireland an attractive location for tobacco smugglers. The Revenue Commissioners are very conscious of the threat this poses to legitimate business and to the Exchequer and have achieved considerable successes against the illicit trade in tobacco products over recent years. One measure of their success is the reduction in the amount of illicit cigarettes consumed in Ireland, from 15% of the total consumed in 2009 to 11% of the total in 2013. The Revenue Commissioners will continue to make tackling the trade in illicit tobacco products a key objective and the Government will ensure all legislative action necessary to combat the illicit tobacco trade is taken. The measure is estimated to yield €6 million in 2014 and €53 million in a full year.

We will support the financial resolution. I have sympathy for the hard-pressed smoker who is addicted to tobacco and who has been hit time and again with excise increases. I support the objective of working towards a smoke-free Ireland and we commend the Government on adopting the strategy and implementing the policies designed to bring it about. We accept the increase will hit people in the pocket and the issue is whether adequate resources are being given to the Revenue Commissioners and Customs and Excise to deal with the importation, smuggling and sale of illegal cigarettes in this jurisdiction. That is depriving the Exchequer of vast sums of money and defeating the purpose of this initiative on public health grounds. If people still have access to cheap cigarettes, this is not a deterrent and will not incentivise them to try harder to kick the habit if they want to quit smoking. We support the resolution on public health grounds and it brings in more than €50 million in a full year.

Primarily, we support this on public health grounds because other measures have not worked. Consumption levels are decreasing but many young people are starting to smoke. Given the insidious nature of the product, if people start at a young age, the likelihood is that they will remain addicted for the rest of their lives. That is an horrendous outcome for many people and is primarily why we support the measure.

Tobacco causes serious societal and health damage throughout the State and has a massive impact on the health budget. I welcome the progressive moves by the Government with regard to trying to reduce the level of smoking within the State. Unless the measure is backed up with equal measures to stop smuggling tobacco, we will see a change from legally purchased tobacco to smuggled tobacco and the health impact we desire will not be met. One of my worries is that this may be a revenue raising stream.

It is also important to remember the large number of retailers in the State for whom this is a part of their product mix and one of the most important elements of footfall. The retail sector has lost many jobs over recent years. If the measure simply transfers the purchase of the product from the legal sector to the illegal sector, another section of enterprise will be badly hit. I welcome the positive moves to try to reduce the number of smokers but the Government must focus on both ends of the problem.

Every year, I oppose this measure. I do so again this year and I intend to call a vote. I oppose 40 cent added to the price of 20 cigarettes because it is monumental hypocrisy for the Government to pretend this is primarily a health measure. It is no such thing and it is yet another naked revenue grab under the cover of health. The same Government put the interests of the financial markets, the bankers and the bondholders above people's health over the past three and half years, as did its predecessor Government composed of Fianna Fáil and the Green Party. The Government has also seen serious problems for our ordinary people in the health care system, yet it has the audacity to pretend this major increase is in the interest of the nation's health. It is another austerity measure.

I detest the cigarette companies and the cigarette industry. The major cigarette and tobacco corporations have made incredible profits on the back of addiction, and have cultivated, promoted and thrived on addiction. Cigarette companies are ruthless profit seekers and should be opposed at every turn. In fact, they should be nationalised and taken into public ownership. Then, policies could be developed. The Minister for Health should listen for a change.

He is otherwise engaged.

I apologise, I am referring to the former Minister for Health. Long before it became a fact, I supported the banning of all advertising of tobacco products. I strongly support the plain packaging proposals, which I hope will be pushed through despite the obvious strong lobbying by the industry behind, and in front of, the scenes. I support genuine measures to help those addicted to give up nicotine.

It is utterly hypocritical for the Government to walk in here today and state this is a measure to help people give up addiction to nicotine. The Government is as hypocritical on this issue as it has been on water conservation. It now has the audacity to argue that the onerous and savage water charges are to help conservation, when for 20 years, this Government and its predecessor did not lift a finger to ensure conservation of billions of litres of clean water-----

We should return to the topic of cigarettes.

-----through measures that could have been taken in the building industry.

This is a tax on poor people addicted to nicotine and another attack on working class people who, unfortunately, are addicted to nicotine. It will make their life even more difficult and more of a struggle than it is currently. The Government has shown its hypocrisy in the issue by giving a break to a section of the alcohol industry in the budget and by not increasing the taxes on the major sector of the alcohol industry. If a rampant increase in price is a genuine measure to reduce consumption, one should consider that alcohol causes untold damage in this country. I am not a prohibitionist by any means and I am in favour of assisting people to use these drugs sensibly. I try to do that and we should all do so. The Government is exhibiting total inconsistency in its approach, which has exposed this as simply a revenue-grabbing measure.

This measure is in keeping with the entire thrust of the budget. While it pretends to be the end of austerity and reverse its effects, it is consolidating the horrific and savage austerity imposed over the past six years. This is a further measure in that regard, as are the savage water charges. Therefore, I oppose the measure.

As our spokesperson on finance outlined, we will support this revenue-raising measure. We have had this discussion on numerous occasions and we had a debate last week in which I complimented the previous Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, on the stand we are taking with tobacco, and particularly the promotion of a tobacco-free society. That is not just for this country and we must ensure Europe will get that message. There are powerful and influential lobbies in the tobacco industry, and I know representatives have contacted the Minister. I ask him to stand firm and ensure he does not give in on the principle of ensuring our citizens can be free of the scourge of nicotine and tobacco addiction.

This is a revenue-raising measure and to a certain extent we camouflage it by calling it a public health policy initiative. There is no doubt that if the price of tobacco is increased, it will encourage people to give it up. At the same time we must be conscious that when the price of tobacco is increased to a certain level, it attracts and encourages illegal trade. Having observed that trade, it is clear that in many cases the cigarettes smuggled in this country are not made illegally in a far-flung place but are manufactured by companies on the listed stock exchanges of the world. They are sold legally in one country but shipped illegally to our country. The idea that the cigarettes are made in the back rooms of a shanty town in the Far East and Asia is not the case. The majority of these cigarettes are made by companies listed on the international stock exchanges.

This is seen as a public health measure but we need to encourage people to give up cigarettes and assist them in doing so. We must consider nicotine replacements and substitutes. There is no empirical evidence on whether such products assist people in giving up cigarettes but there is anecdotal evidence that people can stay off cigarettes longer by using nicotine substitution. Within the public health policy of encouraging people to give up cigarettes - this measure is meant to have that aim, although it is equally a revenue-raising measure - there should be a system in place to lighten the cost to an individual of giving up cigarettes. It can be quite expensive to give up cigarettes when one is buying nicotine patches or e-cigarettes. We should make tobacco more expensive but the quid pro quo should be to make nicotine substitution less expensive so as to encourage people in making the switch to something that is not as damaging to health.

We support the measure but as Deputy Higgins indicated, there are socioeconomic factors involved also. More people on low incomes smoke than those on high incomes, with more people with health issues in lower socioeconomic groups. This affects more severely those people in lower income groupings. By using medical cards or other supports, the HSE should in some way be obligated to assist and encourage people in giving up cigarettes.

As there are seven other speakers, I ask people to be as brief as possible. There are only 13 minutes left in the slot.

I will be as quick as I can but this is a matter that has been close to my heart for a long time. There are 5,200 Irish people dying every year in this country from tobacco-related illnesses, which is a staggering number. There are 700,000 Europeans dying every year from tobacco-related illnesses. This is the one legal product which, if used as prescribed by the manufacturer, will kill one of every two people who use it over a long period. Children are particularly price-sensitive and I have no doubt this measure will dissuade them from smoking.

People have discussed the illicit trade and statistics indicate that 90% of this trade is contraband rather than counterfeit. As Deputy Kelleher indicated, these products are manufactured by tobacco companies in other jurisdictions before being smuggled into Ireland. I want people to think long and hard before they drag long and hard. If a person has a cigarette that costs 50 cent, every time he or she looks at it that person could consider whether to use it then or wait until later. The smuggling rate has decreased from 15% to 11%. This measure will raise €53 million in a full year and €6 million this year alone. It is an important part of achieving a tobacco-free Ireland, which we hope to achieve by 2025. That will equate to less than 5% of people in the country smoking cigarettes.

I will not delay the House as Members know my views on the matter. There is a cost to our health service and our industries arising from tobacco, which causes ill-health, absenteeism and so on. There is also a cost to society. Tobacco causes pain, anguish and distress to individuals and families who must watch loved ones die from illnesses that would have been entirely predictable had they not become addicted to tobacco in the first place. I have heard people argue that this measure will disproportionately affect the working class: tobacco is one of the main reasons working class men and women die younger than other people. We must help them become aware of the problems of this drug - it is a toxic drug - and as Deputy Kelleher indicated, we should help them kick the habit. The easiest action to take is to ensure people do not take up the habit in the first place. I pay tribute again to Mr. Gerry Collins and his family for the bravery he showed in making that series of advertisements before he died of lung cancer. To him and his family I say a heart-felt "thank you". I do not know how many hundreds or thousands of lives their dad has saved.

If one sees a person dying from cancer and watches him or her slowly disappear as he or she becomes increasingly emaciated, if one looks at an individual whose lungs are so wrecked that he or she cannot walk from A to B without using an oxygen cylinder and if one sees people who have had strokes or heart attacks, have been left paralysed or have lost limbs as a result of the effects of peripheral vascular disease, one will be aware of the impact of tobacco. What I have described are just some of the things this horrible drug does.

Deputy Joe Higgins outlined his support for plain packaging, which I welcome. He also referred to the tobacco industry, an industry we do not have in this country. We are not anti-smoker but anti-smoking. As stated, we want to prevent people from taking up the habit. I have yet to meet a smoker - I include those in this Chamber who smoke and those who tend to represent smokers - who wants his or her children to take up the habit. Deputy Billy Kelleher was absolutely correct when he referred to the power of the tobacco companies and their absolute determination to undo the efforts of the Government and Members across the House to have a tobacco-free Ireland by 2025.

I commend the measure to the House. It is progressive, will help to fight the scourge of tobacco and protect children into the future.

As Chairman of the Joint Committee on Health and Children, I take the opportunity to voice my support for the measure before the House. This is a public health measure which is designed to ensure the tobacco industry will not have a veto on public health policy. It is also about sending a signal to the industry to the effect that we must protect children and those who want to give up smoking. That is why it is important that cessation and harm-reduction measures are put in place in tandem with this financial measure. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy James Reilly, has referred to the fact that smoking kills 5,200 people in this country and 700,000 throughout Europe each year. One in two people who smoke will die. It costs the State €500 million per annum out of the public health budget to deal with the effects of cigarette smoking.

As stated, this is a public health issue. It is about reducing the number of people who smoke, lessening the effects of smoking and ensuring no single person will have free reign to take up smoking. The tobacco industry has only one issue, namely, to recruit people to smoke. That is why Tobacco Free Ireland is a very important initiative. It is vital that we support the national office of tobacco control and work in tandem with it to deal with the issue relating to retailers. I hope consideration will be given to the subject of cessation, both in the context of tax reliefs and in terms of the establishment of a convention with retailers who might be of assistance in assessing the alternative products with which they might replace cigarettes in their shops. We must support them in their businesses. The House should support the measure before it, particularly from a public health perspective.

I, too, support the motion. Part of the tone of the debate has been questionable. I refer, in particular, to the comments on the lower socioeconomic sections of society, to whom some Members referred as the working classes and stated the measure before the House was a form of discrimination against them. It is an insult for anybody to say this. The people in question are very discerning and know that smoking is bad for their health. To say the increase in the excise duty on cigarettes is an attack on or discrimination against them by the Government or this Parliament is completely wrong and I would not like to be associated with the remarks made in this regard.

I echo the comments made by the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy James Reilly, on the late Mr. Gerry Collins, whom the Minister complimented on the anti-smoking advertisement he filmed before he passed away and which is currently being shown on television. It is a powerful piece of advertising as to why people should not smoke.

In the context of the debate on the motion, it has been correctly stated the problem which arises is whether what we are doing will drive more people into the arms of those who conduct the illicit trade in cigarettes. That is the central concern expressed by most Members. Retail Ireland estimates the value of the illicit or illegal trade in certain goods, including tobacco, clothes, medicines, CDs, DVDs, etc., at €750 million per annum. Given that the Exchequer is missing out on this amount each year, we must ensure we get the balance right. Behind the illicit-illegal trade stands a huge gangland criminal network. We need to take on head on these forces of evil in our society.

Some of revenue that will be raised on foot of the measure before the House which will be the subject of almost unanimous support among Members should be used to provide An Garda Síochána with additional resources in order that it might tackle head on the forces of gangland criminality that are behind the illicit trade. If one walks up O'Connell Street or visits any of the fairs held throughout the county, one will be able to purchase illegal tobacco. This is a problem and we must provide An Garda Síochána with sufficient resources to take on the illicit trade. We must not drive more people into the arms of those who run the underground criminal network that is behind this trade.

I support the measure before the House. I compliment the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy James Reilly, who has responsibility for public health on the work he has done in tackling smoking in his current post and in the one he held previously. This is not just a money-raising exercise. It mirrors the action taken in the context of plain packaging and television advertising. The Minister referred to the advertisement filmed by the late Mr. Gerry Collins before he died. I take the opportunity to thank Mr. Collins and his family for it. The advertisement in question is very hard-hitting and I have no doubt that people who see it think twice about taking a cigarette into their hands.

A huge number of people smoke e-cigarettes. This is a matter on which I have commented in the past and with which I have no difficulty in dealing whatsoever. I would, however, like the Minister to regulate the sale of e-cigarettes and follow the example of other countries which have taken action in this regard. I received major criticism last year when I called for the regulation of e-cigarettes.

Deputy Niall Collins referred to the trade in illegal cigarettes. I acknowledge the great work done by the Customs service at Rosslare Europort in intercepting those seeking to import illegal cigarettes. I would like more money to be allocated to the Customs service and more personnel to be deployed there and at other ports throughout the country in order that we might stop the importation of illegal cigarettes.

I hold a completely opposite view and will be opposing the financial resolution before the House. I firmly believe this is both a con job and a revenue-raising exercise.

Does the Deputy want to take the opportunity to declare himself as being a smoker?

Treating smokers like lepers, making us go outside into the cold and the rain or hitting us in our pockets will never work. Now many Members want to ban e-cigarettes.

No, the Deputy is wrong.

Those who are trying to give up cigarettes use e-cigarettes to help them.

The Government needs to wake up and develop a broader health strategy. In the context of the financial resolution, I accept that such a strategy is required, but increasing the price of a packet of 20 cigarettes by 40 cent will not help because all it means is that €7.60 from each sale will go straight into the Government's coffers. No one should lecture us and state this is not about raising revenue.

What is wrong with that?

Retailers, small businesses, etc., are worried about what is being done. This measure is what I call a "Nidge" tax. The criminal gangs are rubbing their hands together because they are going to make more money from smuggling in cigarettes than they will from bringing in heroin, cannabis or any other drug. The Government needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

There is no basis for what the Deputy is saying.

It is a fact, as the Minister should know.

Where is the evidence for it?

Criminal gangs across Dublin city are up to their necks in the trade in illicit cigarettes and making huge money out of it. This is nothing but a "Nidge" tax.

Three further speakers are offering. Is it agreed that they will each have one minute? Agreed.

This is a health issue, but the measure before the House is going to raise €53 million in revenue. Some of this money should be dedicated to screening for breast cancer among women in the age group up to 65 years.

It has been announced in the budget.

Please, look at the time.

The police and the Customs people will need the resources to police the illegal cigarettes industry. As the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Reilly, has said, producing cigarettes is like producing a death product. Let us imagine cars were made without brakes and a person had to take his chances knowing that 50% of the users in a certain amount of years were going to die for definite. We must stop this and a combination of various measures, including advertisements, increasing the prices, regulations on packaging and so on is the way to do it.

Smoking is a public health problem - I would not like my children to smoke and I say this as a smoker - but this will not work. This is a revenue grabbing exercise that will hit people who are already hammered and struggling yet again. The hypocrisy of the Government's position on the matter is shown by the fact that it has cut the health budget this year. I have double checked it since I said it to the Minister earlier. Last year, the Government allocated €13.3 billion while this year the figure is €13.1 billion.

The Government has actually allocated less. I appeal to the members of the Government not to tell us that this is about public health.

He is not counting correctly. He has left out the capital spend.

This is about revenue gathering. Yet again, it is a matter of hitting the people who can least afford it. It will not make a whit of difference in terms of the public health issue.

There is a €300 million difference.

There has been a good deal of sanctimonious talk from the Government about health, but there is no ring-fencing of this money to take real measures to assist people to stop smoking or to reduce smoking in any way, shape or form. This is a revenue raising exercise. In the Budget Statement the Minister said: "The measures I have announced today will cost an estimated €585 million next year, and this has to be paid for. So, with effect from midnight tonight, the price of 20 cigarettes will increase by 40 cent". In other words, there is nothing about setting aside this money to reduce smoking. What has anything said by Members on the Government side got to do with health?

The only real vote being called tonight on the budget is on this measure. In other words, this is actually a vote on the budget as well. People are sitting outside or at home watching on "RTÉ News: Nine O'Clock". It is important that people vote against this proposal since it is the only thing the Government has done. Unfortunately, it disproportionately affects working class people who have an addiction. The Government has no intention of doing anything about that with this money.

I thank all the Deputies for their comments. I assure Deputy Kelleher that no one in this House, I assume, is going to bend in front of the pressure or the lobby force from tobacco companies. A total of 640 million cigarettes were seized between 2009 and 2013. This year to date, almost 50 million cigarettes were confiscated and seized, including a seizure of 32.3 million in Drogheda, the largest seizure in Europe.

Almost 2,000 staff are involved in Revenue in an integrated tax and customs administration. They are not all associated directly with cigarette seizures but they do a range of things as part of their work in ports and customs and connected areas. They work in ports, airports and postal depots. They are supported by equipment and resources like scanners, extra machines and trafficking detector dogs. These resources are all revamped regularly.

The fiscal policy referred to is part of the overall health policy. Other elements include controls on the sale of cigarettes; permanent health warnings on packets; prohibition on tobacco advertising and the display of tobacco products in all retail outlets; prohibition on sponsorship; restrictions on the smoking of tobacco in public areas and places of work; prohibition on the sale of cigarettes in packs of less than 20; and health education programmes as well as actions by health professionals.

Clearly, if there is an increase in excise duty it is an imposition on people and it is meant to be. As Deputy Reilly pointed out, no one wants to see their children take up this business. While tobacco smuggling is clearly a high priority for Government there is a reason behind this and it is not simply fiscal policy. As Deputy Reilly pointed out, when the racking cough starts and it cannot be gotten rid of people fade away physically, mentally and emotionally. Their lives are destroyed by virtue of this drug. Although the measure causes difficulty for a number of people the tobacco companies must have a new crop of bright young people every year to keep the conveyor belt moving and this measure is intended to inhibit that. I hope we can get to a smoke-free Ireland by 2025. From that point of view I commend the motion to the House and I thank the Deputies for their contributions.

Question put: "That Financial Resolution No. 1 be agreed to."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 122; Níl, 22.

  • Bannon, James.
  • Barry, Tom.
  • Breen, Pat.
  • Burton, Joan.
  • Butler, Ray.
  • Buttimer, Jerry.
  • Byrne, Catherine.
  • Byrne, Eric.
  • Calleary, Dara.
  • Carey, Joe.
  • Coffey, Paudie.
  • Collins, Áine.
  • Collins, Niall.
  • Conaghan, Michael.
  • Conlan, Seán.
  • Connaughton, Paul J.
  • Conway, Ciara.
  • Coonan, Noel.
  • Corcoran Kennedy, Marcella.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Cowen, Barry.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Creighton, Lucinda.
  • Daly, Jim.
  • Deasy, John.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • Deering, Pat.
  • Doherty, Regina.
  • Donnelly, Stephen S.
  • Donohoe, Paschal.
  • Dowds, Robert.
  • Doyle, Andrew.
  • English, Damien.
  • Farrell, Alan.
  • Feighan, Frank.
  • Ferris, Anne.
  • Fitzgerald, Frances.
  • Fitzmaurice, Michael.
  • Fitzpatrick, Peter.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Flanagan, Terence.
  • Fleming, Sean.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Grealish, Noel.
  • Griffin, Brendan.
  • Halligan, John.
  • Hannigan, Dominic.
  • Harrington, Noel.
  • Harris, Simon.
  • Hayes, Tom.
  • Healy, Seamus.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Humphreys, Heather.
  • Humphreys, Kevin.
  • Keating, Derek.
  • Kehoe, Paul.
  • Kelleher, Billy.
  • Kelly, Alan.
  • Kenny, Seán.
  • Kirk, Seamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kyne, Seán.
  • Lawlor, Anthony.
  • Lynch, Ciarán.
  • Lynch, Kathleen.
  • Lyons, John.
  • McCarthy, Michael.
  • McConalogue, Charlie.
  • McEntee, Helen.
  • McFadden, Gabrielle.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Mattie.
  • McGuinness, John.
  • McHugh, Joe.
  • McNamara, Michael.
  • Maloney, Eamonn.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • Mathews, Peter.
  • Mitchell, Olivia.
  • Mitchell O'Connor, Mary.
  • Moynihan, Michael.
  • Mulherin, Michelle.
  • Murphy, Catherine.
  • Murphy, Eoghan.
  • Naughten, Denis.
  • Neville, Dan.
  • Nolan, Derek.
  • Noonan, Michael.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
  • Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Donnell, Kieran.
  • O'Donovan, Patrick.
  • O'Dowd, Fergus.
  • O'Mahony, John.
  • O'Reilly, Joe.
  • O'Sullivan, Jan.
  • Penrose, Willie.
  • Phelan, Ann.
  • Phelan, John Paul.
  • Pringle, Thomas.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Reilly, James.
  • Ring, Michael.
  • Ross, Shane.
  • Ryan, Brendan.
  • Shatter, Alan.
  • Sherlock, Sean.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Spring, Arthur.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Stanton, David.
  • Timmins, Billy.
  • Troy, Robert.
  • Tuffy, Joanna.
  • Twomey, Liam.
  • Varadkar, Leo.
  • Walsh, Brian.
  • White, Alex.

Níl

  • Adams, Gerry.
  • Boyd Barrett, Richard.
  • Broughan, Thomas P.
  • Collins, Joan.
  • Colreavy, Michael.
  • Coppinger, Ruth.
  • Daly, Clare.
  • Doherty, Pearse.
  • Ellis, Dessie.
  • Ferris, Martin.
  • Fleming, Tom.
  • Higgins, Joe.
  • Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
  • McGrath, Finian.
  • McLellan, Sandra.
  • Murphy, Paul.
  • Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
  • O'Brien, Jonathan.
  • O'Sullivan, Maureen.
  • Stanley, Brian.
  • Tóibín, Peadar.
  • Wallace, Mick.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg; Níl, Deputies Joe Higgins and Ruth Coppinger.
Question declared carried.
Top
Share