Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 23 Mar 1988

Vol. 379 No. 4

Private Members' Business. - Intoxicating Liquor (Children and Young Persons) Bill, 1988: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

Mr. Lawlor

Many serious issues have been discussed in this House but this is probably one of the most serious. The demographics will show that the teenage population in my constituency and in the constituency of my colleague, Deputy Flood, are the highest in the country. These constituencies have more than their share of social and economic problems and under age drinking is a problem which repeatedly comes up when one meets residents' associations, community councils and various concerned social leaders. The Minister in his address to the House last evening and Deputy Barrett, by bringing forward this Bill, have rightly identified that some decisive action is necessary in relation to under age drinking.

The point at issue is what action is workable, practical and capable of being implemented. There are a variety of views as to what should be done. We now have the opportunity to take action when legislation is in the final stages of drafting in the Department of Justice and when Deputy Barrett has brought before the House for consideration a Bill which is almost the same as the 1986 Intoxicating Liquor Bill. It would appear that, collectively, we in this House are at one that some action is needed. We will have to be very pragmatic, decisive and realistic and ensure that whatever legislation we enact will be workable and will have the desired effect.

We must approach this problem in a detailed, educational way, particularly at post-primary school level. We have seen the impact of the health education programme on young boys and girls who now recognise the dangers and the health risks of smoking. The cigarette manufacturers are now feeling the cold winds of change and the information coming through indicates that there is a drop off in the level of cigarette smoking in particular among young people because of very explicit advertising programmes and other health education programmes that have been brought forward within post-primary schools. Under age drinking comes within the area of health protection and concern for health. A major role can be played by those in the educational area in combatting under age drinking. There should be a recognition of an educational programme alongside any Bill the Minister brings before the House.

The role of the parent cannot be left to one side. I suppose many of us in this House believe that much of the under age drinking can be laid firmly and fairly at the doorsteps of parents who have not exercised parental control. I urge parents to recognise that what may seem like a misdemeanour now can become a serious illness in later years and can cause major difficulties as one goes through life. Under age drinking can set a train of absenteeism from employment and can lead to various other problems. The abuse of alcohol can lead to a breakdown in society, to economic problems and to vandalism.

We consistently get complaints and representations from groups who highlight the fact that drink is being sold, without any due control to under age persons. The Garda authorities do not seem to be capable of coping with the problem at present. All sorts of reasons, excuses and facts are given as to why one cannot move against the people who are selling drink to under age teenagers. Hopefully, this acceptance of mediocrity will come to a conclusion with the enactment of legislation that will be implemented and made workable.

There has been much discussion about whether there should be identification cards and how a publican is supposed to know whether a teenager is under age. In particular, it is difficult to draw that line in relation to young girls who wear make-up. We would probably be better to err on the side of caution in this area. There are problems in regard to an identification card system. Those who are opposed to them will say that big brother is taking over, that the State is beginning to exercise far too much personal control and that there is an invasion of privacy but that is going to be the penalty for helping to tackle this problem. I believe that merit comes down on the side of trying to ensure that there is not a continuance of the present trend of illegal under age drinking with all the effects that may have in later life. In later years many young people could rightly look at society and say, "you gave me very little advice and protection at a very vulnerable age and I will carry the scars of this throughout my life." When one talks to anybody in the health service or looks at the national bill for absenteeism and the burden on the health services which is caused by the excessive abuse of alcohol one realises that it is a major problem and one which must be tackled vigorously.

On the positive side there is a greater recognition of health education and of sporting activities among people. There has been major improvement in this area. We as legislators have to capitalise on that and implement as a matter of urgency very strict legislation that will protect our young people. I welcome the commitment given by the Minister in the House last evening that legislation will be brought forward immediately after the Easter recess. I hope Deputy Barrett will accept the intent in that legislation and that it is in no way a reflection on the 1986 Intoxicating Liquor Bill. I hope that the debate that has ensued in the interim and the experience that has been gained by the Minister and the parliamentary draftsman will make the 1988 Bill all the more effective. There has been a lengthy debate about the other aspects of this Bill, namely the clubs, discos and off-licences which provide drink. Those aspects will have to be dealt with in an overall Bill dealing with this subject. That section of the Bill will have to be scrutinised in detail and I would favour strong action which would help deal with this problem.

The young person who is abusing his health by taking alcohol is the person who is in need of protection. There is no parental control, no recognition of coming home late, and possibly there is an alcohol problem in the family. This is the young person we must try to protect. We cannot guarantee these people protection and we cannot guarantee to properly police the area, but we cannot err by backing off from taking definite decisions, as will arise if the publican has to exercise judgment. He will be put in the invidious position of having to pick one or two teenagers out of a group if he thinks they are under age and question them. In busy pubs this will be very difficult for staff, but if there is a clear identification procedure, that will be all to the good. This is an area at which the Minister should look very closely to see how best he can reconcile the minimal invasion of privacy with protection of the individual in tackling the problem.

Last night Deputy Stafford mentioned the sale of alcohol in off-licence premises. This is a cause of great concern because we believe this is where the greatest abuse lies. We see outside licensed premises young teenagers having cider parties. It is this kind of issue which is causing concern in large urban areas. With proper policing by the community and the Garda we should be able to monitor the sale of alcohol so that those selling liquor to young people can be identified and heavily fined. Local people can usually identify where these abuses happen. They know where alcohol is available, where proper controls are not exercised and where those in off-licence premises are willing, for the sake of a profit, to sell alcohol to young people. There must be some control which can be exercised when these people are renewing their licences. I would like to see a number of decisive paragraphs in the legislation to deal with this problem.

The educational area should be fully explored and, hopefully, some resources will be made available to tackle this problem. The advertising of alcohol on our television screens has gone overboard in the last number of years. We have a range of lagers and other drinks presented as light refreshment but there is a very strong alcoholic content in those beverages. This advertising is aimed directly at young people who have disposable income. The breweries and the vested interests are aiming at these people and they will leave no stone unturned by way of sponsorship and investment to get the name of their product across.

It is interesting to note that in the United States the Guinness Group's fastest growing product is Kaliber, a non-alcoholic drink. There is an acceptance there that one does not have to drink alcohol to be with it. Whatever moves can be made in that direction by the Minister and his Cabinet colleagues should be taken to ensure that the drinks industry play their part in tackling this abuse, which is often the cause of vandalism, house breaking and other problems for the settled community, and the old folk in large urban areas, some of whom I represent.

I compliment Deputy Barrett for bringing forward this Bill. I do not think there is any difference of opinion between us, but I hope the Minister's legislation will have more teeth and will be more comprehensive than the 1986 Bill which lapsed with the outgoing Government. As promised, it will be before the House after the Easter recess and I hope it gets a speedy passage.

Miss Harney

The Progressive Democrats will be supporting this Bill. We welcome the opportunity to deal with the problem of under-age drinking. It is a good thing that the Opposition in this Dáil are getting the chance to have some legislative effect. It has been a long time since a Private Members' Bill passed through the Dáil, although we had one recently from Deputy Shatter and now we have another from Deputy Barrett. One of the good things about having a minority Government is that, hopefully, there will be a greater opportunity in future, particularly during the lifetime of this Dáil, for more Private Members' Bills to be taken on board and to become part of the legislative agenda.

I compliment Deputy Barrett for producing this Bill. There is no doubt that under-age drinking has caused great concern to communities, residents' associations, families and so on. Last night the Minister said it was not possible, even if it were desirable, to legislate for virtue or for the ideal situation and I agree with that but we must look at the problem of under-age drinking in the context of a society where most things, particularly social life, centre around alcohol, the availability of alcohol, the consumption of alcohol and so on.

On 9 February last I asked the Minister for Justice about the special exemption orders granted in recent years. Although I know there are a number of these exemption orders in force in hotels, restaurants, discos, and so on, I was surprised to learn that in 1987 45,014 special exemption orders were granted and 1,398 occasional licences. Those figures are alarming because they indicate an overdependence on alcohol being available in order, first, sometimes for those functions to take place and, second, to be a success, particularly a financial success. Whether one is in a sports club, a political organisation or whatever, if one wants to get a response from the public to a social function, one is forced to apply for an occasional licence or exemption order so that drink will be available into the very late hours. It is a pity that we, as a country, are so dependent on alcohol. I do not say that out of a sense of virtue, but because there is no doubt this is having a severe effect not only on our young people but on our economy generally.

Most employers will tell you that absenteeism on Monday morning in particular, after the weekend drinking, is very high. We have a very serious alcohol problem and we need to deal with it from the point of view of education, health, reaction and alternative facilities for young people. In many urban centres there is very little for a young person to do except hang around the local pub. From an early age it becomes almost necessary for him to go to an establishment where drink is available to have a social life of any kind. We have not provided sufficient facilities for young people and we are to blame for the overdependence many of them have on bars, pubs and places where alcohol is available. I agree with those who suggested that greater use should be made of the proceeds of the national lottery to provide alternative recreational and social facilities for teenagers.

Deputy Lawlor referred to the great success of Kaliber and non-alcoholic drinks in the US and Europe. The success of them is an indication that there has to be some kind of alcohol resemblance for young people to consume a certain product. Drink is associated with being adult, mature and independent. That is how it is advertised. The glamour attached to it, and the secrecy that surrounds it, is very much part and parcel of the type of craving that young people have as soon as drink becomes available in their social circle. That is not just a feature of this country because, generally speaking, the way drink is advertised around the world leaves a lot to be desired.

Deputy Lawlor suggested that it would be very hard for publicans to establish the age of young people but his reference to girls with make-up was a sexist comment. Generally speaking drink is advertised in a sexist way. When I was a teenager the big craving was Babycham. That drink is still available but we do not hear very much about it. Young people have moved on to other sophisticated and glamorous products that are often over sold but certainly over advertised.

The kernel of the Bill is the need to introduce a law and enforce it. At present it is illegal to sell alcohol to persons under the age of 18 but even with that law in 1986, according to the report of the Garda Commissioner for crime in that year, only six charges were brought against licensees for a breach of it and five convictions obtained. That is a very low figure given the extent of the problem. The law is not being enforced. We must introduce legislation that is capable of being enforced and in that context I should like to deal with a number of provisions in the Bill. I enthusiastically welcome the intent and the thrust of the Bill but it enters into a grey area in some respects. It may be impossible to enforce some of its provisions if they are passed in their present form.

The Bill places an onus on a licensee to ensure that those served with alcohol are over the age of 18 but without the introduction of a type of identity card here I do not think it will be possible to enforce that central provision. In my view it will cause many problems for publicans. They will be placed in a difficult position if we do not have an easily identifiable card for people over a certain age. There is no doubt that if a publican is to be careful he or she will have to refuse drink to people as old as 20, 21 or 22 because it will not be possible to be certain of the age of such people.

We should take on board the suggestions by Deputy Barrett, and others, about identity cards. Somehow we do not like being restricted. We have a general sense of lawlessness about ourselves. We adopt many of our systems from the British; if they do not have them we do not introduce them. The paranoia displayed in recent days about this issue was unnecessary and shameful. It goes back to the type of attitude that we do not want any laws to govern ourselves. The fact is that the easier it is to identify a person the less draconian other laws will be. If it is easy to identify a person we will not have to have long periods of detention for identification purposes. Many people are against the introduction of identify cards because they consider such a system to be draconian but in my view it would eliminate the need to introduce other draconian measures. People should take that on board.

Members of the NUJ display a laminated identity card on their cars and they have not objected to them. The staff of Leinster House, and officials of other public offices, are issued with identity cards and they have no objection to them. People travelling to European countries carry their passports and they do not object to having to do so. The introduction of identity cards here would remove the necessity for carrying a passport when travelling in EC countries and we should bear that in mind. Identity cards would also help us deal with problems such as social welfare fraud, tax evasion and so on. I am not suggesting that everybody should be given a number at birth but they should be given identity cards from the time they reach 16 years.

We will have to move in that direction not just because of the provisions of the Bill but because identity cards are desirable. A debate on an identity card system should be a meaningful one. We should not have people going over the top on this issue. That is the only way I could describe some of the comments I read about such a proposal. Those comments were not reasonable and they should not prevent us introducing an identity card system in the future. The question of who would issue the card will have to be discussed later but we should not put this matter on the long finger simply because there may be difficulties involved in getting the scheme under way.

With other Members I attended a meeting arranged by the Vintners Federation of Ireland today when the provisions of the Bill were discussed. I asked some of the representatives if they could enforce the provisions of the Bill. They admitted that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce the provisions if we did not have an identity card system. In my view the absence of such a system will mean that those between 19 and 22 will have to carry a passport, a birth certificate or some other form of identification when seeking admission to licensed premises.

Section 5 (1) (a) states that the holder of a licence shall not sell or deliver intoxicating liquor to a person under the age of 18 years. I should like to ask Deputy Barrett to tell the House, when replying, what he means by the word "deliver". Does he mean give to, provide for or serve a person under that age? In my view the word "deliver" should be clearly defined. The section also states that people under the age of 18 cannot drink alcohol other than in a private residence. That means that at the wedding of a brother or sister, on the occasion of a family get-together in a hotel or at a Sunday lunch with parents a young person cannot have a glass of wine or a beer. If a young person on a Sunday picnic with his or her family wants to have wine or beer he or she will be prohibited from drinking it. I do not think anybody wants such a draconian measure introduced but if we pass the Bill in its present form that will be the law. We must ensure that the law is adequate if it is to be properly enforced but I do not think anybody intended this or any other measure to have that effect. Many young people go abroad on holidays or are involved in exchange arrangements with foreign students and they become accustomed to having an occasional glass of wine or a beer. People in other countries have a more sensible attitude to drink in the home and to drink in moderation. Children at a much younger age take the occasional glass of wine or beer and do not go over the top when they become of age. They have a more sensible attitude to drink. If that is the case, whether in a public place or not, it should not be prohibited by the provisions in this Bill. I do not want to go through the Bill as a lawyer would, saying this or that is wrong and this or that is impossible. Far too much of that is going on. If people make a reasonable effort to bring in measures the general thrust of which we would support we should be positive rather than negative. I am making these comments simply in that context, but there may be problems.

Section 8 places a requirement on the holder of a licensed premises not to allow a child on the premises at any time except in the company of a parent or guardian and except between the hours of 10.30 a.m. and 8 p.m. This applies except for access to particular facilities attached to the premises. I am wondering if those provisions are a little restrictive. Is it really necessary to go that far? Section 120 of the Children Act of 1908 prohibited children from being in bars except when these were closed. As we all know, that is not enforced and rightly so. It would inconvenience families, particularly when they are involved in leisuse activities or on holidays, when there is a leisurely attitude to a child being in a bar on a Sunday afternoon or in the early hours of the evening. It is right that we are not as restrictive as the present law would require. There may be circumstances in which after 8 o'clock it is desirable that a child be with his or her parents in a public house.

Section 9 deals with special exemptions. Generally, this would refer to places like hotels with special licences for discos and so on. The Bill states that persons under 18 cannot be present at all where exemption orders apply. That would mean that in an hotel room, for instance, or in a lobby of an hotel where alcohol is consumed, a child would be excluded. The Bill says that anywhere alcohol is either sold or consumed where special exemption orders apply everybody under 18 years of age is excluded. That section should be examined to see whether its restrictiveness would cause problems.

There is also a problem in relation to the employment of persons in licensed premises. The Bill refers to the word "employ". Does that refer simply to somebody who is being paid? Generally speaking, the relatives of a licensee would probably not be working for money. Does that mean that they are or are not employed? Either way, to restrict close relatives to being in the premises once they are 16 years of age is far too restrictive. I know of cases where members of the family of publicans who are much younger than 16, from 11 years old depending on the maturity of the individual, can help out by clearing glasses and so forth. That kind of activity does not cause any problems. This matter should be examined. Some members of the Vintners' Federation have told me that it is generally the case that people start learning their trade as a barman at the age of 16 or certainly from 16 upwards. If that is the case, it would be very restrictive to limit the age to 18 years. There are situations where for family or financial reasons people at universities of the age of 16 or 17 or people at school may work one night a week, or on a Saturday, in the lounge part of the premises. Generally speaking, they do not have a problem with alcohol because of their experience.

Section 11 gives particular powers to the Garda Síochána. I very much welcome this section which is badly needed. The present law is such that if gardaí come upon a cider party in a public park they are totally powerless to seize the goods. Gardaí have time and time again told me at meetings which I have attended that there is nothing that they can do in these cases. I would like Deputy Barrett to refer to the situation where licences are run in conjunction with, for example, grocery shops, supermarkets and so on. The Bill mentions that where the bulk of the business comes from the sale of alcohol young people are completely excluded, except in the company of their parents. When 55 per cent of a business comes from the sale of alcohol and 45 per cent from groceries, at no time other than in the company of a parent or guardian during the hours of 10.30 a.m. and 8 p.m. can a child go in to get a message. If you want to send somebody to buy cigarettes in an off-licence, that will also be precluded. It would be no harm to look again at that section.

Let me now deal with the panalties. Deputy Barrett has sought to increase penalties and I welcome that. However, if you want to enforce the law to its full potential you will eventually come up against the problem of total forfeiture of the licence or of doing nothing at all. The courts have a discretion and after two endorsements the Garda do not bother any more because the courts do not want to enforce total forfeiture on account of the burden placed on the licence holder and on the premises. I suggest that, instead of withdrawal of the licence in certain circumstances, which should be available in extreme cases where there would be continued flouting of the law, the premises be closed down for a week, a month or some such period. This was mentioned by Deputy Taylor. Threat of a suspended licence could be quite successful. Certainly, it would be a greater deterrent than the £50 and £300 fines and would be more workable than the present restrictive measures. I am not saying that extreme measures are not necessary in some situations but, generally speaking, if a good case is put up for the keeping of a licence on the grounds of hardship to the family or the employees, the courts do not enforce total forfeiture. Apparently, there has not been a withdrawal of a licence for quite some time and, in all, very few licences have been withdrawn.

The measure is a much needed and welcome one. Deputy Barrett and his party are to be congratulated on giving us an opportunity to discuss this legislation and, it is hoped, to pass it. I would refer to the comments of the Minister last night. Because he will be bringing in similar type legislation he thought that we should have a useful debate but after Easter should take on board the Government's measure. The Progressive Democrats do not support that view. We will be supporting this Bill in Committee and if it goes on to a special committee of this House we will be putting forward amendments to try to improve it, to make it more workable and to remove some of the grey areas which are causing concern.

I accept what the Minister for Justice said last night about the need to look generally at the whole question of liquor licences and enforcement of the present law and the introduction of laws that are real and practical and will have an effect. I understand no new licences have been granted since 1904 except in the ten exemption categories where the population has increased, where the public house is within a mile of another or where a pub has been demolished or burnt. It is a strange position which should be looked at.

I note from statistics supplied by the vintners' federation that in Dublin city and county, for example, where the population exceeds one million people there is a total of 834 licensed premises. Yet, in the rest of the country where the population is twice that, there are 9,643 licences. I understand why that situation exists. I live in a small village where the population is about 2,500 and within a mile there are four licensed premises. That is generally a feature of rural areas. There are far too many public houses and it is one of the things we are most associated with internationally — Ireland and its pubs. There is a discrepancy and, as a result, new public houses in the Dublin area tend to be enormous. The idea of the small, family-run public house is almost gone in Dublin. The licensing laws should be looked at so that they can be made more effective and free of the restrictions placed on them under present legislation.

Mr. Flood

I am very glad to have an opportunity to contribute to this very important debate on a subject that has been pushed aside for far too long. I compliment Deputy Barrett on bringing this Bill forward to give us an opportunity to critically examine the whole question of the abuse of alcohol by under-age drinkers. The debate will serve a useful purpose because we have failed to deal in any significant way with a rapidly growing problem over the past ten to 20 years. As legislators, we must devise ways and means of imposing effective control on the abuse of alcohol by under-age drinking.

The Bill is a reminder that for a number of years the problem has been growing significantly. I represent an urban constituency and it is the single greatest problem referred to at meetings of one kind or another when we meet the public as part of our duties as public representatives. The complaint consistently put forward is that there seems to be few powers available to the Garda to deal with the problem which has been getting out of hand in the area with which I am familiar. I know from listening to other contributors that that is the case not just in large urban areas but also in rural constituencies. We must ask why allegedly between 60 per cent and 70 per cent of young people are excessive drinkers. In order to deal with the problem we must try to find the answer.

Is it that young people see an ambivalent attitude on the part of adults, their parents or the elders in the community, towards the consumption of alcohol? They are given to understand that it is not really a great crime to over-indulge consistently in alcohol abuse. Perhaps that is why young people have not adopted a sensible attitude towards the consumption of alcohol. We must carry a certain amount of the blame for the growth of this very serious problem which affects very young children. Many children of 12, 13, 14 and 15 are seasoned drinkers which is desperately sad. We must try — not just through legislation — to cope with the problem.

One of the by-products of this abuse which I have seen at first hand — and which has been referred to by other contributors — is the growth of cider parties. This phenomenon has developed over the past five to ten years, particularly in larger urban areas. It causes severe problems for the community affected because in the aftermath of these parties there is very serious vandalism of public and private property. Senior citizens feel very threatened and fearful as a result of these practices and very often they are prisoners in their own homes. These parties have sprung up in developing areas, in parklands and open places and there seems to be very little power available to curtail such activities. This is consistently referred to at meetings of residents' and tenants' associations. These practices arise largely because alcohol is available to young people from many licensed premises, supermarkets, off-licences and so on.

The vast majority of people in the licensed trade conduct their business properly but, unfortunately, in practically every area there is an outlet which is known to have an easy attitude to the sale of drink to those who are under age. Very young people are drawn to these areas seeking intoxicating liquor for the various parties to which I referred.

Going back to the adult attitude to drink, the cider parties are really an extension of past practices by adults. There was a growth in the number of beer festivals which were no more than an excuse for over-indulgence in alcohol consumption. These festivals were largely developed by adults for their own enjoyment but young people could not fail to have been influenced by them. Weekend music festivals were also held which produced good music but also much over-indulgence in alcohol. The two seemed to go hand-in-hand. These festivals have been held at weekends over the past 20 years although they seem to have dwindled recently. They suggested to young people that the abuse of alcohol did not pose any great problem and they probably considered they would be able to control the intake of alcohol just as their parents appeared to have done. Of course we all know that is not the case.

The easy availability of alcohol concerns us all and I wonder if its sale in places like supermarkets is appropriate. I see no reason for supermarkets being allowed sell alcohol, which may be very attractively packaged and sitting side by side with the essentials of life. It is going to be extremely difficult for the large supermarkets to police the legislation effectively even if they have a desire to do so. As we know, some of these supermarkets are extremely large and are very busy on certain days of the week. This will make it very difficult to adequately supervise the sale of alcohol. If you have two or three people rushing through a very busy checkout point it is going to prove practically impossible for the management to properly control the sale of drink. That is a question which needs to be addressed and perhaps the Minister could address it in the legislation he intends bringing forward. I believe that the number of outlets will have to be curtailed so that the legislation can be properly enforced and policed. It will prove very difficult to enforce the legislation if there is a multiplicity of outlets, be they off-licence premises or supermarkets. That is an issue which is going to have to be addressed in any legislation brought forward.

Young people see adults abuse alcohol when they go out for a night and travel by car. These young people question in their own minds the wisdom of such practices. We have all seen the results of those practices in the carnage on our roads. Young people can get the false impression that alcohol can be trifled with. Because of this adults have got to adopt a different attitude in their use of alcohol. We have got to take into account that young people are influenced by our behaviour, the very people this legislation is aimed at protecting.

There are one or two aspects of the Bill which I would like to comment on. Previous speakers have referred to identity cards I have no objection to the issuing of identity cards and, as has been mentioned already, most of us already carry identification of one kind or another be it a passport, a bankcard or membership card of a sporting organisation, club or library. If we are going to a particular place and need identification we will always make sure that we have the appropriate identification with us.

Problems could arise if the carrying of identity cards is made compulsory. Would it be possible to go half way in order to meet the serious objections that some people might have on the necessity to carry identity cards and introduce a scheme where people would voluntarily carry an identity card? This already happens in business. If a sales representative of a company wishes to enter the premises of a would-be customer he would be expected to have with him proper identification such as a card bearing his photograph and the name of the company he was representing. I see no reason that the carrying of identity cards in order to properly police the intoxicating liquor laws could not be made voluntary also. Those who do not wish to carry such identity cards would have to face the consequences of a refusal on the part of a licensee if he or she was in doubt as to the age of the person seeking to be served with drink on their premises. That is one way the problem in regard to identification can be overcome.

I agree that it can be extremely difficult to decide on whether a person is under or over 18 years of age and the carrying of identity cards voluntarily could solve many of the problems in this regard. I think most people would accept that there is a necessity to carry suitable identification and that without it there may be problems in their being served drink at the festive occasion they were going out to attend. We can get over this difficulty without causing too many problems for those who may have objections in principle to the carrying of identity cards.

I would now like to refer to the seizure of alcohol by the Garda Síochána in cases where they believe the legislation may have been infringed. This is a very important inclusion in the legislation. We have all seen young people carrying intoxicating liquor and heading off to an area which is well known in terms of cider parties. Unfortunately, up until now the Garda Síochána seem to have had very little power to deal with a situation just developing which, as everybody in the community knows, in a matter of two or three hours is going to cause serious problems.

The difficulty which I see in section 11 (1) (a) is that it proposes to confer powers on the Garda Síochána in relation to people infringing the legislation who are in possession of drink in a public place. This may cause problems. As we all know, it is very easy to identify a park as a public place but what about a derelict house which is privately owned? Will this Bill cover that type of premises and would the Garda Síochána have the power to enter into these premises? If they are not to have such power there is a serious defect in the Bill. There are many derelict and vacant properties in our cities and towns which are in private ownership and very often these are used for the type of practice that I have referred to. We have got to give to the Garda Síochána the power to enter these premises and seize intoxicating liquor from young people in cases where it appears that the legislation has been infringed. If that is absent from legislation there will be a major weakness in it.

I would urge the Minister when bringing forward legislation, to consider this issue very carefully, otherwise the Bill could be considerably weakened particularly relating to larger urban areas where there is a predominance of such semi-derelict properties. Of course, public property at times, is also available for this type of practice. Will the Garda have power to move into, for example, a local authority house which may have been vandalised and which is being used to hold cider parties and for other related practices, where the communities around these properties are being terrified out of their homes at night time? The communities who raised these problems with me will want any legislation produced to deal with that type of situation. They will be disappointed if the legislation does not confer powers on the Garda to deal with such a difficulty.

In relation to penalties for the infringement of the legislation by the licence holder, we have to make it clear that a licence holder has to be careful as to how he or she operates an establishment selling intoxicating liquor. Up to this, people could abdicate their responsibility by saying that they did not really know. We have to delete that word "knowingly" and put a greater degree of onus on the licensee to ensure that no infringement of the legislation takes place on his property by the sale of intoxicating liquor to under-age people.

The larger urban areas have grown in the last ten to 15 years. Alongside the development of larger housing estates, roads, schools, churches and so on have been provided. Along with that we see the smaller shopping centre and the development plan type of neighbourhood public house. I am very critical of the development of huge licensed premises on the outskirts of our cities. There are some very large establishments easily capable of holding a thousand or more people. That is detrimental to any community. The pub becomes the dominating building; it dominates the community, the Church, the school and the houses. These huge establishments should not be allowed. I would far prefer to see smaller licensed premises suitably located in individual housing estates without causing inconvenience to anyone there. That would be a far better development than subjecting communities to these huge premises which are largely impersonal. The crowds which gravitate to those premises cause real problems for the residents in those areas. In relation to the granting of licences, the Minister could address this problem and lay down guidelines as to the size of new licensed premises, in an effort to bring some order into the development of such establishments. We have one such establishment in Dublin claiming to be the biggest public house in Europe. I do not know if that is a great boast for a licensed premises, but we have such a one on the outskirts of Dublin. In a smaller, more personal, well run establishment, the licensee knows his patrons and is therefore in a better position to police the sort of legislation we are talking about here and which the Minister for Justice has promised after Easter.

I welcome the Minister's commitment in his address last night to bring forward suitable legislation. I hope it will be expanded beyond underage drinking alone. Several other issues that impinge on each other need to be dealt with now, rather than taking one single issue and introducing legislation to deal with that alone. It was right that the Minister should take this opportunity to undertake a total review of the whole licensing system in so far as it affects the sale of intoxicating liquor to under-age people, the opening of licensed premises and so on. It is time to address those issues. This Bill dealing with a single issue is probably premature, although to start the debate on the wider issue it is to be welcomed.

Mr. Carey

I want to be associated with the praise that has been given to the Fine Gael spokesman on Justice, Deputy Seán Barrett, for producing this Bill. The debate on intoxicating liquor has been going on for a long time. During the lifetime of the previous Dáil a joint committee on legislation undertook an extensive examination of the licensing laws and spent quite some time dealing with the many submissions from all facets of the trade, the licensed vintners, the vintners federation, Irish hotels, Irish ballrooms and the restaurant association. On the other side there were people who were concerned about the health of the community, people like the ID card group in Mayo, the No Name Club, the Pioneer Total Abstinence Association and the National Council for Alcoholism. There has been extensive debate in parliament since 1982 about this problem.

In recent days this matter was highlighted by a pastoral issued by the Bishops of Ireland which was read in the churches, in which there was trenchant criticism of the abuse by young people of alcohol. Some people felt that the bishops were a little too critical. Indeed, I have seen cases where there has been substantial improvement in the attitude of young people to alcoholism and to alcohol abuse. I would not like it to go from this House that the Members of the Dáil feel that all young people are abusing alcohol, or that there is a plague among them and that we have to get rid of it. Many young people act responsibly and they view the abuse of alcohol in a different light from what people did some 20 years ago. Deputies have expressed the feeling that some young people are chasing the crack every weekend but I do not think all of them do that and I compliment the many young people who become involved in community and social work, who do many good things in their local communities and help old people.

However, the people most in touch — I referred earlier to the bishops — seem to be more and more concerned. Perhaps in this House we should have been just as concerned and we should not have delayed legislation to deal with this one problem. Since this Bill has been introduced I have been heartened by the obvious consensus in this House on this problem. Last night the Minister said he welcomed the discussion initiated by Deputy Barrett. Deputy Harney on behalf of the Progressive Democrats supported the Bill and Deputies on the Government side of the House have spoken favourably on it.

Because the Minister is to bring in an extensive Bill dealing with intoxicating liquor I appeal to him to go ahead with Deputy Barrett's proposal and allow this legislation to be followed through because the problems immediately affecting young people are addressed in this Bill. Solutions to current difficulties are proposed and running in parellel is a discussion on ID cards. The time is ripe for the Minister and for this House to go ahead and support this initiative. Indeed the most trenchant criticism before the Committee on Legislation came from people who had established the concept of ID cards in Mayo who illustrated in very stark terms some terrible happenings that young people had experienced even in the west.

Fr. Morahan is a priest well known in GAA circles — I am certain the Leas-Cheann Comhairle met him when he was associated with the GAA — and I must give him credit. He helped to change one famous rule in the GAA book.

Mr. Collins

Hear, hear.

Mr. Carey

In this other rule he is trying to champion the ID cards and I support him in that and hope he is successful. The ID group have been, apart from the clergy, people who have pressed most consistently for a change in this legislation which has been in existence since 1924. Can we afford to delay further?

It is clear from what the Minister said that the new Bill to be introduced in this House will be very extensive. The previous speaker wants the Minister to have a look at the definition of "public place" used in a section of Deputy Barrett's Bill. With all the details to be undertaken by the Minister in his reform of intoxicating liquor law, that section of the legislation will not be in place by summer. Outbreaks have occurred during the summer when young people have on occasion gone on wild parties after the leaving certificate results have come out. I thought that was all right when it was left to leaving certificate students but in recent years the intermediate certificate students went on rampage after the results came out. I would like to see the Garda getting the powers sought in this Bill. I would like licensed vintners and people who sell alcohol to be made aware of the public disquiet over the sale of alcohol to people under 18 years of age.

The Minister illustrated his goodwill, but he can give a positive answer when this debate is drawing to a close. I would like him to support this Bill and let it proceed. Discussion on the Order of Business on successive mornings has illustrated that the parliamentary draftsman who is putting legislation together currently is having difficulties in many areas. If it has taken 60 years to bring in a Bill on this side of the House on intoxicating liquor I am certain we will experience a few more hiccups before the Minister produces his document. In the interests of the young people he should support Deputy Barrett's Bill. I will not press him further on that. I know him to have an interest in the well-being of young people. He is interested in sport facilities and outdoor activities and has taken a full part in those matters in his constituency. He knows people are very anxious about this matter.

In future we can limit the numbers of people who fall for the craze of alcohol by providing more leisure activities for them. I support fully the claims made last evening for greater investment from the national lottery funds in community halls and community games where small injections of funds can have really beneficial results. Deputy Barrett last night spoke about non-alcohol bars, the development of that atmosphere and so on. For instance, youth leaders in my constituency are always anxious to hold local discos in community halls. They feel that if they can keep young people in such surroundings for as long as possible they can keep them away from the obvious attractions of public houses, and where such is the practice the vast majority of young people respond favourably. I have seen it at work in parishes, where, for instance, clubs have won major trophies in county championships. The community leaders have asked young people to desist from alcohol on nights of celebration and to stay out of the pubs and they have responded fully.

The practice of the filling of the cup and passing it around has been dropped by the GAA and I commend them for that. As well as that competitions have been set up by Scór. There are also competitions in dance routines, particularly Irish dancing, so there are means of giving young people proper example. But as Deputy Barrett pointed out, there is unfortunately a need to put in restrictions. Deputy Barrett took the age of 18. We had problems with that in this House in regard to the age of majority. Is it not time that we changed the 1924 Act which permits at section 11 (4) (c) "the sale or delivery to a person over the age of fifteen of Intoxicating Liquor delivered in a corked and sealed vessel containing not less than one reputed pint?" We have to make a reasonable effort now and acknowledge some of the fine work and research that has been done. Doctor Brendan Walsh, in his submission to the legislation committee, listed statistics and other records analysing the effects of absenteeism and so on by the abuse of alcohol. Some of the results were alarming.

One area where we have fallen down is in regard to physical education in primary schools. If physical education was given the importance it is given in other countries some of the effects of the abuse of alcohol would become very apparent to young people and they would be discouraged from indulging in it. In Ireland we seem to neglect this area which should be part of our everyday life.

When the national lottery was introduced the emphasis was on sport but there is a serious need for physical education and for teachers both at primary and second level to get directly involved. In the current drive for fiscal rectitude in the Department of Education they probably do not want to hear about putting any new subjects on the curriculum but the lack of physical education is a serious defect in the education of young people. This leads to their going to snooker halls during their lunch breaks. Playing pot black at lunch time in public houses leads to the abuse of alcohol. The county councils and the local authorities have been remiss in not enforcing the law with regard to the change of use of public houses and I would ask the Minister for the Environment to have another look at this law; gaming of this sort should be excluded from public houses.

I congratulate Deputy Barrett on bringing in this Bill. It is an initiative that has been desired by many for a long time. The Minister has an opportunity now to push this matter ahead. We have dragged our heels on it for far too long. I appeal to the Minister to allow this Bill a Second Reading.

Mr. Briscoe

I think I have about four minutes before the next business. I welcome this Bill as does the Minister. I would like to express to Deputy Carey, who maybe was not here last night when the Minister was speaking, that the Minister welcomed the Bill but also stated that it formed a very small part of the 1986 Bill which lapsed with the last Dáil.

Mr. Carey

The point is taken.

Mr. Briscoe

The facts are that the Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1988 is 99.9 per cent ready and will be ready, by the time we come back after Easter.

Mr. Carey

Live horse and you will get grass.

Mr. Collins

Can we have a little wager on the margin?

Mr. Briscoe

I am sure Deputy Barrett will be delighted if it has hastened the implementation of the Intoxicating Liquor Bill which, as he knows, deals with far ranging aspects of this whole business, discos, extensions, etc. It is delightful that the Deputy should use it so constructively. Every speaker on this side of the house who has spoken has welcomed the legislation.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair is not impressed by these tripartite talks. Deputy Briscoe, without assistance or interruption.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. S. Barrett

He is inviting comment.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is to be allowed to speak. If Deputy Briscoe were to address the Chair he would proceed with fewer interruptions.

Mr. Briscoe

I was trying to educate Deputy Carey a little——

Mr. Carey

Thank you, Deputy Briscoe.

Mr. Briscoe

——as to the ramifications of the Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1988.

Mr. Collins

If we are not careful he will buy a drink for the House.

Mr. Briscoe

The public at large, whether in urban or rural areas, but particularly in the urban areas, are concerned about these maurauding gangs of hooligans holding their cider parties and causing havoc and they want something done about it now, and this is why we are welcoming this Bill. We do not differ at all. In fact I believe even The Workers' Party might vote for this one. I would be surprised. I would have to question my conscience if I had them coming through the same lobby as I do, but that is for another day.

Mr. Carey

They kept you in Government for eight months——

Mr. Briscoe

You did not do so badly out of them. It was not in your interest or in our interest either that they were voting with us.

(Interruptions.)

Debate adjourned.