The second item on the agenda is a discussion with Dr. Gordon Holmes, chairman of the Government Alcohol Advisory Group. I welcome Dr. Holmes who is accompanied by Mr. Seamus Carroll and Ms Kathleen Connolly from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I will introduce Dr. Holmes to the members of the committee. They are Deputy Charles Flanagan who is the Front Bench spokesman on justice for Fine Gael, Deputy Jimmy Deenihan, Senator Eugene Regan, Deputy Brian O'Shea who is from Wexford—
Liquor Licensing Laws: Discussion with Government Alcohol Advisory Group.
I am from Waterford.
I beg the Deputy's pardon. It is my wife's constituency. I introduce Deputies Finian McGrath, Connick and Thomas Byrne and Senator McDonald.
Before I ask Dr. Holmes to begin, I wish to advise everyone that we will receive a short presentation to be followed by a questions and answers session. Members will appreciate that the Government's alcohol advisory group's duty is to report in the first instance to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Since the group was recently established, members will appreciate that Dr. Holmes will not be in a position to express firm opinions, as the advisory group has not finally decided on many of the issues. Members will have received Dr. Holmes's memorandum in that regard.
We welcome the opportunity to engage with Dr. Holmes as chairman of the Government advisory group. All committee members have a keen interest in the issues being discussed today. In recent years, Deputy Charles Flanagan prepared a report on the abuse of alcohol by young children with which we would be pleased to present Dr. Holmes in due course. Last April, the committee delivered a report to the Oireachtas arising from its trip to San Francisco to witness how the abuse of alcohol by young children is dealt with there. We would be happy to make the report available to Dr. Holmes and his group.
Before we begin, I request that all mobile telephones be switched off. Furthermore, I draw everyone's attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege, but that same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Under the salient rulings of the Chair, members 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. I invite Dr. Holmes to begin.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I thank the Chairman. This group was appointed by the Minister on or about 10 or 11 January and told that it would be given three months to produce a report, a short time that has since been eroded to 31 March. We lost a fortnight before we began and have a tight schedule in which to work. The group consists of myself, Mr. Seamus Carroll, Ms Kathleen Connelly who is secretary to the group, Chief Superintendent John Twomey of the Garda Síochána, a former superintendent at Pearse Street Garda station who has, one might say, a great deal of experience on the ground in dealing with many of these issues, Professor Ian O'Donnell, a criminologist at UCD, and two health experts, Dr. Declan Bedford who specialises in public health and Robbie Breen from the Department of Health and Children.
Over the years, a difficulty facing anyone dealing with the problems of alcohol has been problems between different Departments. There have always been tensions between the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, which would like a free market, deregulation and market forces in control, and the Department of Health and Children, which would virtually like the exact opposite. One will always have great difficulty in bringing the two — I will not call them roaring — opposite factions together.
The issues with which the Minister asked us to deal were set out in his original announcement. First, we are to deal with the increase in the number of supermarkets, convenience stores and petrol stations with off-licences and the manner and conditions of sale of alcohol products in such outlets, including below unit cost selling and special promotions. In itself, this is a major task. To give the committee some of the flavour of what we will attempt to do, it is interesting to note that the number of pubs in the Dublin region in 1996 was 893 whereas the number is now 977. It is not a marked change and, given people moving around and population variations, not all that surprising. In 1996, however, the number of off-licences in the Dublin region was 274 whereas it is now 863 and is increasing on a regular basis. I would be grateful for any help the members can give us. Our difficulty is that neither I nor the committee see what can be done about existing off-licences. They have licences and property rights. It is disturbing to note that the courts have never refused an application for an off-licence on the grounds of adequacy of numbers, one of the rights of the courts, despite Garda objections from time to time.
We advertised in the newspapers when we embarked on our task and we are still receiving submissions, reading them and taking them on board even though it is long past the deadline. It is optimistic in Ireland to expect people to keep to the deadline. Approximately half were from private individuals and half from institutions such as doctors and children's organisation.
The public is worried about hours of opening and filling stations having licences and serving drink at 7.30 a.m. This sends out the wrong message, particularly to the young people in who the committee is interested. This is one of our major problems and it is difficult to see how we can control what has happened. We may have some influence on what happens in the future and I hope we can assist the Minister and the committee members. Members have experience of the views of their constituents — I almost said "parishioners", which would have been a dreadful mistake — and I hope they will share these views with us. We will try to take as many as possible on board.
The proliferation of off-licences is a worrying feature and is continuing. From our investigations of many of the filling stations that are opening retail stores such as supermarkets and minimarkets, the people engaged to run them have experience in the licensed trade. This highlights where they see the emphasis in profits in the future, a worrying and disturbing feature. I will revert to the education of people serving drink presently.
The manner and condition of sale of alcohol products in these outlets, including below unit cost selling, presented us with a major problem. To sustain any form of prosecution for breaches of any regulation, such as below cost selling, one must be in a position to prove it. One must know the baseline cost. To find this information I visited a number of producers. I had a fascinating meeting in Cork with Heineken last week. The company was extremely helpful and forthcoming, except when I asked for the cost it was charging. Prices were sensitive and the representatives could not tell me but I did learn the general principles.
The pricing methods are extraordinary. A company such as Tesco will buy in bulk and everything will be delivered to one distribution centre. Its discount will be based on the bulk buying and the fact that Heineken does not have to distribute it. Heineken will also assist individual stores with marketing, to achieve the best possible sales. Very often, supermarkets sell alcohol next to sweets, chocolates and the check-out centres, making it as easy as possible to buy alcohol. They also sell it in several places in the store so that when young children shop with their parents, alcohol is everywhere. Even though I am not an expert in this area, this must have an effect on how they will regard alcohol at 15 or 16 years of age, and how they can gain access to it in whatever nefarious way. These are problems with which we must deal.
To return to the issue of below cost selling, the next largest purchasers after companies such as Tesco and Dunnes Stores are companies such as the Musgrave Group and SuperValu which buy in bulk and receive a decent discount. After the group purchases in bulk, the product must delivered to the various stores. As these stores are franchises, an extra discount for arranging marketing cannot be given by Heineken. This means they do not receive the same discount as the others. Private deals can be made with shop owners but this is a different matter. Therefore, the price at which drink is supplied to Tesco and Centra is not the same.
The only advantage gained by others who buy from distributors is that they buy in bulk and receive a better discount for doing so than can be obtained by individual houses in buying for themselves. This discount can be passed on to the consumer. People told us that it is cheaper to buy vodka in Holland and bring it to Ireland than it is to buy it here. Buying in England and Northern Ireland, in particular, was never a problem because of the discrepancy between sterling and the euro. However, since last July this has changed with a 10% improvement in the euro exchange rate. This means people now buy from distributors in Northern Ireland.
With all of this information available to us, we realised we could do nothing to fix below-cost selling because we did not know what the cost price per unit was. This is a major difficulty for us because we would very much like to do so. It reflects what we were asked to do in many of the submissions made. It seems to be an extremely difficult problem, on which we did a significant amount of work. We met a large number of people and will meet many more. The position may change but it is difficult.
I do not believe people really want to see price controls introduced because they would not control the same item. This very day, I saw a Czech or Slovakian lorry delivering beer to Redmond's in Ranelagh and a place close to our office. I do not know at what price the beer was bought. Below cost selling is a difficult issue on which to give coherent advice. It is a problem we must examine because the Minister specifically asked us to do so.
Special promotions are of major concern to us because it is wrong to use alcohol as bait in promotions, as a loss leader and in newspaper advertisements run by supermarkets to attract people to spend their money on baked beans, bread and other products. One year Tesco ran an advertisement prior to St. Patrick's Day in which 48 cans of lager were offered for the price of 24 but it was not a two for one offer. Coming as it did in the run-up to St. Patrick's Day, it was clearly an invitation to binge-drink. This type of promotion must be controlled and forbidden. Alcohol should never be used as a loss leader to lure people into supermarkets. We have difficulty with other promotions such as two bottles of wine for €12 where one bottle normally costs €7. We have work to do to clearly and cogently express what we will recommend the Minister bring to the Dáil for its consideration. We are working hard on this and will phrase it as accurately and as well as we can. We are as aware as committee members of the problems created by promotions. We must take steps to remedy them as the problem is reaching epidemic proportions.
With regard to the increasing number of special exemption orders, a place in Tallaght managed to obtain 364 such orders last year. It did not receive one for Good Friday, as the Oireachtas will not let such places open on that day. How in the name of goodness does the phrase "special exemption" apply to a licence awarded for 364 out of 365 days? We have directed our attention to that issue will produce recommendations on it. We obtained statistics on the number of special exemptions granted throughout the country and they are quite frightening.
The hours of trading are an issue we are dealing with in a comprehensive manner. There are several hours of trading which caused us great concern. Early-morning trading means the supermarkets can get exemptions and thus sell drink virtually all day and all night long. Such trading means that garages, for example, can sell alcohol at 7.30 a.m. or 8 a.m., which is a practice we want to ban. It is a practice which is bad because the two types of people who buy alcohol at that time are those who should not, namely those with drink problems or young people on some form of skite. I do not want the committee to get the impression that all our thoughts and deliberations are turned on young people — they are not. Nonetheless, young people present problems in terms of public safety at 2 a.m. or 2.30 a.m. Early morning opening is an issue we are currently examining and hope to address because it presents a serious problem in that it makes alcohol accessible to the wrong people.
The same issue applies in off licences. One off licence owner told me that the only reason he sought an early morning opening for his premises was that there was a Dunnes Stores nearby which opened for the sale of drink at 9 a.m. He said that once a week people went to the nearby post office to collect their dole cheques and bought a surprisingly large amount of drink with their dole money. If Dunnes Stores was the only place open, that is where they would go. The off-licence owner sought a 9 a.m. opening to compete. However, he said he would prefer not to have such an exemption if nobody else had it. That was the attitude of O'Brien's off licence, which I found quite refreshing. They made it quite clear that as long as there was an even playing field they did not mind what the opening hours were. Their only concern was to ensure that everyone opened at the same time. Our deliberations so far suggest that the dangers attached to early opening for off licence premises far outweigh any convenience it may present for people.
We are also examining special exemption closing times. It is very depressing to see that Dublin effectively has two different regimes for special exemption orders. It is 2 a.m. in one part of Dublin, but 2.30 a.m. in the other part because there are different District Court judges dealing with the applications. Effectively, one can have two licensed premises within 100 yards of each other to which different closing times apply. That is not right if we are serious about aiming for a level playing field.
Public disorder at night is a matter of grave concern. I have not yet met the judges and a meeting with them seems unlikely at this stage. The most recent missive from them suggests they will not be able to meet us until March and we must produce our report by the end of that month. There are problems regarding the disparity between the closing times imposed by different judges and the fact that District Court judges are frequently overruled by Circuit Court judges. There are also enormous differences between the sanctions imposed for breaches of the licensing laws. In one case, a person convicted of selling alcohol to under age people was ordered by the District Court to close the premises for two days, which was a reasonable penalty. However, the Circuit Court reduced that order to two hours, which was derisory when one considers that two hours can be washing-up time on a Monday morning. It was a meaningless penalty and had a very bad effect on the members of the Garda Síochána who conducted the investigation and managed to secure a conviction. It is very difficult to secure a conviction for selling alcohol to under age people because their parents generally do not want them to go to the District Court and be subject to cross examination by, as one man put it, some smart-alec lawyer. I assured him that I know more smart-alec lawyers than anyone else as I have been in the law game for a very long time. I can understand parents' concerns but it means that proof in such cases is gone out the gate. One cannot win a case if one's only witness will not turn up in court.
We have many problems but we are trying to address them. The difficulty in sentencing means publicans will risk breaking the law and being caught. If caught they will pay a heavy fine, and with the profits they make they would rather do that and remain open. We were told about one publican who had 14 convictions and did not lose his licence. He had been fined a total of approximately €80,000 but informed the Garda that with the profits he made from the early hour a fine of €80,000 was preferable to closing down. It is interesting to note that before a pub gets a late opening special exemption it must have a dance licence. I do not know if these pubs provide any area for dancing. They would strongly disapprove if anybody tried to dance on their premises and took up valuable space that would normally be occupied by drinkers. It is a sham. We are trying to deal with this.
Existing sanctions and penalties are a major problem but there is little we can do because they are the sole prerogative of the courts. I am always interested to see the Oireachtas pass legislation that imposes specific minimum penalties for offences. When I began my law career I would have strongly disapproved of that. I do not disapprove as strongly now because I often see it is the only way matters are brought home to people. We will have to examine whether there should be minimum penalties for some breaches of the licensing laws, particularly when young people are involved.
We are examining a number of issues, including the peculiar issue of theatre licences, of which the committee may not be aware. Theatre licences are not given by the courts but by the Revenue Commissioners. With a theatre licence venues can sell drink until half an hour after the last performance. A performance is not described in the Act, so it could be a man getting up and telling an off-colour joke, and half an hour later getting up and telling the same joke. That is a performance and the venue can stay open and sell drink for half an hour after it. The venue is not subject to court sanctions.
How widespread is that?
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I regret that it is on the increase. In the beginning there were approximately two, the Gaiety and Point theatres but nearly all the nightclubs are following suit. I have figures on this and the Revenue has to get me the ideal figures. I recently spoke to my people in Limerick. Three years ago there were none in Limerick, and now there are five. It is not just about the number of venues. The Gaiety would be packed every night. Some of the venues have five bars and they would all be full. While I was chairing the commission, much of whose work we are trying to undo, which is amusing in its own way, I went into the Gaiety and asked whether people of my age would be allowed in. I was assured that not only would I be allowed in, but there were places where middle aged gentlemen could go with their friends. I asked whether we would be hunted out early but was assured I could stay as long as I liked. I returned to the offices of the commission and wrote some letters about it. That must be dealt with. It is a serious issue.
The other serious issue that might have some gainful effects is the training and age of the people who sell alcohol. If one is buying alcohol in a supermarket, the person at the check-out should be of a certain age and have passed whatever training is necessary, and that training should be certified by one of the certifying institutions here. If shops are in breach of that, it should be an offence. We are pursuing that very strongly.
That is an overview of what we are doing. I have interviewed a large number of people, and that is ongoing. I interviewed the two youth organisations this morning and will interview more next week. We are getting everybody's views on it that we can and I would be grateful for any help that any committee members can offer. The members' constituents take these issues seriously and a number of the submissions we received are from private individuals.
I thank Dr. Holmes. We are delighted to have his insightful perspectives on this thorny issue about which this committee is concerned. We are delighted to have this opportunity to engage with Dr. Holmes. I hope our members will provide some insights that will be reflected in the final deliberations as they come to fruition in March. The adverse comments about public houses would apply to a public house not one million miles from here.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
Perish the thought, Chairman.
I will be brief because I am sure my colleagues have a number of questions and observations to make at this important meeting. I welcome Dr. Holmes and compliment him on his important role, not only in recent times but also during the years as chairman of the Government advisory group on alcohol. He has done some service in terms of the provision of reports and in his posing not only of questions but also providing many of the answers and solutions to problems regarding the long-established network of legal requirements and laws dealing with the control of the sale of alcohol. Having listened to him and given the pessimistic nature of his observations, I cannot help but believe that what we are trying to do now is to put the horse back in the stable. A real problem has developed in the past five or six years, in particular, and it has happened in front of our eyes as legislators and those of Dr. Holmes.
I lost my Dáil seat in 2002, as did others here. At the time there were 600 off-licences. Today there are almost 1,900. How could this have happened in such a short period without the warnings and alarm bells being addressed? How could the recommendations of the strategic task force on alcohol which reported in 2004 have been ignored by the Government and the Oireachtas? How could many of Dr. Holmes's recommendations made in that time such as those to do with garage forecourts have been ignored? In his report he stated that, without in any way underestimating the difficulty of distinguishing outlets from retail outlets, the commission recommended serious consideration be given to restricting the sale of alcohol in these facilities, yet the opposite has happened. It is now a free-for-all. I would go further and say that outlets designed primarily for the sale of fuels are now primarily engaged in the sale of alcohol. The commission might undertake a study of this development. In many Texaco-type stations the sale of petrol and diesel is secondary to the sale of alcohol, such has been the change in recent years. We all see this and I do not need to give examples. The situation is such that there does not appear to be any element of control.
Many of the recommendations on controls made by the sub-committee of which I was chairman and which reported in 2001 have been cast aside and, in particular, during the time of the last Dáil as people rushed to embrace the free market. The policy was to allow the market dictate, the mantra of the Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats Government of the day. Now we are trying to put the horse back in the stable.
I was disappointed to hear Dr. Holmes state he could not do anything about existing licences. I suggest we revert to the previous practice of having a restricted physical space in outlets and rather than have the Texaco sign behind that for Heineken. We could then at least restrict the stock of Heineken to a corner of the shop in order that alcohol might be restricted to no more than 20% of the retail unit's space.
I suggest the issue of roadside advertising should be examined. The monthly rise in the price of petrol and diesel fuels means that petrol outlets are advertising for sale at half price cheap French wines which have been dumped on the Irish market. That is an area in which regulation could be considered.
Dr. Holmes mentioned the matter of below cost selling and loss leaders. We need to consider not only the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, but also the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. While I am not sure it is in order to mention brands, since the elimination of the groceries order by the Minister, Deputy Martin, 24 bottles of Miller can be sold in supermarkets or petrol stations for €19.99, including VAT. The publican, who is the person the law charges with the responsibility of being trained in the dangers of alcohol and the importance of dealing with a controlled substance, must pay his wholesaler €25.41 for the same consignment before he makes a cent on it. We have encouraged people to leave public houses in their droves and engage in buying from off-licences for home consumption.
Another example is distance selling whereby it is possible to employ a local taxi driver to stock up from the local petrol station. Nobody knows who is buying or where the consignment will arrive ultimately.
Dr. Holmes mentioned advertising and training. I commend licensed vintners and NOffLA, the off-licence group, for the manner in which they take their responsibilities on board. For those working on petrol station forecourts, however, the only requirement is to have knowledge of the difference between petrol and diesel and they can sell as much Bulmers, Heineken and Miller as they like without any questions, training or any form of decorum.
Dr. Holmes referred to the swizz, so to speak, of the theatres. I have not seen any great explosion in the theatre industry in recent years. However, I have seen an explosion in the number of places that are selling drink under the guise of being bona fide theatres and selling drink at hours that are not restricted in a way that correlates to public houses or off-licences. I agree with Dr. Holmes that dance licences are a sham. That has been the case for some time and despite numerous opportunities we have failed to address it. Another sham is the registered club, be it the golf club, tennis club, cricket club or whatever, where there is no enforcement of the number of people who can enter or the manner in which drink can be sold late into the night under the guise of being for the private members of the club, but that does not appear to be the case at all.
I wish Dr. Holmes well in his endeavours. Only when I see the response of Government to his report, will I be convinced we are serious about legislating to prevent alcohol abuse and serious in dealing with the proliferation of off-licences in particular. The bona fide publican now appears to be well down the line. It can be put down to social changes that the local publican can no longer be the focus of our dissatisfaction. We need to look beyond that and consider the mistakes we have made, especially in the past five years.
I wish to advise Dr. Holmes that Deputy Flanagan's report is available to him for the benefit of circulation to the committee. He has particular expertise in this area. Local authorities must in the first instance grant planning permission for off-licences before they ever get to court to apply for the licence itself. Is it within the group's remit to recommend that local authorities take into account the anti-social behaviour consequences which will follow the granting of a licence?
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I am glad the Chairman raised the issue of the involvement of local authorities. The commission expressly gave all local authorities the right to be heard in the District Court on the granting of special exemptions and the hours which should apply to their areas. We felt the authority in each area would have the specialist knowledge to determine the extent to which lawlessness was likely to occur on local streets and, therefore, would be a vital voice to be heard before a judge made up his or her mind about the appropriate hour at which licensed premises should close.
Was that recommendation enacted?
Dr. Gordon Holmes
A provision giving such a right to local authorities was included in the 2003 Act on foot of a recommendation made in the first report of the Commission on Liquor Licensing. I regret to tell the committee that no local authority has ever taken up that right. I am nervous about giving local authorities powers under such circumstances. Local authorities are often influenced by considerations which do not help to provide a level playing field.
I would like to respond to an interesting question asked by Deputy Flanagan. When we speak about filling stations, we are inclined to think of large places like Dublin or, in my case, Limerick. We should also think about small villages which might have just one decent shop which sells a small variety of wines and the only set of petrol pumps for many miles. It can be difficult to recommend legislation which covers all such cases. I am conscious of the points made by Deputy Flanagan. He made an important point which may be of great help when he asked whether we had the authority to restrict the percentage of the floor space of supermarkets which may be used for the sale of liquor. He referred, in particular, to retail premises attached to petrol stations. We probably have the authority to provide for such a restriction. It is certainly something we should examine. We will do so.
When one sees publicans taking trolleys full of vodka home from supermarkets to sell in their pubs, one gets an idea of the extent of the problem.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
Yes.
I will call Deputies Finian McGrath and Rabbitte before asking Dr. Holmes to speak again.
I welcome Dr. Holmes to this meeting of the committee. I commend the work he is doing on this important issue. Most Deputies are aware, from our experiences in our clinics and elsewhere in our constituencies, that this problem is getting out of control. Part of the remit of Dr. Holmes is to deal with the changes in public order laws. When one talks about "public order", one is talking about people's behaviour, particularly on the streets. What sensible proposals are being examined to deal with this aspect of the debate? I am also concerned about longer opening hours. Existing sanctions need to be enforced. What ideas are being considered in that regard?
Dr. Holmes raised the important issue of training. He spoke about the age of the staff of off-licences, garages and other places where alcohol is sold. I am concerned about the intimidation of such staff by gangs of under-age drinkers. I sometimes receive complaints from workers to that effect. We have to deal with such issues. The competence and maturity of those who sell alcohol in various outlets need to be examined. We are talking about the serious threats and assaults endured by the staff of licensed premises. Has Dr. Holmes come across similar experiences?
We need to focus on education when we deal with alcohol abuse in the context of our licensing laws. I would not like Dr. Holmes to take his eye off the ball in this respect as he does his work. We need to help children to develop their self-esteem. I have found, from my experience of working in a disadvantaged area for over 20 years, that a child with high self-esteem is less likely to abuse alcohol. That has been proved by those associated with best practice in this field. Kids in difficult situations are prevented from getting involved in drugs and under-age drinking if they have good domestic backgrounds and benefit from strong personal development in their private lives. This should be an aspect of any campaign developed to tackle abuse of alcohol by young people. While it may be an old-fashioned view, a good relationship between a parent and child lays great foundations. For this reason, we must support families in the broader sense of the term.
Reports from the United States indicate that large numbers of young people abuse alcohol. Britain also has a major problem. Has the Government alcohol advisory group sought out examples of international best practice in finding practical, sensible solutions to this problem? An immediate example springs to mind from my experience of camping in France for 20 years. It was always fascinating to observe how thousands of people, including families with children, would gather on beaches on Bastille Day without engaging in binge drinking, rows or fights. A similar event in an open space in Ireland would undoubtedly feature binge drinking and rows and bottles would fly. Clearly France has a sensible education programme or policy in place to deal with these issues. Part of the solution, especially to public order problems, must be to implement existing laws.
We should not lose sight of the fact that the vast majority of young adults go to their local pub, drink moderately and behave sensibly and maturely. I ask Dr. Holmes to ensure this message forms part of his group's work.
I welcome Dr. Gordon Holmes and wish him well in the enterprise he has undertaken. I also wish the Minister well in his commitment to introduce legislative proposals to address the public order dimension of the control and sale of alcohol. I do so, however, with a great deal of scepticism. I do not know, nor have I studied, this issue to the same degree as Deputy Flanagan who produced a report on it in previous years. I am a great deal more pessimistic — sceptical is perhaps not the most appropriate description — about whether the Minister will bring forward the necessary proposals. My pessimism is based on some of the reasons Dr. Holmes detailed, including the possible role of local authorities and the question of what one does in the case of an establishment that is selling various items in the middle of a not very populous area.
Are we to some extent misleading ourselves in arguing that addressing the proliferation of off licences would enable us to deal with the public order aspects of the issue? We have made badly needed and overdue changes in the areas of drink driving, smoking and so forth which have produced a definite and perceptible shift in pub habits. It is, therefore, scarcely surprising that diversification into the off licence trade has taken place, especially given that alcohol consumption is apparently higher than it has ever been, exceeding even the bad old days when work was regarded as the scourge of the drinking classes. Earning potential is also higher. Some degree of diversification is, therefore, inevitable.
I wonder whether it is not a question as much about the observance of the law as it is about the proliferation of off-licences, in the sense that it is plain that in some of the areas where public order offences are most serious these off-licences are selling alcohol to young people who are under age. Where stands the traceability question now? In my constituency it is plain where alcohol related public order problems derive from, but there is no way of proving it and in most cases there is no way of bringing a prosecution that is likely to be successful. While it is known that alcohol is being peddled to young people who are under age we seem largely helpless to deal with it.
One can make recommendations to the Minister but I am not sure how the legislative proposals will be framed because such differences apply. We do not want a situation where if, courtesy of climate change, there is a few fine weeks during the summer but one cannot drink a pint in the open air without les gendarmes moving one on. How does one distinguish between that and some place like Temple Bar after midnight, which is akin to depictions on our television screens of wildebeest moving across the plains and where mayhem and disorder is evident to all? I am not sure how one legislates for the one without catching the other.
I agree with some of the issues raised by Deputy Flanagan. In terms of not being able to deal with the existing licences, what is the frequency with which application must be made for a renewal of licence? If I get a licence to operate an off-licence in my constituency do I have it indefinitely as long as I keep my nose clean or does it have to be renewed? Surely where there ought to be prosecutions for bad behaviour on the part of the proprietor, that ought to be a reason for non-renewal of licence? Can the law be changed in that way or does possession of a licence now mean that it is not possible to intervene in that situation?
Does Dr. Holmes see that this has any connection to the favoured idea of the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, about a cafe society? We are one country now and discrepancies that used to be there no longer exist. I suggest that one could have it in Limerick just as much as in Dublin. What is Dr. Holmes's attitude to whether that would make a contribution? I presume it was defeated purely by vested interests rather than due to questions about whether it would work. It is something that would be worth looking at.
Expressing pessimism about the situation does not mean to say the position is hopeless. However, I represent a constituency where this is a serious problem. Public disorder, intimidation of women and old people and general ugliness resulting from easy access to alcohol is a major problem. I am in agreement on that point and will support Dr. Holmes in any way I can. There have been previous commissions, committees and reports. I am not sure about the blinding new insights. It seems that the explanation for the level of alcohol consumption in our society is a deeper one than simply its easy availability. It is probably as much due to ineffective, careless or reckless management of these off-licences as it is to their proliferation. Some of them blatantly disregard the law and no adequate traceability exists.
If it is, as Dr. Holmes states, a criterion which the District Court is entitled to take into account, that is, the adequacy of the numbers, who is charged with making the case against the proliferation of off-licences when they come before the District Court? Whose job is it to say that in a specific area enough is enough and no more should be allowed?
Dr. Gordon Holmes
It is the job of the Garda.
Is it doing it?
Dr. Gordon Holmes
Its members are doing it. They have objected to many but have never succeeded. I would like to deal with the issues raised by Deputy Rabbitte because they are very interesting. I do not share his pessimism. The figures for the intake of alcohol in Ireland have not changed much since 2001. There had been a frighteningly large jump in the figures up to that year. Taking increased population into account, the figures have not changed much in the past five years. They are far too high and put us at the top of the league generally and, therefore, the matter is quite serious.
The issue of traceability was mentioned by the Chairman and Deputy Rabbitte. Traceability is very difficult because if one finds someone with a can of beer from Dunnes Stores, it will not be accepted in any court of law that the can was bought there. There is an opinion from the Attorney General to that effect. He said that bringing in simple traceability would not work in a court of law. Our experience in the law courts is very unsatisfactory.
Deputy Rabbitte mentioned a very important issue, namely, renewal. This is now automatic in all these cases unless there is an objection. In one case, a publican had been convicted 14 times and fined up to €80,000 and his licence was renewed after an objection. Unfortunately, this answers Deputy Rabbitte's question and makes him entitled to his pessimistic approach to these issues. I had hoped to meet the presidents of the District Court and Circuit Court to explain to them our disquiet. I am not pre-empting any thoughts the Deputy may have on the subject but I am sure he would share our disquiet. If they will not do their duty in these cases, no sanctions, adequate or otherwise, will be imposed and the entire law and order side of things will break down. When one starts to hit people where it hurts, one succeeds in getting a coherent answer to it.
We are engaged in one activity that is probably permitted at the moment. To get around the traceability point and the point I made earlier about proofs where young people were found with alcohol and their fathers and mothers did not want their little cherubs to give evidence in court although they did not mind them buying alcohol when they were under age, we will recommend test purchasing. We will recommend that the Garda send people into places and sometimes one will need to use under age people to achieve that. This is not very desirable but we are left with no alternative.
It was done in Sligo in a case relating to the purchase of tobacco. The District Court judge was inclined to dismiss the case on the grounds of entrapment but finally stated a case for the opinion of the High Court, which upheld the prosecution on the grounds of the test purchase. That seems to be the way forward in alcohol prosecutions against all suppliers for selling to under age people. It seems to be the only way we can go. If anyone has a better idea, that is well and good, but that is something we have discussed.
Another issue we have discussed and which I did not mention at the beginning is the fact that we are talking about making a very strong recommendation that alcohol in all contexts should be taken as a substance on its own. Members may wonder about the importance of this, but I find it difficult to understand why a Department includes alcohol in the drugs category and takes a dangerous substances approach to the problem. Decent people go out for a drink on a Friday or Saturday night, have a pint or two and come home. According to the Department of Education and Science, they are taking a dangerous substance. This undermines the education courses it adopts to bring up young people and it would be far better off approaching alcohol as a subject on its own. Among people with tendencies towards addiction, alcohol may lead to drugs because it has highly dangerous properties, but it should be approached differently. If being treated by a groceries order is how we consider alcohol, our current problems are clearly explained. One treats it as a drug on the one hand and under a groceries order on the other. Surely, they are both wrong. We have dealt with this matter.
I did not tell the committee about everything we have addressed. We want alcohol to be taken on its own as a subject with its own properties and propensities and to be dealt with on that basis.
As time is limited, I will call on other Deputies. I am anxious for all members to have an input in the group's deliberations.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
Certainly.
I will call Deputies Connick, Thomas Byrne and Deenihan. I ask them to be as brief as possible because the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is outside and will brief us on a motion before the committee. We will try to expedite matters.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
May I answer Deputy Finian McGrath's questions now that he is not present?
No, Dr. Holmes can answer all of the questions collectively.
I welcome Dr. Holmes and thank him for his insightful and detailed presentation. My first concern is in respect of law and order and is a significant issue among my peers and friends. There is a lack of understanding of why people on the Continent feel safer and more relaxed at night than we do in Ireland. The difficulty is a lack of implementation of the law and of severe penalties for those who break the law. The policy of some rural towns is to hope the local nightclubs or chippers close down, eliminating the problem. At a night-time event involving 800 or 1,000 people, the ten or 15 people who decide to cause trouble ruin it for everyone else, to which Deputy Finian McGrath referred and in respect of which I support him.
Will Dr. Holmes touch on the matters of the courts and Garda resources? What type of education programme does Dr. Holmes envisage and what recommendations could be made to the education sector? In the case of alcohol, we could consider something similar to the Road Safety Authority's advertising campaigns and its road shows, which it is taking to schools.
Dr. Holmes's point about the increase in the number of licences in the Dublin area was interesting. I wonder whether other rural Deputies have had my experience of a serious decline in the number of public houses being licensed. The smoking ban and random breath testing form part of the reason, which suggests a different reasoning and logic. Was there a stage at which the whole of the country was driving under the influence of alcohol when people headed out at night? Business for rural pubs or pubs in small towns from Monday to Thursday is effectively gone. People are choosing to buy in off-licences, supermarkets or garage forecourts and to drink at home. As consumers, we are partly to blame because we have demanded this type of service. For example, I was in my local supermarket to do some early shopping at 9.30 a.m. on the Sunday morning before last Christmas. I do not drink but I wished to buy alcohol in the supermarket. There was a rope across the area in which alcohol was sold. When I checked I was told that alcohol was not sold before 12 noon which irked me. As consumers we are partly to blame because we wish to buy at our convenience. I was interested to hear that Dunnes Stores could sell alcohol at 9 a.m.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
Not on Sunday.
I see.
Regulation of the price of alcohol will be difficult. It was interesting to hear Dr. Holmes's story about Heineken. Central distribution is a buzzword and has taken over in many larger agencies. Volume determines price and perhaps European law prevents us from regulating this. Perhaps Dr. Holmes could comment on this.
How broad will consultation be? Will it involve all sectors of society, and all age groups? How is this envisaged?
The people in the sports clubs I attend are usually very well-behaved and responsible. It is interesting that Deputy Flanagan alluded to the fact that some misbehave. Theatres are also responsible. It is nice to go to a theatre, have a drink before or after the show and not have to go to a pub.
Wexford County Council and New Ross Town Council have tried to apply regulation to the opening hours of chippers and takeaways recently. It is a cumbersome system. I recently made representations on behalf of a man who opened a Chinese takeaway, having received planning permission that included an order to close at 9 p.m. Six doors away, there is a chipper that is open until 3 a.m. I made representations to see if his opening hours can be extended. We have applied that to a number of premises in the town. Some premises have had long trading hours over a period of years and may be open until 3 a.m. We are now regulating chippers to close at 11.30 p.m. If this was challenged, would we be on strong ground? I welcome the presentation and wish the delegation well. We will offer support to the delegation.
I thank Dr. Holmes for the presentation. One of my bugbears concerns the age limit. The application of a particular age limit is artificial because an 18 year old who is still at secondary school has no business going to a pub, nightclub or off-licence to purchase alcohol. Anyone in secondary school, of whatever age, should not be permitted to purchase alcohol or go to a pub. There is a maturity level involved. There should be a minimum age of 18. If one is 17 in college, as I was, the minimum should possibly be 18 years of age. That might be an easier way because, if half of the class is 18 and the other is 17, should the 17 year olds be expected to remain at home while their peers and friends are legally in nightclubs or pubs? This matter should be examined because it would relieve the peer pressure to go to pubs and night clubs. Parents facilitate this, through no fault of their own. It is the effect of peer pressure.
I am not worried about making regulations to adversely affect existing licences. Meath County Council effectively dezoned a vast area of land for a minimum of five years yesterday. Under the planning legislation no compensation is payable to landowners, who are massively out of pocket, particularly those who purchased land recently. The council did this in the public interest and to comply with regional planning guidelines.
I have no difficulties with imposing restrictions on those who hold licences. The licence is a benefit from the State, not an entitlement. We must remember that all licences granted under liquor licensing legislation are for the public benefit, not the benefit of the publican or the retailer. We should not be afraid to restrict them; the Oireachtas is entitled to do so.
We should also have different hours of sale for different drink products. In Sweden, in which there are state-run off-licences, one cannot buy vodka or liquors over a certain alcohol percentage after a certain time. I see young girls, in particular — I am sure young lads do the same — entering an off-licence at 9.30 p.m. to buy a bottle of vodka. This is crazy. We should have restrictions, whereby one cannot buy vodka after 6.30 p.m. or 7 p.m. One should only be able to buy low-alcohol drinks from an off-licence later in the evening. This would have a major effect. Beer is bad but spirits and whiskeys are a great deal worse. Vodka is the big thing with girls, while whiskey seems to bring out aggression in many young males. The hours during which garages sell alcohol could also be extremely restricted. I would have no difficulty with such a move.
In my constituency a major issue is that of taxis ferrying alcohol to people. I have no difficulty with a taxi ferrying a couple of cans or even a six-pack to an elderly man who cannot leave his house and wants to have a few drinks. However, cases have been reported to me of taxis bringing massive volumes of alcohol from off-licences, perhaps hundreds of euro worth, to a field where under age drinkers are engaged in what is called in the vernacular "knacker-drinking". No offence is meant to anyone but that is what it is called. Taxis should not bring alcohol to under age persons in a house and should certainly not bring it to people in a field. A limit of one six-pack per taxi would benefit the person at home who does no harm to society.
The issue of automatic renewals was raised. I had experience of this in my former job. It is now a matter for the Revenue Commissioners. There is no public involvement in the renewal of licences for pubs and off-licences.
On another matter, I do not know whether funding is provided for secular or religious abstinence societies. Perhaps this could be examined.
Another issue is that many hotels state they will not allow children in the bar after a certain time. However, alcohol is served to parents with children in the lobby. This takes away from the rule.
With regard to the District Court, judges take fire officers extremely seriously. They are afraid of their lives to go against the fire officer. If they had the same mentality and attitude to the local authority in general, not only to the fire officer, we would see a major improvement. I applied for many special exemption orders and never notified the town clerk or county manager. We used to notify the fire officer, which is not required, who told us not to bother notifying him about such orders. Perhaps the position has not changed since the Act was updated recently.
I welcome Dr. Holmes, whom I have known for many years. In recent years we have had four major reports on alcohol abuse and consumption levels. Members of committees and national youth organisations have published individual reports. This is one of the most reported subjects and it seems the problem is getting worse. Either the recommendations of the various reports produced were not effective or they were not implemented.
When the Minister announced the establishment of the advisory group, he was asked by a reporter whether it would be just another report. It was encouraging that he gave a solemn commitment that he would implement the recommendations of the advisory group. My advice to Dr. Holmes is to make his recommendations as tough as possible because the Minister is on record as stating he will implement them immediately. This is reassuring for Dr. Holmes.
With regard to earlier closing hours, I am a member of a policing committee in Tralee, one of the committees established on a pilot basis. In consultation with the Garda Síochána, the local vintners agreed to reduce opening hours by half an hour. At a recent committee meeting local gardaí stated they saw a reduction in the level of public disorder on the streets and anti-social behaviour. Dr. Holmes could look at Tralee as an example of a place where such policies worked.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I will examine that.
Another issue of concern is drinking in public places, including in parks and so forth. It is a difficult issue. The Garda should have power to do more than simply disperse people. There should be something in place to curb drinking in public places but at present, there is nothing. I certainly have not heard of any cases where people, and young people in particular, were prosecuted for drinking in public places, especially late at night.
Young people must have alternatives to drinking alcohol. Is Dr. Holmes examining the issue of youth cafés? There are a number of such cafés throughout the country and I am involved with the establishment of one in Listowel. The café will open shortly and a number of State agencies are involved. Has Dr. Holmes examined the idea of promoting youth cafés as an alternative to public houses and bars for young people?
With regard to educating young people, alcohol advertising should contain counter messages. One sees warnings on cigarette boxes indicating that cigarettes are bad for one's health and so forth. Does Dr. Holmes believe that alcohol packaging and advertising should carry similar warnings? Do we need more educational campaigns outlining how excessive drinking can damage one's liver, kidneys, brain and so forth? We should pursue that avenue.
Deputy Sean Connick referred to licences and most of the licences attached to off-licence premises in Dublin came from rural areas. Does Dr. Holmes believe that licences should be restricted or ring-fenced for certain areas? Does he support the idea of licences not moving outside a certain radius, to curb their movement from rural to urban areas?
Dr. Holmes will be judged by this committee on how radical his proposals are and I hope he will not simply produce another report. If he does, he will be deemed to be a failure.
I welcome Dr. Holmes to this meeting. I refer to Deputy Deenihan's point regarding youth cafés. We can talk all we like about the issue of alcohol but the reality is that there is almost no alternative for young people. If they are involved in sport, that provides an alternative. However, if they are not involved in sport, there is no alternative for them. While we continue to condemn young people for drinking alcohol and so forth, we are not putting any alternatives in place. I do not know whose responsibility it is to do so. We can pontificate all we like but until alternatives are put in place, nothing will change. We have moved under-age drinking from public houses, which was the practice until a few years ago, into open fields. That is the only move that has been made through the legislation and the changes therein.
I am disappointed to hear Dr. Holmes arguing that there are numerous reasons we cannot address the issue of below-cost selling. I find it difficult to understand that view, in light of the fact that we had a groceries order in place for almost 20 years, under which the sale of alcohol and other foodstuffs was regulated. The issue, under the regulation, was the invoice price of the product and the order was effective in preventing below-cost selling. Now a bottle of beer is cheaper than a bottle of water. Something must be done to regulate the market. Surely, with all the brilliant minds in the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Enterprise, Trade and Employment, some form of words can be found to address this issue. There was a system in place; we tampered with it or abolished it and now face the repercussions.
I return to Deputy Rabbitte's earlier point on the labelling of alcohol products. Dr. Holmes has made the point that this has been tested in the courts.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I did not. The Attorney General's office gave an opinion on the matter.
I apologise; the Attorney General gave advice on it. It is difficult for me to understand why we have watertight legislation on traceability of animal feed which is difficult to trace but cannot trace crates of beer. I cannot understand how the Attorney General can advise the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on tonnes of meat on pallets and provide for 100% traceability that is watertight in courts of law but cannot do the same in the case of alcohol. It defies logic. I ask Dr. Holmes to re-examine the matter because there is watertight legislation in place for other products which are more difficult to regulate. If an empty bag is found on the west coast, it can be traced back to the farmer who bought it, where and when it was manufactured and where all the products contained in it came from. Surely something can be done in the case of bottles of beer. We will not address under-age drinking unless we take successful prosecutions against premises that sell alcohol directly or via taxis and hackneys to young people.
Let me ask two final questions. The first is on a situation in California where under planning laws alcohol cannot be sold in premises within 600 ft. of schools, public playgrounds or not-for-profit youth facilities. Could we examine some planning restrictions on the retail sale of alcohol? I recently spoke to a retailer who runs a substantial supermarket in rural Ireland and who buys alcohol in Tesco because he cannot buy it cheaper from his distributor than the public can buy it in Tesco. Deputy Flanagan gave the example of the vintners, but that exposes to an even greater extent that one supermarket can buy alcohol cheaper in Tesco than from its distributor.
A number of years ago, following a recommendation in the final report of the Commission on Liquor Licensing, the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, former Deputy Michael McDowell, suggested a new annual licence for retailers engaging in distance sales of alcohol. Has that suggestion gone off the table? I hope so, because it is unregulated. We must examine the other side, whereby taxis deliver alcohol to people who provide no form of identification. That should not be tolerated.
The brief given to Dr. Holmes presumes that the greater availability of alcohol is the reason for the high level of consumption. It turns economics on its head by suggesting supply creates its own demand. We have a changed, more affluent society and are where we are regarding outlets. With the extinguishment rule, there is a check on the number of outlets. Does restricting access to alcohol lead to a reduction in consumption? Perhaps the research has been done and that issue has been determined. We may be trying to hit too many targets and produce a report and recommendations which are unfocused. One of the most fundamental concerns of the public is under-age drinking and the lack of control and sanctions in that respect. If Dr. Holmes were to make recommendations which were followed through by the Minister on that issue alone, we would make progress.
I welcome Dr. Holmes.
Dr. Holmes mentioned in his presentation the issue of below-cost selling and the fact that drinks companies provide a marketing input for companies such as Tesco. Something we have not mentioned here so far is promotions, advertising, sponsorship, marketing and so on. On one hand, I am strongly in favour of eliminating marketing and advertising if that were possible. However, sport in Ireland has become very dependent on this sort of sponsorship. Sport is a great alternative to the type of lifestyle we are all concerned about in the context of alcohol. Therefore, we need to make sure it is kept afloat. Until the State assumes the role of sponsorship, as a replacement for the alcohol industry, this problem cannot be dealt with. There is also the sort of low-level sponsorship in which the local publican buys a set of jerseys for the local football team. The area of promotion, marketing and advertising must be considered in this context.
There is also the issue of planning and the proliferation of off-licences. I had reason to question this with the planning office in my county recently. The attitude of the office towards granting permission for an off-licence in an area in which there is already a more than adequate number of off-licences is that the market should sort things out. In addition, the off-licence is treated in the same way as any other retail activity. We should consider the planning laws to investigate whether there is a way of restricting the growth of these outlets.
Dr. Holmes said there had been no increase in the overall amount of alcohol consumed since about 2001.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
The population has gone up since then, but generally, the level of alcohol use is the same per capita as it was in the past few years. That is not something of which we should be proud.
On what are these figures based? How is the total consumption assessed and then calculated per head of population? There is quite an amount of alcohol coming from the Continent as people bring back large amounts of wine for their own consumption. Does alcohol brought into the country by people who are travelling feature in the figures here?
The bottom line is that the market argument stands up if the overall amount of alcohol use per capita is not increasing. However, unrestricted growth of these outlets is not in anybody’s interest. Perhaps investigation of the planning laws is the way to approach this. In many cases, planning permission is required to provide an off-licence.
I welcome Dr. Holmes and praise his report and the work he is doing.
We missed the boat in 2003 in terms of the possibility of amending the licensing laws. Now another boat has come along which requires that a recommendation be made. The practice of granting licences goes back to 1902. It is an old established practice in Ireland and in the rest of the world to have watering holes or local pubs. We must consider taking the licence, dissecting it and putting it back together in a way that reflects modern society and reflects the fact that people can now drink in a variety of places — theatres, restaurants and so on — which they seem to want to do.
On the issue of a wine bar on Leeson Street, for example, there was blatant flouting of the laws for a long time yet nothing was ever done about it. We should take the opportunity now to decide what will work to address that. Perhaps we need a broader, catch-all licence that will apply to everybody.
It is interesting that alcohol is allowed to be consumed in the booths in bowling alleys, for example, an activity that was introduced predominantly to give teenage children something to do in an area. I assume that is because the bowling alley has a restaurant licence which is being extended to cover another area outside the licensed area or is the entirety of the premises licensed for alcohol use in all the areas? I find that interesting. That point would apply across the board including, for example, in night clubs which are supposed to have a restaurant licence. Other places are supposed to have a restaurant licence, a piano bar downstairs or whatever. It appears that alcohol use is allowed in all the premises if it is allowed in any part of the premises.
That comes back to the point about the operation of the District Court. We should address that issue another day because the District Court is overburdened and the judges are at their wits end to try to get through the workload. Planning cases tend to be put off in the interests of more pressing criminal matters. The Family Law Court, for example, could be taken out of it to give it more time to deal with District Court work. As Deputy Byrne suggested, we should bring back the requirement to renew one's licence every year.
We can license, restrict and regulate but if we cannot get people to take personal responsibility, we are on a hiding to nothing. I would guard against the nanny state bringing in further regulations. Throwing people into a drunk tank, for example, was suggested at one time. If one asks a group of 17 year old people if they can be served alcohol, there will always be one or two who will put their hand up and boast about the fact that they can be served. We must get away from this "No" on the one hand and "Yes" on the other society. The answer to the problem is somewhere in between. I wish Dr. Holmes luck.
I thank everybody for their contributions. I will call on Dr. Holmes to make some brief concluding remarks because the Minister of State, Deputy Power, has been waiting for some considerable time outside. He was due to brief us at 2.30 p.m. To bring two threads together, there appears to be common consensus in terms of the connection between increased levels of public order and the increased availability of alcohol. As a representative of the people of Limerick, I can say that the proliferation of off-licences especially has a direct correlation between the increase in anti-social behaviour and public order offences. Any garda or anybody involved in community or youth activities will bear out that point. The proliferation of off-licences is a key issue that must be addressed.
I agree with everything Deputy Naughten said about below cost selling. We had a regime which appeared to work relatively well for many years and it should not be beyond the bounds of law reform to restrict below cost selling of alcohol. I agree also with what Deputy O'Shea said because close to where I live an application has been made for an off-licence and in the course of making representations on behalf of local residents, the planners told me that the connection between anti-social behaviour and public order offences, which are consequent upon that local authority giving planning permission, is not a consideration they must take into account. Some recommendation must be brought in which mandates local authorities to make this a very real planning consideration when they are granting planning permission for off-licences.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I do not know where to begin. I am sure I will have forgotten half of the questions so perhaps members might help me in that regard.
I will make some general observations first. A new Bill will be introduced next year and it is hoped many of the issues members complained were not addressed from the earlier reports will be taken into account in the new Bill. Obviously, that will be debated on the floor of the House. Members will be able to select the recommendations the various groups have made and if they are not included in the Bill, they will have an opportunity to raise that in a place where something can be done about it directly. All we are doing is making certain recommendations.
I omitted answering Deputy Rabbitte's earlier question as to whether I supported cafe bars. I favour cafe bars, although I am aware the Chairman does not. I will explain my reason. There is a large drinking population in Ireland. Our object in suggesting cafe bars was to get some of the drinkers from that group into a cafe bar instead of into the environment of drinking at home, binge drinking and drinking in pubs. The idea is to get them, particularly young people, to drink in a totally different society where there would be food, coffee and music available. We were not trying to encourage new people to drink. Ireland has enough drink outlets anyway and the idea that another outlet would mean more drinkers is nonsense because we already have far too many. Our object should be to lessen the number.
We were trying to offer a different type of outlet and get some of the drinking public to drink in this type of place, where they would drink less and in a more civilised way. It was an attempt but it was shot down, and we all know how. Unfortunately, it will not be resurrected. However, it is creeping in the back door. The words "cafe bar" appear on many premises now. That is the answer to the question I shirked earlier.
Why does Dr. Holmes say it is shot down and will stay shot down?
Dr. Gordon Holmes
It is beginning to come in the back door. One sees premises describing themselves as cafe bars. They are providing alternatives. It is creeping in despite the opposition it faced from a particular section of the public. I hope that, although it will not be provided for in legislation, it will end up having some effect on the problems we have.
Enforcement was raised by many members. It is a difficulty. The Garda will have to enforce more widely and we will see to it that the Garda gets that message clearly. Sports sponsorship was raised by Heineken when I met its representatives. I was glad to tell them that it was not part of our remit. I come from Limerick and if I tried to do anything about the Heineken sponsorship of the Heineken Cup, for example, I would be run out of town very quickly. It did not arise.
Deputy O'Shea asked about the statistics. They are quite interesting. Statistics are formed by the revenue and excise duty paid on alcohol. The Deputy is correct that people go on booze cruises and bring home drink from France and other countries. That is why Italy, whose people drink a great deal, is low on the ladder. The Italians make their own wine. I drank it in places in Italy and I can assure members that they make and drink large amounts of it. However, there are no revenue or excise figures available on it, so it is not included in any statistic. The booze cruises are probably offset by the number of tourists who come to this country. They are taken into account in the statistics.
Deputy Naughten raised the question of meal. Meal is slightly different because the problem is that possession of it is an offence, as far as I understand it.
No, farmers use it all the time to feed the stock. There is no problem with having it. If the farmer has a problem with the meal, it is fully traceable.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
Yes, the Deputy was referring to how it can be traced back. However, that is for a liability, not for a prosecution.
It is for prosecution.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
That is if it is contaminated. The problem with alcohol is that there is no question of it being an offence to be in possession of a bottle of beer bought in Dunnes Stores if one is over 18. The vital link is that it must be proved that it was handled by somebody under 18. It is not the thing alone that presents a problem. If the meal is wrong or is contaminated, an offence was committed and the person who has provided it is guilty of that offence. However, a person who sells a can of beer is not guilty of an offence unless one knows he or she sold it to somebody under age. It is back to proof again, and that is where the problem arises.
The questions of planning are interesting and it is worthwhile looking at the history of it. It shows how alcohol has been treated historically in this country that when the commission was sitting, there was no necessity to obtain planning permission to change the use of a shop from selling shoes to selling alcohol because both involved sale by retail. That was madness. It shows how alcohol was considered by the planning authorities generally. We made strong recommendations on that point, we had several meetings with them and they took them on board eventually. There are off-licences situated near schools and one in the Chairman's constituency is right beside a school and a church, but they were allowed under the old regime when the planning authority's only concern was whether they were selling by retail. That has changed, fortunately but it took a great deal of effort to change it.
Without meaning to restrict Dr. Holmes, we have a certain time allocated for use of this room. Obviously, there has been considerable interest in this.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I will discuss the other interesting issues raised. On the restrictions on the supply by taxis, I can inform Deputy Thomas Byrne that to take alcohol in taxis to provide to people in the manner he suggested would be a criminal offence under the existing law if the people in question are under age. That does not require a change in the law; it requires enforcement of it. There are youth cafés and organisations such as the No Name club.
On the serious issue of traceability, I hope that test selling will deal with many of the problems raised. People will buy alcohol as a test and that will give the evidence required for a prosecution. That, of itself, will be an important weapon in the hands of the Garda and I sincerely hope the force will be able to use it properly.
The number of public offences on the streets of Dublin has doubled. In 1999 there were 11,000 intoxications in a public place under section 4 whereas in 2005 there were 22,000. That might show the extent of the problem with which we are dealing. I thank the committee for listening to me. I am sorry for keeping the members so long.
Before we adjourn for five minutes to allow the Minister of State, Deputy Seán Power, to come in, I apologise to Dr. Holmes that time did not allow us explore the matter in greater detail. Such is the importance of the subject that perhaps we needed greater time. Dr. Holmes' expertise in and insight into the area are valuable to the committee and I hope, in turn, our insight and feedback from our constituencies will help him and his committee with their work.
Dr. Gordon Holmes
I thank the Chairman.
Sitting suspended at 4.13 p.m. and resumed at 4.16 p.m.