Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Health and Children debate -
Thursday, 5 Dec 2013

Public Health (Standardised Packaging of Tobacco) Bill: Discussion with Minister for Health

I welcome the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly; Dr. Tony Holohan, Chief Medical Officer; and Ms Geraldine Luddy from the Department of Health. This is our second session today in which we will deal with the general scheme of the Public Health (Standardised Packaging of Tobacco) Bill. On 19 November the Government approved the publication of the general scheme of the Bill and, at the request of the Minister, the committee has been asked to consider in a public manner the heads of the Bill. At our meeting last week we agreed to commence that consideration today by allowing the Minister and the Chief Medical Officer to set the tone for the debate. Prior to the Christmas holidays, the committee will conclude its internal deliberations on the composition of hearings, which it is intended to hold in the last week of January. Our first meeting in January will be the quarterly meeting with the Minister. That meeting will take place on 16 January. In the week beginning 20 January we hope to begin our consultative process on the heads of the Bill.

A detailed briefing document from the Department has been circulated and is included in members' information pack for today's meeting. I thank the Minister for taking the initiative in publishing the heads of the Bill and coming to us in advance of our process to make a presentation on his thinking behind the legislation. We will conclude our deliberations on the structure and composition of the hearings during our meeting prior to the Christmas recess. I welcome those in the Visitors Gallery and thank them for being here and their interest in this legislation.

Witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Apologies have been received from Deputies Billy Kelleher and Catherine Byrne who have other events to attend.

I thank the Chairman and the joint committee for facilitating this meeting. This is a very important public health initiative and the Bill will protect children from a habit that kills one in two people who take it up. I am pleased to be joined by the Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Tony Holohan, and Ms Geraldine Luddy from the Department.

I do not know if familiarity breeds contempt, but in the case of smoking, it often stops one from breathing. If today we were to discover a product in routine domestic use was killing half the people who used it, I do not think it is too much of a leap in imagination to speculate that everybody would pull out all the stops to fix the issue. If this product were to be brought to the market today, knowing what we know about it, it would not see the light of day and would never be made legal. I have said many times that my priority, while not forgetting those who smoke currently, is to prevent children from starting. We are not anti-smoker and will continue to support smokers who wish to kick the habit.

A large survey found that almost four out of every five smokers, 78%, started to smoke before the age of 18 years. This means that children are being recruited by the tobacco industry to replace the 5,200 Irish people who die every year from tobacco-related disease and the other thousands who give up smoking. The tobacco industry seeks to recruit new smokers and we know that four times out of five it is children it is trying to attract, with packets such as the one I am holding. It is a nice, sleek packet that has a nice feel and has lovely colours, which children will find interesting. A survey done by the Irish Cancer Society - some its representatives are present today, as well as previous representatives in this House - showed these cigarette packets to children. We have all seen the advertisement on UTV. Children find them attractive and it is confirmed that they make them feel good. They look nice and are nice to hold. However, when children were shown packets such as the other one I am showing the committee, they recoiled from them and wondered why would anybody want to smoke. That is the message we seek to give children. It is the truth, not advertising. This picture shows what it does.

Smoking has been killing half the people who do it for so long that many of us have lost a sense of horror and urgency. We tend to accept it as a fact of life and some believe there really is not much more we can do to change it - that smokers will smoke regardless of how hard or expensive we make it for them or how many times we tell them how dangerous it is. That is the commonly held belief, but it is simply not true. The facts show that anti-smoking measures make a difference, a real difference. The more we can find and implement, the bigger that difference will be. I am therefore especially pleased to be here today to open these hearings on the general scheme of the public health (standardised packaging of tobacco) Bill 2013. Standardised packaging is one more useful tool for the task of constructing a smoke-free society, and the sooner we have it the better. I look forward to the presentations of the invited guests and I am confident that these hearings will provide very useful input as we finalise the drafting of the Bill's provisions.

Tobacco use is one of the most preventable public health threats, but nearly 6 million people die from smoking each year globally. On a human level, that is 6 million lives needlessly cut short; on an economic level, that is a substantial section of the health care budget which could be saved or redirected to other areas in need of funding. Governments must take strong action to tackle this global problem. Smokers die, on average, ten years sooner than non-smokers, and the quality of a smoker's last few years are anything but pleasant, as I am sure any member of the committee who has witnessed a relative or friend with lung cancer, heart failure or chronic chest problems can attest. I certainly can. I still see the images of patients sitting on the edge of their beds, gasping for breath despite the aid of oxygen, as they slowly lose the ability to breathe enough oxygen to survive. It is horrible suffocation over a period not of hours or days but of months. The addiction is so strong that I have seen patients sneak out of the ward, with the oxygen cylinder on their backs, to have a cigarette, putting at risk not only their own lives but the lives of all those on the ward. We all know what a match mixed with oxygen can do. That is how strong the addiction is, so we must make sure our children never get addicted.

Sometimes we forget what it really means. If one has watched a loved one waste away from lung cancer, seen a friend lose a limb from tobacco-induced peripheral vascular disease, PVD, or cared for someone who was left disabled by a stroke, one will have a much better sense of what we are dealing with. We must protect our children from these scenarios. The frightening fact is that one in every two children who experiments with cigarettes goes on to become a smoker. A recent European study shows that Ireland has the lowest starting age for smoking among all the EU member states. We also know that one in two who become addicted will die from a tobacco-related disease.

In October this year I launched Ireland's latest policy on smoking, Tobacco Free Ireland. It is the first policy document to be launched under the Healthy Ireland framework. Lifestyle trends and inequality in health outcomes are leading us towards a dangerously unhealthy and unaffordable future. Healthy Ireland is a Government framework which sets out a vision that will improve the health and well-being of all of the population of Ireland over the next 12 years. It puts forward a whole-of-society approach and outlines new arrangements to ensure more effective co-operation to achieve better outcomes for all.

Today we are highlighting the ongoing health issue of tobacco and further regulation of tobacco products. The main aim of Tobacco Free Ireland is to make Ireland tobacco-free - that is, with a smoking rate of less than 5% of the population - by 2025. I believe we can achieve that. The strategy targets the protection of children and the de-normalisation of smoking. Its 63 recommendations include the following: banning smoking anywhere on the premises of primary and secondary schools and child care facilities; promoting tobacco-free areas in our third level campuses, sporting facilities, public parks and beaches; and continuing the good work of creating smoke-free playgrounds and smoke-free campuses for our hospitals and health facilities. The introduction of standardised packaging is just one of the 63 recommendations, but it is a hugely important one. As such, this measure should not be considered in isolation but as part of a suite.

Tobacco Free Ireland builds on many successful past initiatives. The ground-breaking workplace smoking ban in 2004 had a huge impact. Many other worthwhile and effective measures have been introduced in recent years. These include the ban on the sale of ten-packs and candy or sweet cigarettes - one cannot mention candy or sweet cigarettes without thinking of children; the ban on point-of-sale advertising; the HSE's Quit campaign; and the introduction of the graphic warnings on cigarette packets. The Irish public has been very much in favour of these efforts. In a recent report undertaken by the European Commission, Irish citizens were in the top rank in their support of initiatives relating to tobacco. Significantly for the business of today, we were in the top rank in supporting the banning of colours, logos and promotional elements from cigarette packs. I will never tire of saying that I have yet to meet a smoker who wanted their child to smoke.

Government approval has now been received for the publication of the general scheme of a new public health (standardised packaging of tobacco) Bill 2013 and to proceed with the drafting of the legislation based on this general scheme. My chief medical officer, Dr. Holohan, will go into more detail on standardised packaging and the 16 heads of the scheme, so I will outline briefly why I am introducing this particular measure on tobacco.

People love brands. We all know how jealously brand leaders in a range of products guard their brand. Young people, in particular, love brands, even if in the case of their chosen cigarette brand it may well kill them. The tobacco industry knows this and has invested heavily in pack design to communicate specific messages to specific groups. It is working. Despite the ban on tobacco advertising, the ban on point-of-sale display and the introduction of graphic warnings, a gap still exists which I believe can now be eliminated by the introduction of standardised packaging. Australia, which I congratulate, was the first country in the world to take this initiative in December 2012. We are in ongoing contact with our Australian colleagues to ensure our initiative benefits from their experience.

The UK's review of the benefits of standardised packaging is due for completion in March 2014, and Scotland and New Zealand have indicated their intention to follow suit. The initiative is steadily being embraced globally and I thank our UK neighbours for their help.

As regards the possibility of a legal challenge by the tobacco industry, the legislation in Australia was successfully defended by the Australian Government in the courts. That legislation is currently the subject of challenges under World Trade Organization rules. While a legal challenge cannot be ruled out, I am confident that the research available to us demonstrates that standardised packaging will have a positive impact on health and is a proportionate and justified measure. I would go as far as to say that I would be astonished if there is not a legal challenge. The reason for my astonishment would be that the tobacco industry knows that this is going to work and will fight it tooth and nail. The tobacco industry is only interested in its bottom-line profit. What we on this committee are interested in is saving the lives of our citizens and protecting our children.

I am determined that the threat of legal challenges should not be an obstacle in progressing public health policies. There are always obstacles, legal or otherwise, to any move for change. We must do what is right, not what is easiest. Sometimes we observe how others might proceed, but there are times too when we must lead, and this is one of those times. We must press on with our mission. The challenge is to protect our children, and that is a challenge at which we cannot fail. If we can protect this generation of children from taking up smoking, then lung cancer will become a rarity in 30 or 40 years' time. This morning I was in St. James's Hospital to launch its ten-year cancer audit report. Last year 700 cases of lung cancer were treated at the hospital and only 6% of those patients were non-smokers. We know what we must do.

In conclusion, I look forward to hearing the committee's deliberations on the general scheme, which I and my team shall follow very closely. I look forward to receiving the report. Finally, I thank the Chairman and all of those who will participate in these public hearings for the valuable contribution they will make and for the assistance it will provide to me and my officials in introducing legislation on standardised packaging of tobacco products in Ireland - a move that can help protect and save our children from the fate of those I described in my opening remarks.

I thank the Minister and call Dr. Tony Holohan, chief medical officer, to commence his remarks. I apologise that Deputy McLellan has had to leave in order to attend another meeting. Before she left she asked me to convey her apologies.

Dr. Tony Holohan

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee. I am pleased to be here today to contribute to these hearings on the general scheme of the public health (standardised packaging of tobacco) Bill 2013. The Minister has already provided the background to the heads of the Bill. I will set out some detail regarding the evidence base for the measure and will also go through the general scheme head by head.

In order to put today's subject matter in context, it is important to state that smoking is the greatest single cause of preventable illness and premature death in Ireland. Approximately 5,200 Irish people die every year from diseases caused by smoking - cancers, circulatory diseases, respiratory and digestive diseases. In all, smoking-related disease causes 19% of all deaths nationally and they are all preventable and avoidable deaths.

Apart from the cost in terms of disease and years of potential life lost, it is important to consider the economic cost of deaths and illness attributable to smoking. A European study conducted in 2009 estimated it to be in the region of €664 million for Ireland. However, it is clear that the measures we have introduced are working. There has been a decrease in the number of people smoking. The most recent figures we have from the rolling surveys conducted by the national Office of Tobacco Control indicate that 22% of Irish adults smoke. That represents a decline of 7% since 2007, when the last large-scale study on smoking in Ireland was done. In addition, recent data on school-aged children - the HBSC survey, which uses an international methodology - indicates a clear downward trend, with 80% of 15 to 17 year olds not smoking and nearly 90% of 12 to 17 year olds not smoking.

As the Minister has stated, standardised packaging is the next step in tackling the promotion and advertising of tobacco and smoking. International research conclusively shows that standardised packaging will increase the noticeability, recall and impact of health warning messages, reduce the ability of packaging to mislead consumers into believing that some products may be less harmful than others, and reduce the attractiveness of the tobacco product for both adults and children.

What is standardised packaging? It means that all forms of branding, such as trademarks, logos, colours and graphics, would be removed from tobacco packs. The brand name would be presented in a uniform typeface for all brands and the pack would be in one plain neutral colour. The resulting pack will be less attractive to consumers, as the Minister has demonstrated, and will make the picture health warnings stand out more clearly. It will also prevent packaging from misleading consumers about the harmful effects of tobacco. For example, evidence shows that lighter-coloured packs give the impression that the cigarettes are less harmful.

Why do we need to introduce the measure? Cumulative restrictions in Ireland and internationally on advertising, promotion and sponsorship have resulted in the industry turning increasingly to packaging as a key marketing tool. It is the last place they can legally advertise their product to interest smokers and potential smokers. The tobacco industry has argued that standard plain packs would be easier to forge and that smuggling would increase as a result.

I must advise that there is a vote in the Seanad.

Dr. Tony Holohan

The Department is in close contact with the Revenue Commissioners about standardised packaging. They have advised that the tax stamp is a key means for them to distinguish between legal and illegal products, irrespective of the way in which the cigarettes are packaged. Tax stamps will remain a fixture on tobacco products following the introduction of standardised packaging and, therefore, the legislation is unlikely to have a significant impact on their work on illicit trade in cigarettes.

I will now take the committee through the general scheme head by head. I do not wish to pre-empt the discussion but I am mindful that there may be some issues to be dealt with. Furthermore, some of the participants in these hearings might identify additional technical issues that may need examination and I look forward to suggestions from the Chairman or committee members which will lead to an improvement in the operation of the legislation.

Head 1 sets out definitions and interpretations used throughout the Bill. It defines for us the meanings of some of the terms used for the purposes of the Bill, including "cigarette pack", "combined health warning", "retail packaging", "tobacco product" and "variant name". Head 2 deals with regulations. It makes standard provisions giving the Minister powers to make regulations for the purposes of the Act. Head 3 sets out the overall purpose of the Bill. The objective is to reduce the appeal of tobacco products, increase the effectiveness of health warnings and reduce the ability of branded tobacco packaging to mislead consumers about the harmful effects of smoking. Head 4 sets out the legal jurisdiction and scope of the legislation, in that the provisions in the Act relate to products for retail sale in Ireland only and do not apply to products and packaging for export.

Head 5 sets out the requirements for the physical features of cigarette packs and cartons. It provides that cigarette packs and cartons must have a rectangular shape and cigarette packs must have flip-top openings. The lining of cigarette packs, if any, must only be plain silver-coloured foil with a white paper backing. Cigarette packs must be a regulated dull drab colour with a matte finish and have plain white inner surfaces. No trademarks or other marks can appear on tobacco packaging and packs must not be visually enhanced in any way. Special provision is made for the appearance of the tax stamp and health warnings to be included on packs.

Head 6 sets out the amendments for the increase in size and positioning of health warnings on cigarette packs and cartons. These provisions are in line with proposals for the revision of the European tobacco products directive which will I hope be finalised by the end of the year.

Head 7 sets out the requirements for the appearance of cigarette sticks. Design features on tobacco products are also regulated to ensure branding, trademarks, etc., are not transferred to the cigarette product.

Head 8 sets out the requirements for the physical features of roll-your-own tobacco packs which are similar in nature to those laid out for cigarette packs under head 5. For example, packs must be a dull, drab colour with a matt finish and plain white inner surfaces.

Head 9 sets out the amendments for the increase in size and positioning of health warnings on roll-your-own tobacco packs and, similar to the provisions made in head 6 in respect of cigarette packs, are in line with measures included in the proposed directive.

Head 10 sets out the requirements for packaging for all other tobacco products other than cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco packs. Its provisions are similar to those described in heads 5 to 9, inclusive.

Head 11 sets out the requirements for the prohibition of various features on packs, for example, noises, smells or scents, or features designed to change the packaging after sale such as heat activated inks, scratchable panels or fold-out panels. It does not affect changes an individual may make to a packet bought for personal use.

Head 12 provides for the amendment of section 48 of the Public Health (Tobacco) Act 2002 to allow authorised officers - environmental health officers in the HSE who enforce that Act - to enforce the provisions of this legislation.

Head 13 sets out the offences created under the Bill. They relate to the sale or supply, purchase, packaging or manufacture of tobacco products for retail sale. They will apply to commercial participants in the tobacco industry in Ireland who fail to comply with the requirements for tobacco products and packaging created under the Bill. They will not apply to individuals who purchase tobacco products for personal use, nor to conduct, other than through retail sale, undertaken for the purposes of exporting tobacco products and packaging.

Head 14 sets out the fines and penalties for a first and subsequent offences under the Bill.

Head 15 sets out provisions relating to the Trade Marks Act 1996. As Irish trademark law provides for revocation of a registered mark if it is not used over a period of five years, it is necessary to provide that the Bill amounts to a proper reason for non-use of trademarks and does not leave them open to a process of revocation.

Head 16 sets out the Short Title and commencement date. There will be a transitional provision provided for in the Bill in regard to the commencement date of the legislation. The specific dates will be decided through a process of consultation.

As Chief Medical Officer, I am confident that the measures launched by the Minister in October and outlined in the document, Tobacco Free Ireland, including standardised packaging, will further reduce the numbers of people, young and old, smoking in Ireland, taking us towards our target of Ireland being smoke free by 2025.

I thank the Chairman and committee members for giving me the opportunity to address them. I wish the committee well in its work and look forward to its report.

I welcome the Minister for Health, Dr. Holohan who has been with us all morning and Ms Luddy. I also welcome the briefing note from the tobacco and alcohol control unit in the Department of Health. I had sought an elaboration on the evidence for the potential success of the measure. The jury is still out on this measure, but there is adequate reassurance that this is worth doing, not so much that we will be seen to be doing something but as an end in itself. I welcome the publication of the heads of the planned legislation. It does not happen often enough and is a useful and informative initiative.

With regard to supporting evidence for the effectiveness of the introduction of plain packaging, we are meeting on the first anniversary of the introduction of a similar measure in Australia. It took place in December last year and I ask the Minister and Dr. Holohan if they have information on any intended report from the Australian Government or the health Department in Australia on what happened in the first 12 months since its introduction and any results to which they can point. Among other countries considering the measure two are European, Britain and France. Can the Minister and Dr. Holohan provide us with an update on the point of consideration these two countries are at in this regard? Are they anywhere near where we are in dealing with proposed legislation?

Denormalisation, leading I hope to the goal of a significant reduction in tobacco use, if not its elimination, is a shared goal of the members of the committee. Some can be louder and others, calmer, but I am confident there is a shared rationale across all political views that this is a shared goal. It is not unique, but it is one on which we can all sign off. The Minister can take comfort in this.

With regard to the recent designation of hospital campuses as smoke-free - it happened in my constituency and was a welcome development - I ask the Chief Medical Officer whether it has been completely ruled out at this time. Are there hospital sites that have not pursued this development? Are there health facilities to which it does not apply? In the experience of those hospital sites that have only recently introduced the measure and where there was a pattern of smoking outside the door as against outside the gates, have there been problems presenting? Can we get an insight into what the Chief Medical Officer knows at this point about the success of this initiative following its introduction?

In regard to seized illegal tobacco products, by which I mean those on which tax had not been paid, from time to time we hear about, read and see such reports on television on seizures. How are the cigarettes seized disposed of? Perhaps the Chief Medical Officer does not know and perhaps it is the Revenue Commissioners that make the determination. I wonder whether the disposal of seized tobacco products, not knowing how it is done, could be used as another tool to demonstrate to the public their unacceptable nature. I hesitate to say incineration is the way to go as it may be in conflict with the very thought of creating a smoke-free environment. Perhaps the Chief Medical Officer might shed some light on this, but it could be a further aid in demonstrating to young people, in particular, how unacceptable smoking is for them and us, collectively, as a society.

I welcome the publication of the heads of the Bill and look forward to participating in the engagement with those who will present before us, who are equally committed and of a shared disposition in this matter.

I express my support for the Minister and welcome the publication of the heads of the Bill.

I have a couple of related questions.

If we are to succeed in encouraging a further reduction in the number of people smoking, it is very important to close the back door through which cigarettes come. This refers a little to the points raised by Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin. Last week I raised a matter in the Topical Issue debate and one of the things which came up was that the Minister for Finance believed that although a person was legally entitled to bring in 800 cigarettes from abroad, in reality a lot more were being brought in. Can the Department of Health put pressure on Revenue to ensure this door is blocked, as well as the importation of illegal cigarettes? I have reason to believe that in certain parts of my constituency approximately one third of cigarettes sold are illegal. Apart from the fact that it is bad people are smoking cigarettes, it is really important that those involved pay tax on them.

What evidence has emerged from Australia on the success of its legislation? Do the tobacco companies have realistic grounds on which to take the State to the cleaners when they oppose the Minister's legislation? I hope the answer is no, but they are hardly sabre rattling without having some prospect of success on that front.

I thank the Minister and his colleagues for their strong presentations. I also thank the Minister for doing what he said he would do. He has brought the heads of the Bill to the committee and made a very strong presentation. As a doctor, he knows exactly what happens to people who smoke. He is proposing this policy and I say "Well done" to him.

Last week The Irish Times ran a story in which it claimed legal opinion had been received from a major tobacco company. It stated that if standardised packaging was introduced, this would make the State liable for hundreds of millions of euro in compensation. Is that a credible threat or is it really an attempt to bully and scare us? Has the Minister obtained a legal opinion on the matter? Perhaps he cannot share it with us today, but I would like to hear it. On a number of occasions I have read that the introduction of standardised packaging would damage Ireland's reputation as a protector of intellectual property. Will the Minister comment on this?

I refer to obesity, especially childhood obesity, an issue on which I have been working with a number of groups. Would the Minister consider doing much the same in the case of products with a high sugar and high salt content?

That matter is not up for discussion today.

The Minister might comment on it. The Chairman always stops me when I am in full flow.

I am sorry, but we are dealing with the issue of plain packaging, not obesity.

We are dealing with the issue of plain packaging, but perhaps we might have plain packaging also for products with a high sugar and a high salt content.

I do not want to repeat what has been said as the questions I wanted to ask have been covered. Obviously, people in other Departments deal with the illegal sale of cigarettes on the street. Are they co-operating? Are they involved in stepping up the campaign because it would be contradictory if we could catch people on Henry Street but not in a shop? Is there a way to step up the campaign to stop the sale of illegal tobacco on the streets which we see happen all the time?

I thank the Minister for Health, Dr. Holohan and Ms Luddy. The presentations were very good.

Obviously, we are only starting to go through the heads of the Bill. I have a question on head 13, as well as some general questions. Perhaps there is a really obvious explanation, but if I buy a packet of contraband cigarettes which somebody has seen fit to bring in on Henry Street when this legislation is enacted, it will not be an offence. Why is the Minister excluding the individual who can continue to go to markets, Moore Street or wherever else? Why are we not including this as an offence?

Others spoke about the successes, results and analysis from Australia. Has any research been conducted on what reformed smokers spend the money they used to spend on tobacco products? In its campaign the tobacco industry is raising concerns about the disastrous effect this measure will have on the profits of the retail trade and its overall turnover. I dispute this because I have a very good memory of being the benefactor when my mother gave up smoking when I was a child. She put the money in a pot and we got to spend it at the end of every month. I thought I was loaded because she spent most of it on clothes for me. Has specific research been conducted which we could use to dispel the growing campaign that the money will not be disseminated in the retail industry, as is being stated by the tobacco industry? Fears are being fuelled by this as a result.

Again, it is being propagated by the tobacco industry, but there is a slight danger that this will only be seen as a small thing and that the view will be taken that we should be stopping the main suppliers of contraband in this and other countries. In unison with this legislation, what measures will we bring forward next year to stop the huge amounts of contraband being brought in through our ports?

Will somebody explain why nicotine replacement therapy products are only available in pharmacies? People dying for a fag on a Sunday afternoon are roaming around. We are making it a lot more difficult for people who want to give up cigarettes and tobacco products by not making nicotine replacement therapy products available in as many outlets as possible. Will the Minister explain why their sale is restricted?

I thank the Minister and his colleagues for coming. As he knows, I am a huge supporter of his efforts to ratchet up the pressure on the tobacco industry, but we are not going anywhere near far enough. That is not a criticism of the Minister. We both want to ensure a long-term plan to increase the pressure even more severely in the years to come.

Will the Minister clarify exactly what has happened in respect of the US Chamber of Commerce? There were rumours of threats from people who were not officially representing the tobacco industry but who appeared to be on the side of those whom we generally thought of as the good guys. What strategies are we taking to counter this? I urge that we take a very public strategy to counter it. I think the average American citizen who is very anti-smoking would like to know what the agencies acting, allegedly, in his or her name are doing.

I am very upset that our legislation on smoking in cars in which there are children is still stuck in bureaucracy nearly a year and a half after it was passed on Second Stage. That is unacceptable. It is not the Minister's fault specifically, but some of the folks who work in his organisations are not giving it priority.

The track record of the Government so far in terms of legislation to deal with smoking is providing for the passage of a Bill which will make it easier to sell cigarettes cheaply. I know that is not its intention and that the Minister is intent on bringing forward a raft of legislation to redress the imbalance. A great start would be made if we could address this issue. During Private Members' business in the Seanad in the week after next I will be introducing further anti-tobacco industry legislation, of which I hope the Minister will be supportive and which I will be delighted to discuss with him later.

We will suspend the sitting until after the vote in the Dáil Chamber.

Sitting suspended at 12.50 p.m. and resumed at 1.20 p.m.

I welcome the Bill. Any measure that will dissuade people from smoking must be welcomed. I compliment the Minister for bringing forward the Public Health (Standardised Packaging of Tobacco) Bill. Earlier in the year on foot of the EU tobacco directive, the Department sought submissions, and I understand in the region of 6,000 submissions were made and the issue of plain packaging was covered. Would it be beneficial to the consideration of the Bill to have a report on those submissions?

The Minister alluded to the Australian model and the fact that Australia has introduced plain packaging for cigarettes. In the region of 82% of the package is covered with warnings, including picture images on health, however, this will only be 65% in Ireland. Is there a reason we cannot follow through on the Australian example?

While it may not be totally relevant to the Bill, we are aware of the illegal sale of tobacco. I have tabled parliamentary questions to the Department of Health that have been referred to the Department of Finance because of the revenue implications. The sale of tobacco is subject to controls, and the product cannot be sold to minors. For people who have the habit, we are not losing revenue to the Exchequer. It does not make sense to impose restrictions on the legal trade, whereas at the same time the illegal trade seems to get away scot free. I would like to hear the Minister's views on how we can tackle that.

I thank all the witnesses for their presentations. The Minister has set the target for 2025 but does the Department and the HSE have a five-year target? How will the progress on reaching targets be monitored? Will we break down the 2025 period into five-year time periods and set targets for each period? I understand the Government in Australia has set out targets for tobacco control and I wonder if we can keep track of what is being done in terms of targets in Australia?

The third issue I wish to raise is smoking during pregnancy. Have we tailored a campaign to target women because of the high health risks of smoking during pregnancy? Have we conducted studies recently on the impact of information given by GPs and medical practitioners to that particular group? I think it is important that we aim information at adults on the risks associated with smoking during pregnancy. Have we new information in that regard? What is the HSE doing specifically in that area?

I thank the Minister and the group who compiled this report, which covers many of the health issues around smoking. I wish to quote from the foreword of the report in which the Minister states, "No-one, whether smoker or non-smoker, wants their children to smoke." Tobacco is well known as a major contribution towards ill-health and premature mortality. What shocked me in the report was the fact that the incidence of cancer related to smoking has overtaken the incidence of breast cancer. That popped off the page.

Notwithstanding the Tobacco Free Ireland report, smoking during pregnancy is not mentioned in this report. I have raised this issue with the Minister of State, Deputy Alex White, in the Dáil in the past couple of weeks, particularly around how we assist women to give up smoking, because of the effect on the unborn child. I made a suggestion that women should be given nicotine patches under the supervision of their GP to help them give up smoking. I have spoken to a number of GPs in England and Ireland on giving patches under medical supervision to pregnant women. I appreciate that the patches are free in England, but I think we should look at this because anything that can help a woman to give up smoking while pregnant is of great value. Will the Minister elaborate on that point?

I wish to raise the NRT, nicotine replacement therapy, for medical cardholders. Will the Minister clarify what types of nicotine replacement therapy are available? Is it patches, gum or just therapy as in counselling and so on?

Tá a lán ceisteanna anseo.

I thank Deputy Ó Caoláin for his support. I think he mentions that the jury is still out on this issue but I would dispute that with him. There is a whole host of reports from the past two years, in the order of 37 different studies and reports. An analysis done by Moodie et al in 2012 suggests that standardised packaging can reduce the appeal of tobacco products, increase the effectiveness of health warnings and reduce the ability of branded tobacco packaging to mislead customers about the harmful effects of smoking. That is very much the case in terms of having a plain package, as the one I have described here, that does not confuse. There is one message, namely, "This is not good for you". That is the truth. The more messaging one has on a tobacco package, the less likely one is to get the core message across.

It is more effective to have plain colouring and one simple message, delivered both in writing and with a graphic picture and the 37 studies support this. The 2012 review conducted by Moodie across these studies states that it is worth emphasising the remarkable consistency in study findings regarding the potential impact of plain packaging. Across studies using different designs conducted in a range of countries and with smokers and non-smokers, the key findings are similar. This consistency of evidence can provide confidence about the observed potential effects of plain packaging. If and when introduced, existing evidence suggests that plain packaging represents an additional tobacco control measure that has the potential to contribute to reductions in the harm caused by tobacco smoking now and into the future. That is why I said in my opening remarks that this is about protecting children and future generations from ever taking this product. I will be astonished if the tobacco industry does not fight us tooth and nail on this because they know, as they do more research than anybody, that it will work as well. They have billions of euro at their disposal. They are terrified of it. They will leave no stone unturned or no group unsolicited for support to try to block this.

I will go through the contributions seriatim as I might miss something that somebody has said. There is a report out today from KPMG sponsored by the tobacco industry showing there has been no reduction. I would like to get the details of how that was carried out. This is the industry that knew in 1959 it was selling a carcinogen but never told anyone.

I would take very carefully anything that would emanate from a tobacco-sponsored report and examine it very closely.

The Deputy asked about the state of readiness of Britain and France. I will refer those questions on to the chief medical officer. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all my colleagues in the EU for supporting the EU directive during the Irish Presidency and for ensuring the trialogues can start, in terms of this directive, with the Commission.

Several members have spoken about the illicit trade and the seizure of cigarettes. I accept that people come to us and make representations. I am pleased that the committee is inviting a broad section of people to come in and make their positions known. We want this Bill to be a very good Bill. We want it to be legally proofed. We will take all arguments that come in and examine them very closely. I think I will address the seizure of cigarettes. Many members have addressed the issue of the illicit trade. The bottom line is that this is an enforcement issue for Revenue, which is now reviewing its strategy with the intention of bringing out a new strategy to deal with it. This issue is also dealt with by the Garda as a matter of course. Like others, I am concerned to ensure severe penalties are put in place to deal with those who sell to people who are under age, those who smuggle and those who are found with illegal cigarettes. Almost 90% of the approximately 6 million cigarettes confiscated last year were contraband and just over 10% of them were counterfeit. The tobacco companies are laughing all the way to the bank one way or the other because they are producing these cigarettes in other countries. They are not having them smuggled in here, but they are being smuggled in here. They are at no loss because they have been paid for them already elsewhere. They are only affected by the counterfeit ones.

The argument that has been made in the past - nobody has raised it here today - is that these measures will make it much easier to counterfeit. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, this will make it easier to police the illegal trade. No country in Europe other than Ireland is doing this at the moment. They will stick out like a sore thumb. I believe this will be advantageous in relation to that trade. This is an issue for the Department of Justice and Equality, as I have said. The Deputy asked about how seized cigarettes are disposed of. There will be ceremonial public disposals of seized cigarettes. There are many ways to dispose of them.

Deputy Dowds asked whether the Department of Health can put pressure on the Department of Finance with regard to the limits that are in place at the moment. We continually talk to our counterparts in the Department of Finance about this issue. We also talk to them about the price of cigarettes because we know they are price-sensitive. I have said on many occasions that I would like each individual cigarette to cost €1, so that people will think long and hard before they drag long and hard. I also believe that a sudden sharp rise in cigarette prices often shocks people into giving up smoking. I do not think incremental price increases are of as much assistance in that regard.

The Deputy suggested that in some areas, up to one third of cigarettes may be illegal. That may be so, but I would not say that position obtains across the country by any means. He also suggested that the tobacco industry is taking the State to the cleaners. There is no doubt that as part of the tobacco companies' strategy, they threaten litigation in the hope that people will hang back. I can verify to this committee that politicians from other jurisdictions have said to me "We will hold back and wait to see how you guys get on". We often said the same thing. We waited to see how Scotland would get on with minimum unit pricing when court cases were pursued in that regard.

The tobacco industry would like to intimidate certain countries. It would particularly like to intimidate a country like Ireland. It was reported to me that representatives of the industry were in Europe in the Commissioner's office threatening to sue Ireland for our national gross domestic product on the basis of intellectual property rights. I cannot verify this. I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate clearly that it would be fairly strange to live in a society that would put the lives and well-being of its citizens behind an argument on intellectual property rights. I do not believe it is the wish of the Irish people for Ireland to be such a society. I do not believe many western societies would choose to put intellectual property rights ahead of the lives of children. I cannot imagine that would be the case. I remind members to be under no illusion that the tobacco companies will try every single method available to them to derail this.

I thank Deputy Mitchell O'Connor for her support. I have just dealt with the issue of legal opinion, which she raised.

I must inform Senator Colm Burke that there is a vote in the Seanad. I apologise for interrupting the Minister.

Would the Chair like me to deal with the issues raised by Senator Burke before he leaves?

I will ask Dr. Holohan to talk about how we are going to track the progress of the tobacco-free Ireland initiative and similar initiatives, such as the campaign aimed at pregnant women.

The Minister will respond to Deputy Mitchell O'Connor's questions after that.

Dr. Tony Holohan

We are in the process of developing a three-year action plan. There will be cycles of three-year action planning with detailed actions. I will be happy to give the Senator a sense of the kinds of things we are talking about in that context and set out some of the kinds of measures in question. The single most important measure we will be tracking is the population prevalence of tobacco because that is the overall target. We are not saying there will be certain targets along the way. It is a single target and we will be monitoring progress in the direction of that target.

Deputy Mitchell O'Connor asked about the campaign aimed at pregnant women. I think it is a very worthwhile campaign. There was a similar campaign a couple of years ago. Deputy Catherine Byrne made a proposal regarding nicotine replacement therapy in this context. I will certainly examine that. We would have to get it costed. It is important to send out a message from today's meeting that nicotine replacement therapy is far safer in pregnancy than smoking. I will come back to the other questions in due course if that is okay.

The argument about damage to Ireland's intellectual property reputation is another spurious one. This country has very strong property laws. They are attacking us on intellectual property rights because they know this country has a Constitution that provides very strong protections to property rights. We have taken our legal advice. I would be aware that the tobacco industry has retained a large number of senior counsel. They might not use them, but the fact that the tobacco industry has retained them means we cannot use them. We saw that coming. We took action before that became the case. We have a good team to defend any challenge to this legislation. Part of that team is in this room. I thank the members of this committee for that. Their consideration of the heads of the Bill will help to inform the Bill itself. The further review of that Bill before it becomes law will be the best protection we can confer on that Bill to ensure it stands up to any challenge.

I assure Deputy Mitchell O'Connor that not a year goes by without the inclusion of the introduction of a sugar tax, which she raised in the context of childhood obesity, on the wish list we submit to Revenue. While Revenue has not yet seen fit to accept our proposal, I believe we will eventually succeed in introducing such a tax. The pressure will be on again this year to ensure this issue is tackled.

Deputy Neville spoke about stepping up the campaign to combat the illicit trade in cigarettes. As I have said, 90% of the illegal trade is contraband as opposed to counterfeit. Licensing laws are going to come in as well. There will be more stringent observation of that. Any breaches will lead to severe penalties being imposed on those who sell cigarettes without a licence or who sell cigarettes to a minor under the age of 18. I believe we should also have more severe penalties for anybody who is found selling or smuggling illegal cigarettes.

Deputy Regina Doherty asked about head 13 of the proposed Bill. I will let Dr. Holohan deal with that. She also asked what ex-smokers spend their money on.

As a general practitioner, I used to advise people who gave up cigarettes to put the money they saved in a jar and spend it on themselves in a different way. The Deputy is correct that we could commission some research to identify where this money is spent. I have no doubt it stays in the economy and does not disappear up chimneys in puffs of smoke.

We can examine the issue of nicotine replacement therapies only being available in pharmacies. Given the increasing number of items sold over the counter, I do not see any reason all retailers of cigarettes would not at some point sell nicotine replacement patches.

The number of people who have given up cigarettes is decreasing. The Minister makes a good point about retailers selling nicotine replacement products, rather than requiring people to visit pharmacies to purchase them. Will that possibility be considered?

Yes, it was recommended in the Tobacco Free Ireland report. The Department is on the ball.

Senator Crown referred to threats from the American Chamber of Commerce and he is correct that letters were written to try to intimidate us. They were not written by the American Chamber of Commerce but by people represented by the chamber who described themselves as something else. I believe there were six signatories to the letter.

We all received representations from four members of the House of Representatives, all of whom come from big tobacco constituencies. The joint committee has invited them to appear before us.

We must be clear and calm about this issue. This is a very serious public health measure on which we will not be deterred by anybody. Irish people have a right to self-determination and the role of Members is to represent them. The vast bulk of Irish people support our position on this matter. This affords me an opportunity to consult my iPad to cite the findings of a survey conducted by Ipsos MRBI on behalf of the Irish Cancer Society, the Irish Heart Foundation, the Irish Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Children, Barnardos, the Children's Rights Alliance, the Asthma Society of Ireland, the Irish Heart Foundation, the Irish Cancer Society, ASH Ireland and the Irish Thoracic Society. A news release on the survey findings states:

The new law is being introduced to protect children’s health by inserting large graphic warnings of the fatal consequences of smoking on cigarette packs and making it illegal for tobacco companies to use colour, text and packet size to market cigarettes. The study shows that whilst the plain packs have the backing of 74% of non-smokers, a majority of smokers are also in favour, with 58% supporting the Government legislation which is due to come into force next year.

The Chairman will be pleased to note that the highest regional support for the plan was in Munster and Leinster, outside Dublin, where support stood at 74%. Men, at 73%, were also more supportive of the legislation than women, at 69%. People are with us on this issue because they are wise and know the harm done by cigarettes. They have experienced scenes similar to those I described from experience, not only throughout my professional life but also in my personal life. They know the harm this product causes and want their children to be protected. I fully accept that the legislation may not cause everyone who is so addicted to cigarette smoking to give up cigarettes. However, a survey conducted in Canada after graphic warnings were introduced found a fourfold increase in the number of smokers expressing a desire to quit.

Senator Crown referred to the Bill on smoking in cars. While I and my Department fully support the legislation, we are trying to get through a significant number of Bills. I must give priority to this legislation because it is of critical importance. As licensing is part of the budgetary consideration, it must be implemented. There is no slouching on this matter and nobody is holding back on the Bill on smoking in cars. The Attorney General is working through a number of technical difficulties in the legislation. I may seek additional support for the tobacco unit in terms of drafting capability because we have a great deal of work on our plate.

Deputy Troy referred to 6,000 submissions received by the Department. The chief medical officer will address this issue. As far as I am aware, it was the European Union, rather than my Department, which sought submissions. It is appropriate that the Deputy raises the issue because it is another ploy used by the tobacco industry as it seeks to have as many people as possible make as many submissions as possible in order to deluge the Department and slow down the process. Every year produces countless billions of euro in profit for the industry and another 700,000 deaths in Europe from tobacco related illness. The tobacco industry knows that if Ireland succeeds, which we will, England, Scotland, France and the rest of the Europe will not be far behind. This is what scares it and the United States is not ignoring what we are doing either.

Deputy Troy also noted that the 82% of the surface area of cigarette packs is covered in Australia compared to 65% here. I have already discussed in detail our view that this Bill must stand and should not be allowed to fall on technicalities. For this reason, we are keeping the surface area to be covered within the range agreed in the European directive. As such, we cannot be challenged on that front. Australia is an independent island and law unto itself, although Australians would probably prefer to have their country described as a large continent. In any event, it is a large continent surrounded by water. The bottom line is that it has sole jurisdiction in this matter and does not have to be joined in EU law.

I have addressed the issue of the illegal trade in tobacco which the Deputy also raised. This is a matter for the Revenue and Department of Justice and Equality to pursue. However, if cigarette packets are uniform and one colour, it will be easy to spot packets that are different from the norm and people will be asked how they got them.

Deputy Catherine Byrne referred to the cost of providing nicotine replacement therapy for pregnant women. As a doctor, I would like it to be made available to pregnant women. We have an excellent antenatal care scheme which brings women into regular contact with health professionals during the course of a pregnancy. It would be a great way to start a campaign of getting off and staying off cigarettes. If women can stop smoking during their pregnancy, the chances that they will stay off them after the baby is born are very high. Pregnancy is a time when many women stop smoking.

I thank the Minister for his reply. While I cannot provide costings for measures, I am sure the Department could do so and I am certain the cost of providing nicotine replacement therapy to pregnant women who smoke would be far outweighed by the subsequent costs of providing medical treatment for babies and mothers. Are figures available for the number of people who avail of nicotine replacement therapy under the medical card scheme?

On the issue of contraband being brought in through airports and ports, I hear a great deal about tobacco being brought in from the North. There are many minor roads in the Border region. Is anything being done to prevent illegal trafficking of tobacco from the North? It is easy to smuggle tobacco that has been brought into Northern Ireland into the Republic. I know from people who work in Dublin Airport that there is a crackdown on the smuggling of cigarettes at the airport and its security system has become much more advanced recently. I do not believe there is correlation between higher tobacco prices and the number of contraband cigarettes. The higher the price, the larger the number of smokers who quit.

The Minister is correct about people who give up smoking putting savings aside in a jar. I know people who have been able to take two holidays in one year paid for from the savings they made from giving up smoking. They were blown away by this because they did not realise they smoked so much or spent so much on the habit.

Dr. Tony Holohan

I have a couple of additional comments to make. On Deputy Ó Caoláin's question on smoke-free hospital campuses, the process is almost complete.

There is one hospital campus that will not become smoke-free until January. Our clear understanding is that very little has arisen by way of significant issues. Perhaps I can spend a moment on this issue. I will seek a formal report from the HSE on this matter because we have a leadership responsibility in the health sector to demonstrate what can be done in regard to smoke-free campuses for other sectors. As the Minister has already mentioned, our Healthy Ireland framework already cuts across the divisional group that I chair of people at assistant secretary level from all Departments. Through that, we are asking that all public service workplaces be required by the Government to promote and protect the health and well-being of their staff, their clients and the communities they serve. As an element of the implementation of that particular framework, we will use our example of implementation of smoke-free campuses throughout the health sector as a leadership example for other Departments, encouraging them to respond similarly with regard to campuses that are relevant in their sectors. Clearly, schools are a high priority in this regard, as recommended in Tobacco Free Ireland.

The Deputy asked about evidence from Australia. The Minister has given that.

With respect, that is not the evidence I was seeking. That seems to be a contrary position from the tobacco industry. I am looking for the affirmative response of either the Australian Government or the Department of Health, not what the tobacco industry might sponsor.

Dr. Tony Holohan

We are in constant communication with Australia and with the Department there. According to some of the initial work it has done, there are perceived differences in the taste of the products, which gives us preliminary encouragement, but we have to await a proper evaluation. I am not suggesting the Deputy has said anything in this regard, but we would all feel it was reasonable that they be given a period of 12 months in which to evaluate something that has not yet been introduced anywhere else. All the evidence we have points towards success. I am certainly satisfied about it. We are satisfied as to the evidence base behind what we are doing.

The Deputy asked what value we may be able to get out of using the disposal of seized cigarettes in a promotional sense. That is an interesting question that we will consider in our discussions with the Revenue Commissioners, with whom we have an ongoing relationship in the context of much of this work. Certainly our intention in much of that engagement is that we seek collectively to up our performance in terms of the alignment between what we are trying to do and what the Revenue Commissioners are trying to do. Ultimately we have the same objective, which is to reduce the number of cigarettes in existence. We are certain they have common cause with us on our objective of reducing smoking.

Deputy Regina Doherty raised a specific point about head 13. That is an exclusion for people who purchase cigarettes that do not meet our labelling requirements outside the State and bring them in. That is to exclude from the penalties people who bring back cigarettes from their holidays.

Does it mean that if I walk up to Moore Street after the Bill is enacted and buy a packet of cigarettes from the fellow with the duffel bag that he is still excluded?

Dr. Tony Holohan

That person is committing a crime already.

Yes, he is. Am I committing a crime? The way I read that head is that it also excludes me because I would be buying it for my own personal use. I appreciate that if I go to Spain and bring some cigarettes back in my suitcase that is fine. I am asking specifically about those people who are actively going to the sellers of contraband stock. Are we excluding them too?

Dr. Tony Holohan

Purchasing an illegal product is illegal.

One is committing a crime.

Dr. Tony Holohan

As the Minister has already said in relation to-----

I have strong memories of a similar issue from the past, when people were buying, for example, very expensive cameras abroad. If one was caught with them here and could not provide a receipt or proof of where one had purchased it, one was in trouble.

Dr. Tony Holohan

As the Minister has mentioned, the licensing provisions would tighten up the sale of cigarettes significantly. That is certainly our intention. The question of nicotine replacement therapy was raised. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked about the different forms in which it comes. It is provided free on the medical card.

What is the figure?

Dr. Tony Holohan

I do not have those figures with me today but we can undertake to get them.

That is grand. I thank Dr. Holohan.

Dr. Tony Holohan

I am not certain that it will allow us to demonstrate how much of it is delivered in various forms.

If there are any figures available I would be grateful.

Dr. Tony Holohan

Okay.

As a consequence of the submission process we have 6,000 submissions. On our behalf the Institute of Public Health is doing an analysis of those and we hope to have a report on them in the near future. As the Minister has already said, this is part of the tactical game that is played by the industry to drown us, if I may say it, in paper.

Give us examples of whom they are from.

Dr. Tony Holohan

They are from a range of different parties. We will set all that out in the report.

When they all come deluging in we will be able to give clear evidence of who they are, rather than supposition that could allow people to accuse us of being-----

We should have it in the short term rather than the long term as part of the deliberations on the heads of the Bill.

Dr. Tony Holohan

In the deliberations on the heads of the Bill, we should be in a position to have a report of the format. To be clear, that was in response to the tobacco products directive. Some of the submissions made reference to standardised packaging and for that reason they informed some of our thinking, but it was not specifically about standardised packages. Once we have it, we will make the report available to the members of the committee if they wish. These submissions add to the significant increase in our workload that we have noticed in the form of freedom of information requests and other forms of activity that are generated directly or indirectly by the tobacco industry. Part of the strategy is to delay us by affecting our capacity to get the necessary work done for the legislation process by diverting us into some of these other activities. No doubt that is a tactical exercise on behalf of the industry. I think I have dealt with the remaining questions.

I thank Dr. Tony Holohan.

Very good. Aon duine eile?

I thank everybody for their support. I am looking forward to the hearings. I have no doubt they will inform us in a very real way in the production and publication of the Bill. I am aware that retailers have had concerns in the past, but this morning's news, which was on the Internet last night, that Ireland is now the best country in the world in which to do business - not just the best small country - should be of some reassurance to them. If I were to sum up what this measure is about, I would say it was about putting another nail in the coffin of these coffin nails.

I thank the Minister, Dr. Tony Holohan and Ms Geraldine Luddy for their attendance. Prior to Christmas we will have internal deliberations on the structure of the hearings that will take place in January. We will hold open and fair hearings and give the Bill every consideration to assist the Minister and his Department in producing a Bill that is as near perfect as possible. I thank members for their presence and patience during our two meetings this morning.

I remind members that on Tuesday we are holding a session on our work programme for 2014, along with European scrutiny on outstanding matters for 2013, at 5 p.m. If members have not communicated to the secretariat their items for inclusion in the work programme I ask them to do so as soon as possible.

May I seek clarification?

Is it the case that where we have signalled items on an ongoing basis, we do not have to repeat them - that our requests have been noted by the secretariat?

The Deputy might just communicate-----

I refer to issues such as the one I highlighted this morning about the excessive cost of child care following on from the report yesterday.

I hope I will not have to put that in writing again.

I hope not.

The joint committee adjourned at 2 p.m. until 5.15 p.m. on Tuesday, 10 December 2013.
Top
Share