Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality debate -
Wednesday, 19 Nov 2014

Public Order Offences from Alcohol Misuse Perspective: Discussion (Resumed)

Chairman

The purpose of the meeting is to have an engagement with representatives of the National Off-Licence Association and the Vintners' Federation of Ireland. Briefings have been circulated to members. I welcome Ms Evelyn Jones, Mr. Kevin O'Brien and Mr. Martin Moran from the National Off-Licence Association and Ms Noreen O'Sullivan, and Mr. Padraig Cribben from the Vintners' Federation of Ireland.

The format of the meeting is that I will invite representatives to make some opening remarks for approximately five minutes followed by a question and answer session with members which, from experience, we find is the most interesting part of an engagement such as this.

As this meeting is being broadcast on the Oireachtas television channel, I would ask everybody to turn off their mobile telephones and any other devices which might interfere with the broadcast. It is annoying if such interference comes across the airwaves.

Before we begin, I draw attention of all witnesses to the situation in relation to privilege. The should note, by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to do so, they will be 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 any person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. Members should be aware that, under the Salient Rulings of the Chair, members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person or persons outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The meeting is about alcohol. This is the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality and our focus is on matters such as public order, accidents and criminality. What we are really looking for at the end of the day is how to resolve some of the issues and what solutions the groups might come up with. The groups are the experts in this area, far more expert than we are. That is why we welcome the opportunity to engage with them this morning and to learn from their experience and what they have to bring to this. We are looking at public order, criminality, accidents, and possibly depression-suicide, which is also linked. However, we do not want to stray too much into the health area, which is the remit of a different committee. I invite Ms Jones to start the proceedings.

Ms Evelyn Jones

I thank the Chairman and members for the invitation to appear before the committee today to outline the National Off-Licence Association's recommendations on tackling problem drinking from a public order perspective.

The National Off-Licence Association, NOffLA, is a representative body consisting of 315 independent off-licence members across Ireland. We represent almost 6,000 workers across 26 counties, and work to promote the responsible sale, marketing and consumption of alcohol and to share best practices with the entire trade. It is a mandatory requirement for membership of NOffLA that one is trained and examined under NOffLA's responsible trading certificate to ensure that alcohol is retailed in the safest and most responsible manner possible. Our members' outlets tend to be owner-operated and located in the heart of their communities. As alcohol is our primary product, retailing responsibility and, by extension, retaining a clean off-trade licence is of fundamental importance, as loss of licence equals loss of livelihood.

NOffLA welcomes all new measures designed to curb problem drinking and reduce public order offences and looks forward to the introduction of the public health (alcohol) Bill, amongst other legislation, for its potential to curb irresponsible pricing and promotion of alcohol. Conscious of the delays that can occur in bringing about new legislative mechanisms, including delays entirely out of the hands of the Government such as European scrutiny, NOffLA stresses the urgency in considering matters already on the Statute Book that can have an immediate and positive impact.

NOffLA believes that a stringent application of existing laws regarding both the sale and consumption of alcohol would serve to limit the access of young people to alcohol. This would reduce the levels of public drunkenness and by extension, social order issues. For example, fines ranging from €500 to €5,000, as well as summary convictions, exist for the following offences: adolescents who purchase alcohol, adolescents who lie about their age to purchase alcohol, adolescents who consume alcohol in public, adults who purchase alcohol for children, and adults who permit a child to consume alcohol in their home without the express consent of their parent or guardian. Lesser, yet still notably punitive, fines exist for public drunkenness and any offensive and abusive actions that can ensue. Were it to become common knowledge through enforcement that public and underage drunkenness carry heavy penalties, individuals would think twice before consuming to excess and committing these offences. A full list of these infractions can be found in the presentation appendices.

NOffLA does not seek to place the blame solely on the consumer, recognising that alcohol retailers are the final link between the product and any consumer who may ultimately commit the public order offence. NOffLA has no time or sympathy for any retailer involved in the irresponsible retailing of alcohol as ultimately those of us who retail strictly within the law are punished for their irresponsibility in terms of our reputation as responsible retailers. Matters such as underage purchasing should be rigorously investigated by An Garda Síochána to identify how the alcohol was acquired and harsh sanctions be delivered as appropriate. I must add that these investigations may be hampered by a wider systemic shortfall in community policing due to other Garda commitments. This often results in suspected incidences of proxy-purchasing being reported by retailers but not being caught in time by the Garda due to its limited resources.

To mitigate the incidence of irresponsible retail in the off-trade, NOffLA has long maintained that the current Responsible Retailers of Alcohol in Ireland, RRAI, code of practice on the display and sale of alcohol products in supermarkets, petrol stations and convenience stores is entirely unfit for purpose and is in desperate need of replacement. Not only is the code voluntary, it permits the self-service of alcohol and contains ambiguous terms such as "as far as possible" that results in seemingly high compliance rates for retailers that do not nearly match the prevalence of these irresponsible practices.

NOffLA strongly disagrees with the decision by successive Governments not to enact section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008, which provides for the separation of alcohol products from all other grocery products in mixed trading premises. The proposed substitute, the publication of a statutory code using section 16 of the miscellaneous provisions Bill promised since October 2013, while far from ideal, is nonetheless eagerly awaited. We understand, however, that there may be an issue with the lack of sanction contained in section 16 of the miscellaneous provisions Bill which is causing delays at the Office of the Attorney General, and would ask the committee to consider calling on the Minister for Justice and Equality to immediately enact section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008, which will have the same impact and, more importantly, the required sanction.

Either way, we believe the introduction of the statutory code, using section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008 or section 16 of the miscellaneous provisions Bill, should reflect the urgency of this issue and we would recommend that it adequately addresses the need to separate alcohol from other products with a clear divisible means of access. Access to this alcohol area should be strictly confined to adults and exclude those under 18 unless they are accompanied by an adult - which is currently the law in off-licences. Alcohol should only be purchased in this area with a dedicated till operated by a trained shop assistant. Our full recommendations in this regard can also be found in the presentation appendices.

NOffLA recommends also that the committee consider augmenting the powers and protections afforded to off-licence retailers so that they can exercise judgment in refusing sales, whether it be a consumer's state of mind or suspicion that he or she is buying for others, without fear of infringing on that person's civil liberties. Our hands are tied legally, for example, from preventing a young person on his or her 18th birthday buying a litre of spirits even though it is unlikely that the person alone will consume that quantity - and if that were the case, it would be even more dangerous. An example of the issues faced by off-licence retailers and the legal risks are illustrated in Appendix II of the presentation. This is where a member of ours received a solicitor's letter stating that a girl of 18 years plus ten days who had been refused a litre of vodka had her civil liberties infringed by our member refusing to sell it to her and offering to sell her a smaller amount.

The National Off-Licence Association is grateful for the opportunity to appear before the committee today, and grateful for the committee's time in considering the points we have made. We look forward to working with the committee, and Government, on this important issue. We are happy to elaborate on the issues presented and relevant questions the committee may have.

By way of context, I am accompanied by Mr. Kevin O'Brien, an off-licence proprietor in the busy Mulhuddart area who employs 15 people and is knowledgeable regarding staff training, benefits of community policing and local public order issues, and Mr. Martin Moran who advises NOffLA members on licensing law and related legal issues, and as such can clarify any matters in this regard. As for myself, I operate an off-licence in Rathgar as well as being the Chair of the National Off-Licence Association.

Mr. Padraig Cribben

I welcome the opportunity to address the committee. I am accompanied by Ms Noreen O'Sullivan, who is our national president and a publican operating in Nenagh, County Tipperary. Much of what I have to say will echo many of the comments made by Ms Jones. I am here in my capacity as chief executive of the Vintners' Federation of Ireland, which represents thousands of small businesses which run public houses outside Dublin. The federation has 4,000 members.

The theme of this meeting is legislative issues surrounding licensing laws. This discussion is most welcome because the current licensing situation in Ireland is putting small businesses at a distinct disadvantage. Changes to the laws surrounding how alcohol is sold, especially the removal of the groceries order in 2006, have been instrumental in driving a sea change in the way in which Irish people consume alcohol. In 1999, 60% of the volume of alcohol consumed in Ireland was bought in the on-trade and 40% was bought in the off-trade. By 2013, those ratios had been completely reversed. This has had a number of profound affects, including: the loss of thousands of jobs from the employment intensive on-trade; the health impact of encouraging drinking outside of a regulated environment; and the social impact resulting from isolation. The grim reality, which many of the members will recognise, is that the rural pub is slowly disappearing from the landscape.

Given that this committee is focused on the legislative issues surrounding licensing laws, I do not intend to dwell on the impact that the rural pub has on local communities and Ireland's tourism infrastructure. Instead, we will turn our attention to the specific policy issues that this committee must consider in the context of the Irish licensing regime. Members of the drinks industry in Ireland are very aware that there are issues surrounding the misuse of alcohol. We want to work with the Government to address these issues, not least because they are causing significant damage to the reputation of an industry which supports 92,000 jobs throughout the country. That is why members of the Support Your Local campaign – which includes pubs, restaurants, hotels and independent off-licences, as well as drinks suppliers throughout the country – issued a pledge in April 2014 to work with the Government on the implementation of meaningful policy measures to combat alcohol misuse. These measures involve addressing the sale of cheap alcohol; introducing a statutory ban on price-based advertising; and introducing statutory codes to regulate the merchandising of alcohol. I will now comment briefly on each of these.

As already stated, in 2006 the then Government removed the groceries order on all goods including alcohol. This was despite warnings from the drinks industry that it would lead to a situation in which supermarkets would follow the example of their UK counterparts and use alcohol as a footfall driver. Unfortunately, that prophecy has been proved absolutely correct. In light of the complete absence of real regulation on the way alcohol can be purchased in supermarkets, footfall is often driven through offering promotions relating to the quantity of alcohol purchased. Gone are the days of the humble six pack. Consumers are now offered slabs of beer and this beer is actually cheaper than water. To place this matter in context, I have in my possession a copy of an advertisement from a Sunday newspaper published prior to St. Patrick's Day 2005 in which a slab of beer is advertised at "cost price". The price quoted in the advertisement is €37.98. If one purchases today's edition of the Irish Independent, one will see that the same product is now being sold for €24. This places the effect of the abolition of the groceries order, as it relates to the sale of alcohol, into perspective.

The scale of the problem we are discussing can be difficult to articulate properly because the CSO does not collect information on promotions. However, industry figures show that 60% of the volume of alcohol sold in Ireland is now purchased in off-licences - mainly those attached to multiple supermarkets - and that 70% of off-licence alcohol is sold on promotion. This means that 42% of the volume of all alcohol sold in this country is bought at close to or below cost. In an attempt to make back margin on such sales, the price of bread, nappies, milk and other such products must be increased. The Government needs to address this issue as a matter of urgency and the drinks industry stands ready to work with it when it does so. It should be noted that the State actually subsidises this below-cost sale of alcohol through the VAT system.

Footfall is often driven through supermarkets by large expenditure in the media, particularly the print media. Not only is this contributing to the problem I have just outlined, it is also creating an environment wherein the sale of cheap alcohol is normalised. One need only look at a Sunday newspaper in the days before a bank holiday weekend - or any weekend - to see the scale of price-based advertising on the part of the multiple retail chains. Before 2006, multiple retailers used promotions on consumer electronics and other products to drive footfall but the removal of the groceries order has allowed them to use alcohol instead. If the Government were to act to ban this practice, these retailers would simply find a new product to entice consumers into their stores. The mechanism for the Government to address this issue already exists. Section 16(2) of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008 allows that where the Minister is satisfied that the medium used for the advertising, or the nature of the advertising, or both, is intended or likely to encourage the consumption of intoxicating liquor to an excessive extent, the need to prohibit or restrict such advertising will come into play. There can be no doubt that price-based advertising in the print media, whereby consumers are often encouraged to purchase more and more to maximise the so-called value of a promotion, falls under this category.

The final point that needs to be considered by the committee relates to placing codes to regulate alcohol on a statutory footing. There is one particular code which I wish to highlight and to which Ms Jones has already referred. The 2008 Act contains provisions in respect of separating alcohol from other products in mixed-trading outlets. Essentially, those who drafted the Act wanted to put a stop to the practice of placing white wine beside nappies in supermarkets. However, following an extensive lobby from the multiple retail chains, section 9 of the Act, which contains these provisions, was not commenced. Instead the voluntary responsible retailing of alcohol in Ireland code was introduced. In substance, this code differs from what was proposed in the Act in a single - but central - way namely, it is voluntary rather than statutory in nature. The code states that certain things should be put in place but, as Ms Jones pointed out, the inclusion of the phrase "as far as possible" renders it meaningless and useless. Naturally, this phrase made the entire code redundant and to this day it has been honoured more in the breach than in the observance. The Government must commence this section of the 2008 Act in order to force large multiple retailers to level the playing field. We simply want to operate in a fair trading environment where the substantial advantages that the large multiple retailers enjoy are not copper-fastened in legislation.

Current licensing laws date back to 1833 and have been updated regularly since then. The result is a very intricate and complicated set of laws. These laws need to be simplified and their consolidation has been promised for almost ten years. Unfortunately, this matter has actually slipped down the list of priorities. The consolidating legislation is now promised for mid-2015. However, a promise in this regard has been made on an annual basis for almost a decade. Part of the regime to which I refer involves licensing hours and days. At present, Good Friday is a prohibited day. The Easter weekend has become a central part of the tourist offering and it is impossible to continue to justifying this position. A Private Members' Bill to rectify the position in this regard was introduced in the Seanad and we would urge members to support it.

I thank members for their attention and we will gladly try to answer any questions they may wish to pose.

Senator Ivana Bacik

I apologise for the fact that I will be obliged to leave in a moment in order to go to the Seanad. I thank our guests for their presentations. Is there a conflict between the two groups in respect of section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008? I am seeking to obtain clarity on the respective positions of the two organisations represented by our guests in the context of bringing the section into effect. Mr. Cribben clearly indicated that the voluntary code is not sufficient and that section 9 of the 2008 Act should be commenced. Will Ms Jones outline her organisation's position on that matter?

Ms Evelyn Jones

Our position on the voluntary code would be that voluntary regulation of the sale of alcohol is not adequate. We have always been in favour of the commencement of section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008.

That section should have been brought in in 2008 and now as we approach 2015, all we are being offered is a statutory code, with no sanction. The sanction for a breach of the code is that it may form the basis for an objection to the renewal of the licence. Legally, I do not see how they can bring in that statutory code. That is what is holding it up. It has been sitting in the Office of the Attorney General.

Senator Ivana Bacik

I thank Ms Jones for clarifying that point; it has been helpful.

Chairman

Does the Senator wish to ask another question?

Senator Ivana Bacik

I have one more question. I should declare an interest, having acted in case law on the selling of alcohol to under-age persons. I am conscious that in her presentations Ms Jones displayed a letter about the conflict between responsible retail and consumer's rights. In her view, what is the best way to resolve that issue? I have worked in this area and I know the difficulties that arise, but what is the best way to deal with this issue?

Ms Evelyn Jones

As a proprietor of an off-licence, it is something that we would micromanage ourselves. It is a delicate balance. In certain cases, we would be in breach of people's civil liberties, but we do so because we are not comfortable with selling alcohol to people who are marginalised. Obviously we are not comfortable selling alcohol to persons who are under age and we are definitely not comfortable selling alcohol to an adult who will give it to a child. We have to police an area of 100 metres in front of our shops, so one would keep an eye out. If one saw an adult walk out with six cans of beer and hand it to a child, one would confiscate that alcohol and bring it back into the shop. The offending person would have to come and look for a refund. Sometimes we have to take it on the chin and risk the breaches of civil liberties. It is not ideal, but it is preferable to the other option.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

A young person can buy 20 bottles of a particular brand of alcohol for €20 in a supermarket, yet one could pay €120 for the same number of bottles of the product in a pub if the group of young people were able to consume the 20 bottles in the evening. There is a significant difference in price. How can one pay €5.50 or €6 for a bottle of alcohol that can be sold in a supermarket for €1? Obviously people will go to the supermarket to buy it. What has been the engagement with Government on this issue? The reality is that part of the cultural life of Ireland historically has been the pub, where one goes to have a drink with friends, act responsibly and not drink too much. It has been part of our culture. If people can purchase the same amount of alcohol for a fraction of the price in some premises, what is the reason for the price differential? What efforts have been made by the representatives to gain an understanding why Government has not addressed this issue? In the current economic climate people will buy alcohol at the cheapest possible price. The National Off-Licence Association and the Vintners' Federation of Ireland must be responsible but the Government has left them in this situation.

Mr. Padraig Cribben

I will address the price issue. Most of the time, and to repeat what I said earlier, 42% of all alcohol is sold on promotion. Some 70% of what one sees in the supermarket is sold on promotion, which is generally below cost. One cannot compare the price and value in the supermarket with what one gets in a pub. They are two very different experiences. One goes into a pub, and the publican is paying for lighting, entertainment, for Sky Sports, water charges and so on.

The product that is being sold in the supermarket is being sold below cost. There is the perception that this is consumer-friendly. It is anything but consumer-friendly. The supermarkets are super-profitable and they must recoup the cost of the promotion. One does not become super-profitable by selling one's products below cost. One has a footfall driver and one sells that below cost to get people in but when people come in they buy other products. The price and the cost to the consumer of other staple products, whether they be bread, milk or nappies, is increased.

Our engagement with Government for quite some time has been to request the introduction of a minimum unit price for alcohol. In 2014, the broader drinks industry signed a pledge that it would work with Government to tackle the issue of cheap alcohol. There are a number of ways to do it. One way is to reintroduce the groceries order. That worked in the past, it can work again and it is immediate. Minimum unit pricing is another option. We recognise, and people may not be aware, that the concept of minimum unit pricing has been introduced in Scotland but it has been held up because some vested interests have taken a court case against it which is now being adjudicated in Europe. We all know that Europe does not necessarily move too quickly as it takes a long time to get out of first gear into second gear. We are probably looking at a period of 18 months to two years for that adjudication.

The Government made a commitment this time last year to introduce minimum unit pricing. It has committed to addressing the issue of how alcohol is marketed and merchandised in supermarkets. This time last year the Government committed to addressing the issue of price-based advertising. Unfortunately, we have not seen the meat on the bones of those commitments.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

I would know of the issues that Mr. Cribben from the Vintners' Federation of Ireland raised, having been made aware of them by the local publicans in my area, who would have raised them with me repeatedly, particularly what Sky channels cost, which is extraordinary.

When a young person can go into a supermarket and buy alcohol at a cheaper price than water, he or she will be inclined to consume more alcohol. There is the practice that people will consume alcohol before they head to the pub later at night. The proprietor has the problem that they may be intoxicated and has the responsibility to turn them away.

I am conscious that publicans are intelligent people. They know there is a real problem for them. They have higher costs, in particular if they are leasing or renting the premises on top of the running costs. They must have a certain margin to make a living, but increasingly it is more difficult to make a living because the issue of supermarkets selling cheap alcohol has not been addressed.

We are all intelligent people. I cannot figure out why this clear issue has dragged on for the length it has. I would like to hear the witnesses comment on it.

Chairman

This is an important engagement and that is the reason we have had the meeting today. We must be careful that we do not stray too much into the enterprise or health areas, because we are focusing on public order and justice issues. I ask the witnesses to comment on public order and the issues I dealt with initially.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

I will assist the Chairman. If one is drunk, public order issues will arise. I will focus on the first part of my question.

Chairman

Thank you Deputy.

Mr. Padraig Cribben

There are public order issues arising from the availability of cheap alcohol. They have been referred to by Deputy Mac Lochlainn. There is a concept, described by a new word in the dictionary, called pre-loading. That is exactly what Deputy Mac Lochlainn described. It is a major problem for publicans. People come in and have one or two drinks, which really should have no effect, but the publican will find it is having a serious effect because the people have consumed a great deal of alcohol before they have come into the pub. There is an added problem for publicans who run late night operations. A number of people come in, not only pre-loaded but also well stocked. They come in and buy a coke but the naggin of vodka is somewhere else. They go into the toilets and suddenly the coke is a lot stronger than it was before they went in. That is a major problem and it leads to public order issues. In some places, the biggest problem in terms of public order issues is where people have been refused entry because of the level of pre-loading. They never get inside but the problem remains outside, when people are told they are not getting in.

The availability of cheap alcohol feeds directly into the issue of public order. Unless the availability of cheap alcohol is addressed, issues relating to public order will increase.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

That is fine. We have work to do.

Chairman

As nobody is offering, I have a number of questions.

There is the question of delivering alcohol off-site and receiving payment electronically or at the point of delivery. I believe one can telephone Drink Link and have the alcohol delivered to one's address. Do the witnesses from the National Off-Licence Association wish to comment on this, its prevalence and the checks and balances in place? If somebody telephones from a private house, asking for a delivery of alcohol to a party, what is the procedure? Is there a verification of the age of the people and is it within the law to do that?

Ms Evelyn Jones

That is illegal. One cannot order alcohol and pay for it on delivery. The transaction must take place in the licensed premises. However, a customer can telephone me, order from me and I can process the payment electronically.

Chairman

The customer will give his or her credit card number.

Ms Evelyn Jones

It is illegal to deliver alcohol and take money at the door. Overall, we would not recommend this practice. We have issued guidelines to our members.

Chairman

Can I tease this out further? If somebody telephones the off-licence with an order and gives the credit card number and asks that the alcohol be delivered, how does one check the age of the customer?

Ms Evelyn Jones

The legal ID for off-licences is the Garda age card. That is the only acceptable form of ID that off-licences can use. If one were to deliver alcohol one would have to check the ID at the door. It is not a practice that we recommend.

Home delivery is micromanaged. If one has a regular customer, and he or she telephones to order six bottles of wine that is a different proposition because one would have dealt with them and know them from being in the shop. If somebody telephoned blind asking if the off-licence delivers we would not agree to that. Perhaps my colleague will add to that.

Mr. Kevin O'Brien

It occurs in the area that we trade. One of the concerns that individual off-licence owners have from discussions with them is that they are competing against multiples. Multiples are doing online deliveries and it is the same scenario. If they cannot take orders from customers, they are losing that customer to the online delivery. Some of them have their own online delivery services at this stage to try to cover this. Legally, the payment has to be made in the off-licence because the person in the van does not have a licence to sell alcohol so it has to be made at the point of sale. It is a decision to compete with the major multiples, which one has to do, or not.

Chairman

Is it up to the person who is driving the van to make a decision at the door as to whether the person is of age? Are the delivery drivers trained to do that? Once the transaction has been completed electronically, what authority do they have to go back on it?

Mr. Kevin O'Brien

They have the same training as the staff in the store. They are trained only to accept sales from somebody who has appropriate ID, which as Ms Jones said is the Garda ID card.

Chairman

Will Mr. O'Brien talk us through the training, how long it lasts and if it is certified?

Mr. Kevin O'Brien

The National Off-Licence Association, NOffLA, runs an outstanding course called a responsible trading certificate, RTC. It covers the whole process of how a person actually handles the day-to-day running of the off-licence, covering the areas of law, the issues that people might not understand such as people drinking within 100 m of the store. The staff of the off-licence have to physically police that area. In my case we have to police other retailers because the other retailers are within 100 m of us. We always have a fear that we will be slammed with this. Many of the mixed traders do not understand the law that they have to police the area outside their premises. We cover the topic of adults purchasing alcohol for minors, how they do it, the recording and maintaining of an incident book and when they should call the Garda. This course equips the staff very well. It is excellent.

Chairman

I have a further question which I will put to both groups. It has been said to us time and again that part of our culture is to drink but the culture seems to be heading in the direction of binge drinking. Young people, the young adults over 18 years seem to think that binge drinking is the way to go. It is very serious from the point of view of their health but it has very serious implications for public order. People have accidents and end up in hospital. Do the witnesses wish to comment on the binge drinking culture that seems to be accelerating, where people drink to get drunk? In other jurisdictions I have visited that is not the case, it is frowned upon. In some countries it is a badge of shame to be drunk in public. Here it seems to be the thing to do. Will the witnesses comment on that and can they put forward solutions?

Mr. Padraig Cribben

The Chairman is correct in identifying the significant cultural change in the way that people learn to drink and how they apply it during the early stages of their drinking life.

Statistics will show that people are starting to drink at a younger age. Let me put it in context, some 93% of all the pubs in Ireland are family owned businesses. They operate in communities and by and large their customers are either neighbours or friends or sons and daughters of neighbours and friends. They have no great interest in peddling alcohol to very young people. I openly suggest that the alcohol that is being sourced for the very young people is not being sourced, by and large, in pubs. It is sometimes dangerous to generalise but there is a shift in culture whereby the target for some people is not social drinking but how quickly they can get drunk. That is a major challenge for the members of the Vintners Federation of Ireland. Equally, another major challenge is pre-loading, the concept I mentioned earlier. One does not know the extent to which people are pre-loaded when they come into the pub. If they are looking for a quick hit, that is a problem that is different from the situation in the past.

Moreover, when they do come in, they are seeking what one might call a quick fix or a quick hit. That problem certainly is different from where it was previously and is one that requires significant different levels of management on behalf of licensees. However, it is a major problem.

Ms Evelyn Jones

I agree with Mr. Cribben in this regard. Fundamentally, it goes to two core issues, the first of which is that of education, and again I refer to drink-driving and smoking, where the impetus came from the children. It started at the bottom and worked its way up that it was unacceptable to smoke as a parent and was unacceptable to drink and drive. A young person now would not consider getting into a car with somebody who had taken alcohol. That is how education on those issues worked and, if possible, we should have the same education regarding alcohol. As to the second issue and to close the circle on the Chairman's previous question, I refer to the point at which the doorbell rings, the alcohol is presented and the 18 year old comes to the door with his Garda ID. Legally, he is entitled to purchase alcohol. Once the door closes, it depends on who is behind the door but the reality is that an 18 year old person who appeared at the front door is responsible for anybody behind it who is under the age of 18 and consuming alcohol. We seek an increased level of enforcement and if the laws that exist were used in respect of adults, that is, people aged 18 and over who are purchasing alcohol for those who are under 18, one could make serious inroads into this issue in a very brief period.

Chairman

I have one final question. This joint committee has done considerable work on community courts in Ireland. I am unsure whether the witnesses are familiar with that concept, whereby somebody who is involved in low-level public order or crime will appear before a court on that same day or the day following and not always but usually is given a community-based sanction, such as community service and so forth. They also receive other supports. Are the witnesses familiar with the concept because it might be something that could be used in the context of public order and drunkenness? Do the witnesses wish to comment on this?

Ms Evelyn Jones

I would not have a problem with it. We must accept there is a lack of enforcement regarding public order and it is a case of anything that will get the job done. We also are on the front line. We are in our shops at night, it is dark and the other shops around us are closed. We are also targets and it is not in anyone's interest to see public order issues infringing on the rights of ordinary citizens.

Mr. Kevin O'Brien

I believe they are a fantastic idea but it must be done in conjunction with community policing.

Chairman

Yes.

Mr. Kevin O'Brien

On community policing, it is clear when the community guards are missing. One has an automatic rise in anti-social behaviour but when they are present and are seen travelling around the community on their bikes, there is an automatic drop. Unfortunately, when I spoke to my local community guard about two months ago and told him I had not seen him for ages, he replied that he had been pulled off the job. That has happened several times in recent years, that is, the first person to be pulled off his or her day-to-day duty is the community garda. However, it is the community that suffers from the lack of that community garda. I appreciate serious crimes and other things are going on but we must invest in community gardaí, who are fantastic. They build relationships with the local traders, the local community and even with people who perhaps normally would be anti-social. They build a relationship and get to know such people and are able to nip it in the bud. Similarly, we may have an incident in which we have a gang of kids, especially during the school holidays, who are hanging around the gates and so on and we know they are asking people to buy alcohol. We could go out and ask them to scatter but I can assure members the answer we would get is not repeatable here today, never mind the threats we also would receive. However, with a community garda we can ring the station to say we need Garda such and such, if he is around, to pass by and assist us to scatter these guys. They are under-appreciated.

Chairman

Indeed.

Mr. Padraig Cribben

If one wishes to reduce the public order issues that stem from alcohol, three things must be addressed in conjunction, namely, availability, affordability and enforcement.

Chairman

I think we are finished. I thank the witnesses for their attendance. This is the start of an item of work the joint committee is undertaking on this issue. Some people will appear before us in a few weeks' time to deal with the issue of aggressive begging, which also is linked to public order and so on. We will suspend the meeting until 11.30 a.m., when the Minister will appear before the joint committee to discuss an exciting European issue.

Sitting suspended at 10.55 a.m. and resumed at 11.30 a.m.