Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 10 Jul 2009

Vol. 688 No. 2

Public Health (Tobacco) (Amendment) Bill 2009: Second Stage.

Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Work on this Bill was initiated by my colleague, Deputy Mary Wallace, and I thank her for her work and her commitment to the preparation of this legislation.

As Deputies will be aware, on 1 July last significant further provisions of the Public Health (Tobacco) Acts were commenced. These provide that no advertising or display of tobacco products will be permitted in a retail premises that sells tobacco products and they require retailers to ensure that their tobacco products are stored out of view, within a closed container or dispenser which can only be accessed by the retailer or retail staff.

To inform potential customers of the brands on sale, a retailer may use a pictorial list to inform a member of the public aged 18 years and older who intends to purchase a tobacco product as to the products that are available. This pictorial list can only be produced when requested by a customer and must otherwise be kept out of sight. Retailers must also display a sign at their premises informing the public that tobacco products may be sold at those premises to people over 18 years of age.

In regard to self-service vending machines, these are now prohibited except in licensed premises and registered clubs and they must be token activated and be located within the line of sight of a member of staff at all times. The purpose of this measure is to ensure that under 18s cannot buy cigarettes from an unsupervised self-service vending machine. All retailers of tobacco products must register with the Office of Tobacco Control.

These measures, which were announced more than a year ago, are an important next step in responding effectively to the continuing public health crisis caused by the consumption of tobacco products, which, in the Irish context, mainly involves smoking cigarettes. The year long lead-in period allowed my Department, together with the Health Service Executive and the Office of Tobacco Control, to work with those affected by the new measures. In addition, a comprehensive guidance document was prepared and made available.

During this lead-in period a number of issues were raised with my Department, some, though not all, of which had merit. As a result, the current measure, the Public Health (Tobacco) (Amendment) Bill 2009, is before us today.

In summary, the Bill proposes some minor changes to the overall package of measures introduced on 1 July last and, in addition, the opportunity is being taken to introduce other minor changes.

The Bill comprises eight sections. Sections 1 and 8 are standard provisions. Section 2 provides a definition of cigarettes. To my slight surprise, a definition was not previously required in our tobacco control legislation.

Sections 3 and 5 provide for judicial discretion on the period a person who is convicted of an offence under the Public Health (Tobacco) Acts is suspended from the retail register. The effect of such a suspension is that they cannot sell tobacco products for the period of the suspension. As this proposal has attracted some critical comment, it would be helpful if I outlined the reasons for the proposed change.

This amendment is being introduced against a background of concerns that the existing penalty, whereby retailers would be removed and therefore be unable to sell tobacco products for three months, is disproportionate in the context of penalties under the Intoxicating Liquor Act. Where a person is convicted of an offence under the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008, the licensed premises will be closed for two to seven days for a first offence and seven to 30 days for a second or subsequent offence. While it is not proposed to align the penalties, it is considered appropriate to allow a judge some discretion under the Public Health (Tobacco) Acts, as in the Intoxicating Liquor Act.

However, it should be noted the three-month penalty remains an option and retailers on summary conviction will also be liable for a fine of up to €3,000. The proposed change was influenced by a concern that the stricter penalty might not be imposed in practice. The decision was also influenced by the prospect of a legal challenge on the basis that a three month removal from the register would be a disproportionate penalty.

As the majority of retailers can be expected to be compliant, it is not envisaged that there will be a large number of prosecutions in the retail sector. I consider, therefore, the current proposal represents a sensible compromise.

Section 4 provides an exemption from the advertising ban for airport duty free retail outlets. They will be permitted to have on permanent display a pictorial list of tobacco products sold but will be required to conform to other significant changes in how they do business. Self-service will be abolished and tobacco products will be required to be kept in a closed container, meaning significant changes in the airport duty free sector. I intend to review this exemption towards the end of 2013. Section 4 also provides an exemption from the advertising ban for specialist tobacconist shops.

Section 6 empowers the Minister to make regulations to introduce combined text and photographic warnings, also known as pictorial or graphic warnings, on tobacco products. The European Commission has proposed a library of these warnings but, as their introduction is not mandatory, an enabling provision is required, hence the inclusion of section 6. These high impact warnings have already been introduced in several other EU member states and similar warnings have been introduced in some third countries such as Thailand, Canada and Brazil. My officials will develop an action plan for the introduction of these warnings.

Section 7 broadens the definition of a specialist tobacco retailer to be either a retailer who carries on, in whole, the business of selling tobacco products and tobacco related products by retail, or a person who carries on, in part, the business of selling tobacco products but other than cigarettes.

This amendment to the existing legislation will allow specialist tobacco retailers, of which there are no more than five in the State, the choice of either selling only tobacco products and tobacco-related products such as lighters, cigar cutters, humidors, ash trays and so forth as is provided in current legislation or in addition to selling tobacco products, selling a full range of non-tobacco related products, typically, wines, walking sticks, ties and high-end consumer goods but not cigarettes.

Tobacco control is a challenging task, requiring building public awareness of the issues and working to achieve public support for radical changes in how we live and work and in how we conduct our social lives. An excellent example of giving effect to this pragmatic vision of tobacco control was the introduction of a smoke free environment at work in March 2004. An important aspect in ensuring the success of this measure was convincing the public of the objective merits of the proposal. We should be in no doubt that measures which do not enjoy this support will not succeed. Our previous success, on which we must build, was based on establishing consensus and support, and this is the approach I am commending today.

Deputy James Reilly

Although I welcome the Bill, I have grave reservations about some of the Minister's amendments. On Committee Stage I will table amendments to them.

When we debate a Bill of this nature, it is important we keep in mind the background to it. There are those lobbying for change to the original legislation, which carried a mandatory suspension from the retail register of three months, versus those who would wish it to stay in place. We can have a semantic and philosophical argument about the difference between the terms "vested interest" and "interest group". The interests groups opposed to the dilution of the original legislation are health-orientated organisations which wish to protect the health of our children and nation. They comprise the Irish Heart Foundation, the Irish Cancer Society and ASH, the latter which consists of many public health experts and cardiologists.

The chief executive of the Irish Heart Foundation, Michael O'Shea, wrote to me about this legislation. He stated:

On behalf of 10,000 families who lose loved ones to heart disease every year, I express my serious disappointment that amendments watering down the enforcement of tobacco health legislation will be hastily put forward on a Friday evening before recess. As the chief executive of the national charity supporting people with heart disease and strokes I welcome the arrival of this legislation as a positive step in the fight against tobacco. But like any legislation its success depends on enforcement by authorities and compliance by relevant parties.

However, I cannot hide my dissatisfaction at the hurried approach to push through amendments to a piece of legislation we believe will operate effectively in its current form [i.e. before the Minister's amendments]. Furthermore, I am extremely disappointed that our organisation has not been consulted as part of this process. I can only conclude that this last minute approach to amend otherwise sound legislation is a direct result of pressure from the vested interests.

I strongly urge you not to give in to this pressure and to strive to set the amendments aside — until the Dáil recommences in the autumn. Our country has led the way with the introduction of the smoking ban and we must continue to drive change to protect our children against the evil of tobacco.

Tobacco is evil. Its consumption has lifelong consequences, shortens lives and causes people to die, which is written on the back of a packet. These measures will ensure that adults, who under our Constitution have the freedom of will and can do as they desire, can choose to smoke as long as they are informed. Minors, however, who cannot be considered to have reached that age for choice, need protection from an industry that holds no bars in trying to get its product out. For years it has increased the addictive nature of its product while obfuscating on its real effects.

Michael O'Shea concluded his letter:

Furthermore, I wish to draw your attention to new signage which has been placed in retail outlets around the country which is contrary to section 43(4) of the Public Health Tobacco Acts. In the latest guidelines for those selling tobacco, it clearly states that only one prescribed sign is permitted per premises. However, it has come to our charity's attention that retail outlets are indeed carrying a second sign clearly designed to attract the attention of young people. This is yet another insidious ploy by the tobacco industry to attract young smokers by "bending the rules" and we strongly urge you to take immediate action to have them removed.

I have tabled an amendment to that effect.

The Irish Heart Foundation does sterling work. We all will be aware of the extent of cardiovascular disease in this country, the number of people who die from heart attacks and from strokes, and from other peripheral vascular disease, particularly those with diabetes. It has been my experience that if a diabetic smokes, he or she faces the amputation of a lower limb. Anything that will avoid people taking up smoking must be commended, and I commend the Bill in that regard.

However, we must look at why we are diluting penalties. There must be a penalty. There must be an urgency about this. There must be a real threat to those who would consider doing otherwise.

This brings me to the next piece of information, which was sent to me by the Irish Cancer Society. In a key point, the society states that it welcomes the introduction of this progressive legislation in principle, but for the initiative to be effective the Government needs to follow through with a real deterrent. The society can see from the latest data from the OTC that a significant portion, 40%, of retailers are still willing to sell cigarettes to minors.

If 40% of retailers are prepared to sell cigarettes to minors, they need a strong message from this House and from the Government that this will not be tolerated and that they will pay a price. As the only reason they are selling those cigarettes is for profit, let us hurt them in their pockets where it hurts most. We are talking not about sending people to jail for three months, but only about removing them from the register to sell tobacco for three months. It is totally incongruous to compare this to the Intoxicating Liquor Act, which penalises somebody only for two to three days. Alcohol is not something we recommend for persons under the age of 18, and yet alcohol in moderation carries nothing like the same health risk as cigarette smoking because there is no such thing as any amount of cigarette smoke being in any way conducive to good health. It is erroneous to compare the two.

The other point that must be made is that an off-licence found in breach and losing its licence is out of business because it sells alcohol in the main, whereas what we are talking about here are many retailers who run small shops who will still be allowed continue to sell newspapers and other products. It is not comparing like with like, and it is particularly disingenuous of the trade to suggest otherwise.

While there is agreement here and I know we come under pressure, there is a time when we must stand up for what we believe is right, and for the rights of our children. The tobacco industry is one that seeks to make the product more addictive and the golden goal is the 20 pack. If one can get the child to smoke 20 cigarettes, one has him or her addicted. That is the aim. It takes years to get them off those cigarettes, while the costs associated must also be taken into consideration. There is also the annual cost to the health service generally of cigarette-related illnesses due to hospitalisation and medication.

This is why the point of sale legislation should not be amended. Young people would be the group impacted upon the most. Some 80% of smokers start before the age of 18, and 53% start before the age of 15. Is this coincidental? Does the Minister think that this industry, which has honed its advertising skills to the last and is probably streets ahead of any other industry, is not focusing on this area? There is a consequence to its advertising and to its activity. It is a frightening statistic that 80% of smokers start before the age of 18. This is what we are trying to prevent.

According to the Irish Cancer Society adult smokers are the most brand loyal of any good on the market. This measure is aimed at young people and will affect young people, a section of the market to which retailers should not be selling in the first place.

On the deterrent being removed, what is measure without enforcement? Surely that is the key. It is not fair on those who do comply, who will lose income as a consequence while they watch somebody up the road selling to minors. However, the real point is that 1,600 people die each year from lung cancer of which cigarette smoking is intimately causative; 7,000 people die each year from smoking related illnesses and there are 1 million smokers in Ireland today. Most worrying, despite the smoking ban, which seemed to have a great effect initially, is that the most recent National Health and Lifestyle Survey from 2007 showed the number of people who smoke increased from 27% in 2002 to 29% in 2007. When one allies that fact with the statistic that 80% start under the age of 18, it shows how critical this legislation is.

ASH Ireland is similarly concerned. It, like the agencies to which I referred, would like this legislation left for a more considered debate in the autumn.

I have no issue with some of the amendments, particularly the amendment on the airports. Nor do I have a problem with the amendment on the specialist tobacco suppliers. However, the one at which I am truly alarmed, which was not clear to people when the amendment Bill was first mooted, is the 90 day mandatory suspension, and its now diluted effect, which would apply to all sections of the Bill, including the sale of cigarettes to minors. I have no issue with there being discretion around breaches of the signage and other small breaches, but I consider sacrosanct the issue of sale to children because that goes to the heart of what we are trying to stop. We spoke about this in the case of food advertising in the context of the time at which advertisements appropriate for children to view should be on television. Subtle or unsubtle, advertising works.

The issue of signage is mentioned in the Bill. It shows how devious this industry is that it put out a sign straight away advising on the age one must be, but it is designed in such a way as to mirror their previous advertising products. There is no end to how far those in the industry will go to protect their profit and there should be no end to how far we will go to protect our children.

I do not wish to delay any more than necessary. I plead with the Minister of State that when we come to Committee Stage she would take cognisance of the concerns of all of these agencies. We all accept that people must make a living, but surely not on the back of the health of children. That must be the bottom line. When we come to Committee State I would hope that the Minister of State would take on board the amendments.

I will not vote against the Bill on Second Stage because I fully concur with its principles and attempted purpose. We are disappointed that the Government has diluted down the main deterrent in the Bill and I hope the Minister of State gives due consideration to that rather than rush through this legislation which may then require amending legislation in a year's time. People will be watching closely to see who offends and what penalty and consequence he or she faces for the offence.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan

I wish to share my time with Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.

I must express my serious concern at the speed with which this legislation is being taken, and particularly that organisations such as the Irish Cancer Society, the Irish Heart Foundation and ASH Ireland did not know this was happening until a few days ago when they sought to make representations to those of us who will be speaking on the legislation today and to express their serious concerns. The industry and representatives of those who sell tobacco were aware for quite some time that there were proposals to amend the original Act and they had consultations on the content of the legislation. I object to this one-sided process as it did not afford a fair opportunity to those with a different point of view to discuss the changes being made in the legislation. The legislation, as published, could have been influenced by their views and the information that would have been made available to the Minister. Those of us seeking to amend the Bill could have had that information available to us in good time.

I had an opportunity to meet representatives of the Irish Cancer Society but only received written submissions from the other two organisations because there simply was not enough time to hear their concerns in person. Did the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady, have an opportunity to meet them? When legislating, we need to hear the arguments on both sides.

We have a very serious responsibility as legislators in respect of cigarette smoking and the purchase of cigarettes by children under the legal purchasing age and we need to hear all the facts and weigh them up as we proceed.

I have no difficulty about the provisions on duty-free purchases but have one or two questions on specialist tobacco shops. I am concerned about the main sections of the Bill that provide for judicial discretion on the period of time a person who is convicted of an offence under the original Acts is suspended from the retail register.

It is important to prevent young people from smoking in the first instance. The statistics are startling in that more than half of all smokers start before they are 15 and 83% start before they are 18. I find it very surprising that, from 2002 to 2007, there was an increase from 27% to 29% in the number of smokers. I believed there had been a decrease since I know many people who have given up smoking. The statistic probably indicates more younger people are taking up smoking, perhaps earlier than ever before, and that older people are quitting. I do not know the statistics on the period in question but must deduce from personal experience and the fact that one cannot smoke in pubs that it is likely the increase indicates many young people are smoking.

We must do everything possible to prevent young people from starting to smoke. Controlling the sale of cigarettes in shops is part of the solution, albeit only part of it. A large part of the solution involves education, making it not cool to smoke and changing the attitudes of young people, particularly young girls who regard smoking as a means of staying thin. We must get across the message that smoking is not attractive and we should change the attitudes of young people so they will not want to smoke. Our job today, however, is to amend the legislation.

The new point-of-sale measures came into force only on 1 July, yet we are taking steps to amend these measures without even determining their effects. Why are we doing so and why were the amendments not included in the original legislation? I presume there were representations made when the original Bill was being considered. Representations were received from cigarette vendors to the effect that mandatory removal from the register for a given period is not always commensurate with the offence committed. They believe that if an offence is fairly minor, one should not be removed from the register for three months. I have taken this on board in my proposed amendment but believe there is a need for some kind of mandatory removal from the register. If one is not removed, one can continue to sell cigarettes the day after committing an offence. We need a mechanism for the definite removal of the guilty vendor from the retail register.

I am particularly concerned that the organisations that focus on the unhealthy effects of smoking were not consulted on this Bill. Lung cancer is the biggest killer in Ireland and 1,600 die from it each year. The smoking of cigarettes is the primary contributor. Seven thousand die each year from smoking-related illnesses. The effect of smoking on the health of the population is extraordinary given the number who die from it and the number whose illnesses are related to it.

All of us, whether we smoke or have lived with smokers, know how difficult it is to quit smoking. This is why it is all the more important to deter young people from smoking in the first instance. We must ensure the measures in place are strong enough to do so.

I do not have a particular difficulty with the provisions on duty-free purchases because duty-free shops are designed to target a specific group. Members of this group make purchases in a controlled environment and must have a passport. I understand there will be no self-service of cigarettes and that they will be stored behind a counter in a box or container. There is an element of competition with other European countries over which gets to sell the duty-free cigarettes being purchased by those from beyond the European Union. I understand the thinking behind this.

Will the Minister of State address section 7, which pertains to specialist shops? There are only five specialist tobacco shops. One type sells just tobacco, including cigarettes. Another carries on, in part, the business of selling tobacco products by retail and does not carry on any business that consists, in whole or in part, of selling cigarettes. The Minister of State suggested they might also sell products such as wine. Is there a loophole allowing retailers that sell a variety of goods to sell tobacco also? While they may not sell cigarettes, they may sell the kind of tobacco one rolls to make one's own. There may be a loophole. I do not have a problem with the specialist tobacco shop that sells only tobacco products. When I heard the word "wine", I felt the provision could easily constitute a way to allow shops that sell many different products to sell tobacco, albeit not cigarettes. Will the Minister of State address this in her reply on Second Stage or during Committee Stage?

The issue of signs was brought to my attention by the Irish Heart Foundation and, I believe, ASH Ireland. I have not seen the signs because we have been pretty much cooped up in the House for the past week. I understand there are signs in shops designed to remind people of packets of cigarettes. I have not seen them and cannot say whether this is true.

Is it possible, by way of regulation under the legislation, for the Minister to specify the types of signs that can be erected, including their colour, size and message, and to ensure there are no subliminal messages on them? I presume that could be done by way of regulation if it is not already there. Maybe it is in the legislation but I have not seen it. We have to be wise to all the possible ways there might be of persuading young people to start smoking because that is what keeps the tobacco industry going. Older people are stopping. I imagine that the number of older people smoking has dropped. The evidence, however, is that young people smoke more now than in the past. We must make sure that every loophole is closed and every measure is taken to ensure that not only are cigarettes not sold to young people but that there are no messages going out to suggest that they should smoke. We will not oppose the Bill on Second Stage but I have proposed an amendment and there are others. We will certainly seek to ensure that anybody who contravenes the legislation will be subject to mandatory removal from the register.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I thank Deputy O'Sullivan for sharing her time with me.

The ban on the display and advertising of tobacco products in shops came into effect on 1 July. It is a very welcome and progressive measure which, as Sinn Féin spokesperson on health and children, I fully support. It complements the workplace smoking ban which has been so successful in helping to create a healthier environment and in discouraging smoking. The impact of smoking is widely agreed to be one of the greatest health challenges facing humanity. It is estimated that across the 32 counties of Ireland 9,500 people die every year from smoking-related illnesses. This is part of a truly shocking worldwide death toll. The World Health Organisation says that tobacco causes approximately 5.4 million deaths a year. Smoking will kill 6.5 million people in 2015 and that number is projected to rise to 8.3 million in 2030. Every 6.5 seconds a current or former smoker dies and an estimated 1.3 billion people worldwide are smokers. These are shocking statistics.

It is a sad fact that smoking is increasing in the developing world and the biggest rise in deaths will occur in low and middle income countries. That is a terrible indictment of the tobacco manufacturers who push their products on children and on the poorest people in the world. The history of that industry is a record of shame beginning with the use of slaves to harvest and process tobacco and continuing today with the spread of addiction and its impact on human health. The tobacco industry does not have the power and influence it once had and there is greater awareness of the health consequences of smoking.

The damage smoking causes to the health of individuals also imposes a significant burden on health systems, including our own. A reduction in smoking is essential for improved public health and provision of public health services. Considering all of that and taking into account the need for constant vigilance and concerted efforts to combat smoking in the most effective ways possible it is extremely disappointing to see the Government bringing forward provisions in this Bill which water down the penalties for breaches of the law relating to the advertisement, sale, and display of tobacco products in shops. What signal does this send out when the latest survey from the Office of Tobacco Control shows that some 40% of shop retailers and 63% of licensed premises are willing to sell cigarettes to minors? While there has been some improvement in those figures since 2007 it is a very high rate and shows that breaches of the law are widespread. Such breaches help to ensure that children have ready access to cigarettes and begin an addiction that in many cases will be lifelong, injurious to health in most, and fatal in a significant number.

In the Public Health (Tobacco) Act 2002, among the penalties set out is removal from the register and consequent prohibition from the sale of tobacco products for three months for a summary offence and a year for a person convicted of an offence on indictment. This Bill proposes to dilute those penalties. The mandatory tobacco sale prohibition period for offenders is to be changed from three months and one year to a maximum of three months and one year with shorter periods possible at the discretion of the Judiciary. This is not acceptable. When the Bill was published the impression was given that this change affected only those provisions relating to the display for sale of tobacco products, the order for which came into effect on 1 July. Retailers had lobbied the Government arguing that the order would for them cause untenable loss of revenue, closure of shops and loss of jobs. The Government rightly went ahead with the order but apparently as a softener for the retailers signalled that it would reduce the penalties for breach of the law. The impression was that this related to display but my reading of the Bill indicates that it covers all breaches of the principal Act of 2002. I ask the Minister of State to clarify this matter, to which other Deputies have referred and state whether this is the case. If so, it adds insult to the injury intended by the dilution of the penalties signalled.

Sinn Féin opposes sections 3 and 5 of this Bill and will act accordingly. They send out entirely the wrong signal and represent a slackening in the effort to combat smoking and the grave damage it does in our society. I have no difficulty with the other sections of the Bill, relating to duty free and specialist tobacco shops. Those are particular cases and not part of the greater concern about access that I wish to see continued and strengthened if possible.

Deputy Mary Alexandra White

I wish to share time with Deputy Wallace.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Mary Alexandra White

I am delighted to speak for a few minutes on this significant Bill. Following the groundbreaking legislation introduced in March 2004 to ban smoking in the workplace and elsewhere this is a welcome step forward.

We have heard the main provisions of the Bill — no advertising for, and no display of, tobacco products permitted in retail premises. All tobacco products must be out of view and stored within a closed container accessible only by the retailer. Vending machines will be permitted only in licensed premises.

I loathe smoking and what it does to people. We have all seen at first hand people who have suffered from lung cancer and heart disease through smoking. In Ireland 1,600 people die each year from smoking, 7,000 die from smoking-related illnesses in a year, and there are 1 million smokers, half of whom will die of smoking-related diseases. This is a very welcome Bill. While we may have concerns about the penalties and their implementation I hope the Minister will review the legislation after a year in practice and examine them to see how they are working and address any shortcomings.

We all know how powerful the smoking lobby is. Its tentacles are everywhere. It tries to suck people in to buy and use its products. When I hitchhiked in New Zealand and south east Asia people offered young travellers free cigarettes so that they could get hooked and the tobacco companies could have new customers for their products. Whether in south east Asia or Carlow, Kilkenny or Dublin we must make sure to protect our young people. This legislation is primarily geared towards young people so as to guarantee that access to something that will have such a damaging effect on their lives in the long term, and perhaps in the short term, is restricted.

It is no longer cool to smoke and take out a packet of Gitanes, Players or other cigarettes. The strong message must go out that we are doing this for the betterment of the health of our young people and to ensure that they are protected from the advertising and strong smoking lobbyists who try to get us to buy these products.

There are concerns about the difficulties of trying to get a prosecution but the primary function of this legislation is to protect health and such considerations. We have all received letters from the Irish Cancer Society and ASH and various Deputies have added the content of those letters to this debate. I have seen at close hand within my family the problems of people who have spent many long years smoking and we must put an end to this, particularly for the next generation. We must ensure that they do not easily gain access to cigarettes. If the action did not affect the inflationary basket at the next budget, I would call on the Minister for Finance to place another few cent on a packet of cigarettes.

We must do all in our power to ensure that progressive legislation is introduced to protect the health of the nation. Everybody in the House has spoken from the heart on this issue and I am glad there is general co-operation and support for this legislation. I would like to conclude by asking the Minister to review the legislation after a year to see if there are any loopholes or if it can be tightened up in future.

Deputy Mary Wallace

As the former Minister of State with responsibility for health promotion, I am familiar with the terms of the Bill, having worked on it. I congratulate the staff of the Department of Health and Children and, in particular, the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady, on bringing the Bill before the House today. The work done to bring about the changes from 1 July will make a difference in removing from the point of sale the advertising of smoking to children.

It is no exaggeration to say that this country has led the way in trying to reduce the number of smokers and in particular the number of young people taking up smoking. It is hard to believe that it was only five years ago that the smoking ban was introduced in Ireland. Deputies referred to today's legislation, but legislation from 2002 and 2004 was not put into place because of the actions of the cigarette companies in the courts. It was only when that position changed that the announcement could be made by the Government on 1 July 2008 that these changes would happen on 1 July 2009.

We can all remember how radical the smoking ban was when it was introduced in Ireland and how vehemently it was opposed by some groups at the time. We can now take clean air for granted and most of us would be appalled to see somebody lighting up in a pub or restaurant. It is great to think that, for a whole generation, smoking in the workplace is unthinkable.

The Government has been able to progress the 2002 and 2004 legislation because of recent actions by cigarette companies, and this year has seen the preparation and bringing into force of a number of regulations for 1 July 2009. For example, because of the product information regulations, a shopkeeper can show a pictorial list outlining the size of a packet with one image and list of warnings. There is a retail sign regulation, which a Deputy has queried, that confirms the size, colour and text font allowed. Those regulations have been signed off.

There is a registration regulation which concerns the setting up of a register by the Office of Tobacco Control, OTC. The Office of Tobacco Control has done significant work in this area and we saw the wonderful work it did in 2002, 2004 and since then. The setting up of a register will be important.

One of the concerns expressed yesterday in The Irish Times related to self-service vending machines and the issue of under age people being able to get cigarettes from 40% of outlets. The self-service vending machine regulations came into effect from 1 July 2009 and dictate that the vending machine must be in sight of the staff and activated by a token or card provided by staff, who must be satisfied that the purchaser is over 18.

All of those changes, combined with the legislation before us today, bring about change in this country from 1 July 2009 that should be as significant as what happened in 2004. I have walked into my local shops in the past few days, although the Houses have been sitting until the late hours, and there are significant changes behind counters. Children going in to buy sweets will not be bombarded with a big advertisement for cigarettes behind the cash register. The advertisements were removed from 1 July, which is significant for the children of the future.

There has been much debate about the effects on children. Deputy O'Caoláin mentioned statistics from the Office of Tobacco Control. The percentage of retailers who refused to sell cigarettes to under age people was 60% in 2008, which compared to 52% in 2007. As the Deputy indicated, those statistics are improving, but, as we would all agree, they are not yet good enough. If we do nothing else today, we should send a strong message to retailers that it is unacceptable for them not to seek identification from young people. Their efforts are currently insufficient.

The audit carried out by the Office of Tobacco Control indicated that, overall, 46% of minors who asked for cigarettes in shops were not asked for identification. This is a slight improvement from a year earlier, when the figure was 53%. Whether it 53% in 2007 or 46% in 2008, it is still not acceptable to the Members of this House that retailers in Ireland are not asking children or young teenagers for identification when they look to buy cigarettes.

The 2008 audit also showed that 96% of minors who were asked for identification were refused the sale, with the figure being 91% in 2007. One of the key findings from the Office of Tobacco Control was that retailers should ask for identification. Others have mentioned statistics relating to children.

In 2006, the Office of Tobacco Control figures showed that 75% of all smokers in Ireland started smoking before they were 18. Whether it is what the Opposition stated today or what the Government believes in its bringing forward of these changes from 1 July, we are all saying the same thing. We all want to ensure that everything possible is done to prevent people from taking up smoking.

All of us know people who smoke and every one of those people would prefer if they had never taken up the habit and could drop it. No Irish person that I know has said that they love smoking and are glad to have started. The difficulty is that over half of all smokers start before they are 16, and the problem must be addressed with young people in mind. That is the reason the Government is working to fine-tune the 1 July changes to do everything possible to remove the opportunity for tobacco companies to advertise to children in this subtle way in shops and airports. By doing so, it will make a difference.

One of the key issues that struck me when I worked on this was the research done by Professor Ken Warner, the dean of public health at the University of Michigan. He examined the number of customers lost by the industry every year due to people quitting, smoking-related death and smokers dying of other causes. For every smoker who dies or quits, the industry needs a replacement smoker, such as a child who will become addicted and replenish the basis of long-term smokers. For the industry to maintain its customer base in Ireland, it is estimated that more than 50 children must start smoking each day. That is why the changes introduced on 1 July are key changes.

Legislation can only go part of the way towards reducing tobacco use. Peer pressure, parental example and the extent to which tobacco is perceived as the norm in certain social situations are all factors in fostering a relaxed attitude to tobacco use. Therefore, everything possible must be done to ensure that advertising of tobacco products ends so that children will no longer believe tobacco use to be the norm and fewer people will take up this terrible habit in the future.

The announcement on the changes introduced on 1 July was made in March. Certain Members have expressed concerns with regard to the 90-day period. I am sure the Minister of State will address that matter in her reply but the key point is that a judge will have discretion with regard to the period during which a retailer may not sell cigarettes following a conviction. A judge may impose a 90-day period if he or she is of the view that the situation merits it. However, every situation must be measured in the context of the offence. Many Deputies wrote to the Department of Health and Children — on behalf of their local shops, and so on — in respect, for example, of temporary staff members placing something on a counter by mistake and thereby causing difficulties for their employers. If a retailer can demonstrate that a temporary employee made a genuine mistake, then the matter can be taken from there.

Self-service will no longer be permitted at duty free retail outlets and tobacco products will be required to be kept in a closed container. Like other Members, I have not had the opportunity to pass through Dublin Airport since 1 July. However, I expect that when I have occasion to do so, I will not see shelves stacked with Carrolls, Silk Cut or Major cigarettes. That will be a major difference. As Deputy Jan O'Sullivan pointed out, the relevant provisions had to be tweaked to a certain degree on foot of concerns regarding duty free retail outlets here being able to compete with Heathrow and other UK airports.

The overriding concern among most people is that smoking involves a major risk factor. I met representatives of the Irish Heart Foundation, the Irish Cancer Society and ASH, which are wonderful organisations and which do great work in this area, on several occasions. As a result, I am aware that we must reduce the prevalence of smoking to mitigate cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, many forms of cancer and a wide range of debilitating conditions. The Government has acted by bringing forward legislation, engaging in health promotion campaigns, dealing with the pricing issue at budget time and controlling the sale and advertising of tobacco. When people look back at what happened during the current period, they will state that the changes introduced on 1 July made a difference.

According to the SLÁN health and lifestyle behaviour study for 2007, 29% of adults reported that they were current smokers. Evidence demonstrates that pricing is a key tool. A 25 cent increase in the price of a pack of 20 cigarettes was introduced on 7 April 2009. Cigarette prices in Ireland are the third highest in Europe. However, I accept that we must take account of the fact that people can purchase cigarettes much more cheaply abroad and then bring them home in their suitcases. The Government must continue to introduce changes in this area because we must do everything in our power to safeguard the health and well-being of future generations.

This legislation, the changes introduced on 1 July and the legislation introduced by the then Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, form a package of measures which mark this country apart. Internationally, Ireland is seen as a trailblazer in this area. Ireland was the first country in Europe to introduce legislation imposing a smoking ban and the model it employs has been copied across member states. Research shows that in the aftermath of the smoking ban, sales of cigarettes here decreased. However, young people and women are again taking up the habit in large numbers. That is a matter of concern to everyone in the House. The perception that smoking is cool or trendy continues to obtain among young people. We must seek to tackle that perception.

We must also seek to address the matters of accessibility and availability. This legislation and the regulations introduced on 1 July are designed to deal with these matters. As with sweets and comics, for many years cigarettes have been on display in newsagents. This serves to make them seem innocuous. However, since 1 July retailers have been obliged to remove all cigarettes and other tobacco products from view and ensure they are placed in closed containers which can only be accessed by said retailers and their staff. This will help to ensure that only those who are of an age at which they can legally purchase tobacco will be able to do so. Furthermore, no advertising of tobacco products will be permitted on retail premises.

As previous speakers indicated, an article in The Irish Times yesterday indicated that young people were able to obtain cigarettes from vending machines in 40% of outlets such as discos, bars and other licensed premises. The changes introduced on 1 July will assist in preventing this from happening because from now on vending machines must be token or card operated.

Smoking and its effects cost the health service more than €1 billion each year, cause the deaths of thousands and give rise to suffering for many more. The legislation makes the purchase of cigarettes by young people extremely difficult. The House must send out a strong message to retailers that it wants it to be difficult for children to purchase cigarettes and wants the legislation and the regulations introduced on 1 July to act as a deterrent.

Smoking is the leading cause of preventable deaths here. I am delighted the Government has been proactive in trying to prevent the sale of tobacco to those who are under age and in discouraging others from taking up this terrible habit.

Deputy Pat Breen

I wish to share time with Deputy Connaughton.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Agreed.

Deputy Pat Breen

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this important Bill. Like previous speakers, I am of the view that more time should have been devoted to this legislation. It is sad that, as with other Bills this week, a guillotine is being applied in respect of it.

In general, Fine Gael supports the Bill. Deputy Reilly tabled several amendments in respect of the penalty for offences committed under the Public Health (Tobacco) Act, most notably those relating to the sale of cigarettes to people under the age of 18. The latter are covered in sections 3 and 5.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady, for keeping Members updated on progress relating to the drafting of the Bill. I also thank her officials for providing us with copies of it last week.

There are numerous people who each day try to break the grip nicotine has upon them. Smoking is a difficult habit to break and it is widely accepted that it is extremely bad for one's health. It is estimated that each year approximately 6,500 people here die as a result of smoking-related diseases. Some 1,600 people die from lung cancer. There are approximately 1 million smokers in this country and half of these will die as a result of smoking-related illnesses. Some 90% of lung cancers are caused by smoking and it costs approximately €1 billion per year to provide health services for smokers.

In spite of all the campaigns to try to stop people from smoking, when the Department of Health and Children published the results of the third national survey of lifestyle, attitudes and nutrition in April 2008, it was revealed that there was a slight increase in the percentage of smokers since 2002, with 29% admitting to being a smoker in 2007 compared to 2002, even though the 2007 figure represented a drop from the 1998 percentage of 33%. The former Minister of State, Deputy Wallace, referred to the number of young people who still smoke, particularly females. I agree with her and this is evident at all social outlets, which is a pity. The introduction of the workplace ban on smoking in 2004, which initially met with some resistance, has been a great success both for smokers and for non-smokers like myself, who also were affected by smoking. The ban was successful, which was partially due to the high percentage of people who complied with it. For instance, last year 97% of workplaces were compliant, which is the highest level since the introduction of the ban in 2004 according to the Office of Tobacco Control's annual report. Consequently, when Ireland became the first country in the EU to remove all tobacco advertising from retail outlets as of 1 July, it was no surprise that when one entered shops on that Wednesday morning, all cigarettes were out of view. We are a law-abiding society and the majority of retailers complied with the law.

Retailers estimate it will cost them approximately €5,500 each to reconfigure their shops to comply with this legislation. They have referred to a similar development in Canada in which no link was found between the implementation of a similar ban and a reduction in the rates of smoking among youths. However, it is a good idea to prevent cigarettes from being visible on entry to a shop and it will deter some people from buying them. While one could argue against this measure by citing the example of drugs, which people are not deterred from using by the lack of advertising, it is important to be proactive and to make every effort to stamp out smoking, particularly among young people. Most contributors to this debate have spoken about the damage to young people's health.

It will be interesting to ascertain whether this ban will be effective in inducing young people to stop smoking. I believe the introduction of more stringent penalties to stop the sale of cigarettes to young people, particularly those under the age of 18, would be more effective. We must also declare war on the illegal importation of cigarettes and this is an extremely important issue. In 2008 alone, Revenue seized 134 million illegal cigarettes, 38 million of which were seized at our airports and a further 90 million at the ports. The value of such seizures was approximately €152 million, which is a great deal of money. However, it is estimated that another 826 million cigarettes went undetected by the Customs and Excise. While a great quantity of cigarettes still are being imported, one must commend the Customs and Excise. It is now in possession of new X-ray equipment with which to spot such contraband in containers. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be familiar with this issue from his own constituency of Wexford. Unless the illegal sale of cigarettes is tackled, Members will not witness any significant reduction in the number of young people smoking. Moreover, there is also the important issue of the excise duty lost to the Exchequer. Revenue estimates the amount lost last year because of cigarette smuggling was approximately €54 million, which is a great deal of money.

As someone from County Clare, in which Shannon Airport is located, I welcome the recognition in this Bill that the duty free industry will be exempted from the ban until December 2013. Otherwise, the duty free industry in Ireland would have been at a serious disadvantage to its counterparts in the United Kingdom, where a similar ban will not be introduced until 2013. The sale of duty free products contributes significantly to commercial revenues at the three main airports at Dublin, Shannon and Cork, which are run by the Dublin Airport Authority. The income stream from landing fees, etc., is a lot less than heretofore, as airlines seek to cut costs. As the airline industry is no different from any other sector at present, getting revenue from commercial activities has become very important for the airports. Any reduction in the sales of duty free at the airports could have a serious impact on jobs. The industry already has faced many threats to its business. The industry in Ireland was also particularly threatened by the adoption of global aviation security regulations on liquids. Particular difficulties for Irish airports arose in respect of transfer passengers, who initially were not allowed to buy duty free at their point of departure. At one point, were one to buy duty free in Shannon Airport before travelling to London Heathrow or London Gatwick to catch a long-haul flight, such liquor would be confiscated in the United Kingdom unless the purchase was put into one's checked-in luggage.

Time is limited at every airport and if passengers do not purchase their cigarettes at Shannon, Dublin or Cork airports, they will buy them at their next point of departure, which in many cases is a hub airport in the United Kingdom. The procedures that are place at our airports for the purchase of duty-free goods are strictly enforced and controlled and are regularly inspected by Revenue. As one must produce one's boarding card and passport to purchase duty-free cigarettes, the sale to minors is not an issue and in any event, cigarettes are sold in cartons of 200 at such outlets.

I welcome the Minister of State's commitment to re-examine the position in respect of duty-free shops if the position in the United Kingdom changes. That is a positive development and we should continue to monitor developments in the United Kingdom. A similar exemption is being sought by duty-free operators there and one must consider what will happen if the United Kingdom's Government extends this exemption beyond 2013. I am pleased the Minister has stated she will revisit this measure.

While most of the parties will support this Bill, I note Deputy Reilly has tabled some amendments to it. I was pleased to have an opportunity to speak on this matter and look forward to the enactment of the legislation.

Deputy Paul Connaughton

I concur with all I have heard in this debate. It would be difficult to oppose the Bill in that I consider it to be correct in principle. As Deputy Breen was speaking, it occurred to me that it is necessary for the State to intervene, in so far as it can, to protect people from themselves. While it is a shocking state of affairs that this must be done, I recall a time, perhaps seven or eight years ago, when I served on an Oireachtas committee on health. At that time, the tobacco companies were making a case that somehow or other, nicotine would not cause one to become addicted to smoking. At one time, the tobacco companies went to the trouble of bringing their so-called medical advisers from America to this Parliament. Members can imagine the kind of damage such activities would do unless the State was there to protect people from such propaganda. Ever since then, whenever I hear representatives of the tobacco industry comment on what it is or is not able to do, I always take such comments with a grain of salt. This is a dangerous poison that has poisoned countless thousands of people in Ireland. Unless we understand, accept and believe that this is what nicotine will do, we are in a false paradise.

I wish to raise two or three aspects of the entire business of smoking. Like my colleague, Deputy Breen, I am a lifelong non-smoker. However, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and other Members are aware, before the introduction of the ban, politicians spent most of their lives in the smokiest places on earth. One never had a real expert on the economy unless he had a pint in one hand and a fag in the other at 2 a.m., whispering in one's ear about how to run the country. I did not have to see the statistics on young people smoking because I see a huge number of young people smoking. Maybe I have the statistics wrong but it seems to be primarily young girls who smoke. There appears to be a massive increase in that category.

I am realistic enough to know, as is the Minister of State, that if one buried tobacco in the bowels of the earth, some people would find it. The onus is on us to act in respect of a number of issues. We must change the culture because that will prevent people from going any length to get tobacco products. In fairness to the Government, clamping down on smoking in public places was a great step in the right direction. I have no problem with people smoking and I take no notice of it, even though maybe I should. I notice a great number of people objecting to those who smoke in public places. I assume that is a good thing to do, even though I do not do it. It is important that we hold the line and the ban is now adhered to by 97% of the population. If that is the case, we are on the right line.

There was a trend that a few specific items got people to come into a shop. One went in for the morning newspaper and one usually bought a pint of milk. While people were there, they would buy a packet of fags. There is no particular connection between these products but that is what people had on the way out of the shop. When cigarettes are removed from view, I agree that there is a lower chance people will want to buy the packet of fags on the spur of the moment. It does not mean that hardline smokers or youngsters will not follow the fags no matter where they are.

I cannot understand why the legislation was changed since it was published if many retailers seem to have sold this product to under age persons. This will form the basis of one of Deputy Reilly's amendments. Why was it deemed necessary to change this? As I read the legislation in March or April, there were well-defined fines to apply to those who break the law. That provision seems to be watered down. We are now saying the judge will have discretion. I do not see anything terribly wrong with that but if people believe nicotine is poisoning the people of our country, the less ambiguity and wriggle room for the implementation of provisions to stop that happening, the better for everyone. One knows that this is what is coming if one breaks the law. The two options are "A" and "B", there should not be any grey area.

When the Minister of State, who has a great interest in this and whose interest coincides with mine——

Deputy Pat Breen

And she is from Galway.

Deputy Paul Connaughton

We are two Galway people, and neighbours to boot. How much time remains?

Acting Chairman (Deputy Charlie O’Connor)

Deputy Connaughton may continue for two minutes and 30 seconds.

Deputy Paul Connaughton

The Acting Chairman was always nice.

Deputy Pat Breen

I thought he could be more generous.

Acting Chairman

We all wish we were in Galway.

Deputy James Reilly

Not Tallaght?

Deputy Paul Connaughton

The Minister of State should be able to give a good reason for the Government changing tack on this matter. Deputy Reilly is a medical doctor and knows more about the effects of tobacco than I do but one does not need to be a medical doctor to know what nicotine has done to thousands of people Members know so well. I had to smile at Deputy Wallace, who put much work into this in the past, when she said she never knew a person who was not sorry for having started smoking and never knew a person who enjoyed it. She was wrong on one point — they are sorry they started but they do enjoy it. If they did not, they would stop. If I see people smoking I see it as their prerogative. If that is what they want to do, well and good. With this Bill, which is part of a much bigger business, we have the opportunity to ensure everything is black and white. As far as this is concerned, people will know that if they break the law there will be a certain penalty, with no deviation. I hope the Minister of State will give us an insight into why there was a change in the past few weeks.

Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady)

On the conclusion of Second Stage, I thank Deputies most sincerely for their contributions. I share the concern about our young people and the number who smoke. The ban on the point of sale advertising is particularly aimed at children and young people.

We had a one year lead-in to this Bill. The then Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Mary Wallace, announced the changes on 27 March 2009. Deputy Wallace and I met with all groups that sought a meeting during that time, as did my officials. I met representatives of the Irish Cancer Society and the Office of Tobacco Control to discuss these proposals. I appreciated the input of these groups. ASH Ireland, in particular, did not seek a meeting with me.

Regarding Deputy O'Sullivan's point on specialist shops, there are five such shops at present and it is unlikely that we will have any more. Over 90% of the Irish tobacco market is cigarettes. No ordinary retailer other than a specialist could have a viable business unless he or she sold cigarettes.

Regarding signage, signs other than the statutory sign cannot refer to tobacco. The current signs are not in breach of the legislation. As well as tobacco, there is a surprisingly wide range of age restricted products found in retail outlets that sell tobacco. Examples include alcohol, lottery tickets, petrol, some aerosols, disposable lighters, knives and some DVDs. There can be no legitimate objection to a sign drawing attention to the fact that age identification may be required as long as tobacco is not specifically referred to. Retailers have made the point that it is helpful for staff to have a sign to point to when dealing with troublesome customers. There is a need to find a solution to this problem and a sign not specifically referring to tobacco is an acceptable solution.

Deputy Ó Caoláin stated that there was an impression given that the Bill only affected the display aspect. No such impression was given. The change proposed will affect all offences and this was made clear when the change was announced. This was the main issue I discussed with the Irish Cancer Society.

Deputy White mentioned the review of the legislation. The tobacco control legislation and its operation is routinely monitored and the suspension from selling tobacco will also be kept under review. I appreciate that Deputies were concerned about the smuggling of tobacco products and I share this concern. The Revenue Commissioners continue to implement a wide range of measures to combat smuggling, including seizing illegal products, the prosecution of offenders, monitoring sea cargo and international courier and air freight services and monitoring Internet sites and sales patterns.

In particular I note the concerns many Deputies expressed with regard to the proposed removal of the mandatory 90 day suspension from the retail register when a retailer commits an offence. I emphasise that careful consideration was given to this point when the legislation was being drafted and I am confident that the proposed change is a sounder approach that will better serve the tobacco control agenda in the long term. It is a judgment call. The period of suspension is mandatory and the only change proposed is the duration of the period of suspension which will now be a matter of judicial discretion. I will elaborate on that on Committee Stage.

As I mentioned in my opening speech, the purpose of the Bill is to address legitimate points that were raised with the Department over the past year. It does not represent any weakening of the Government's position on tobacco control. With the introduction of the 1 July package, when international tobacco measures are compared, Ireland's position is at the forefront. The protection of our younger people is a particular objective of the Bill.

Question put and agreed to.

Acting Chairman

In accordance with the orders of the House, we now move to Committee Stage.