Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. Professor Murray outlined in stark detail the difficulties that we as a nation have with drink and our unhealthy relationship with alcohol. For a long time, there has been a tacit acceptance that we have a little problem with drink which we are incapable of dealing with or facing up to as a mature society. While the issue has been swept under the carpet for a long time, it has come to a head in recent years, notably in our hospital emergency units at night, especially weekend nights. Alcohol leaves a trail of destruction in its wake in terms of health and societal damage. We stand at a crossroads as we decide how to address the problem. While my party welcomes the proposed Bill and hopes it will make an impact, it is only a stepping stone. Further measures will be required, including an overall ban on alcohol advertising.

I propose to elaborate on several issues that arise in this regard. If we want to bring members of the public with us, we must base our thesis and ideas on facts and frame the Bill accordingly. Many people regard the World Health Organization statistics on binge drinking as extreme and will argue that the maximum number of units per week set by WHO does not take Irish habits into account and is not based on scientific evidence. A person we would consider to be a light drinker would be categorised as a binge drinker under the WHO threshold for maximum alcohol consumption. I ask Professor Murray to elaborate on that issue. We need a firm acceptance that the World Health Organization standards are those on which we should base our efforts.

We must persuade the wider public, legislators and everyone else concerned to accept the difficulties the country has with alcohol. Has the introduction of minimum unit pricing or similar measures in other countries resulted in an immediate improvement, for example, in respect of the visibility of the alcohol problem on the streets and in emergency departments at weekends? How long does it take for such measures to filter through to health outcomes? I presume it takes some time before they feed into health outcomes, such as reductions in the incidence of cirrhosis of the liver, which can be seen in statistics? Is there any scientific evidence to show that health outcomes begin to improve dramatically and quickly following the introduction of such measures?

Professor Murray referred to younger people. Every Thursday, Friday and Saturday night when young people head into town, parents worry about whether their children will return home in one piece or end up in an emergency department. This is a genuine and ongoing concern among parents. As I stated, one only has to walk the streets of any town or city on a Saturday night to see the extent of the problem. Those who would prefer not to do so need only walk the streets on a Sunday morning to see the evidence of the problem on doorways all over our cities.

Much of the underage drinking that takes place is done in advance of going out. Parental supervision is needed and parents must at least encourage their children not to binge drink. A change in behaviour is required. While I am not viewing the past through rose-tinted glasses, there has been a societal shift in how Irish people drink. Previously, when people started drinking at an earlier age, an element of collective supervision was involved. Young people drank in a public house where bar staff, neighbours and other people were present and, as such, they drank in a public forum. Drinking habits have changed dramatically, however, as statistics on off-licence sales show. I ask Professor Murray to address that issue.

I have often made the following suggestion because I believe it merits discussion. Alcohol is frequently purchased legally but subsequently gets into the hands of underage young people. An 18 year old can legally purchase as much alcohol as he or she likes. If he or she has a friend aged 16 who has a girlfriend aged 14, illegal and dangerous drinking will quickly take place among this peer group. If we are to encourage people not to engage in this type of unsupervised drinking, perhaps we should consider increasing to 21 years the age at which alcohol can be purchased in off-licences as opposed to on-licensed premises. It may be worthwhile considering this option, as it could help address the problem of young people binge drinking in an unsupervised environment at home and the practice of "bushing", as we used to describe outdoor drinking. Is there any evidence available internationally to show that increasing the age requirement reduces binge drinking and damage to young people? I have often considered this option because I have seen 18 year olds buying alcohol in industrial quantities in off-licences. This drink is then consumed behind a shed or somewhere else by 14 or 15 year old children.

When an off-licence opens in an area, public representatives almost immediately receive calls from local residents raising the issue of anti-social behaviour and drunkenness in the vicinity of the premises. While many off-licence owners act responsibly and only sell alcohol legally, much of the alcohol sold in off-licences is consumed illegally. Is my proposal worth examining?

Even among medical professionals, one hears the view expressed that a drop of whiskey or glass of red wine every evening is good for the blood and so forth. There is an acceptance that some alcohol is okay. Professor Murray indicated that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption. People who should know this fact must explain it openly. General practitioners should not tell patients that a drop of whiskey in the evening will aid sleep or thin the blood, because such throwaway remarks embed themselves in people's thinking. We then hear that a couple of pints here and there or a drop of whiskey or half a bottle of wine every night is not that bad. Medical professionals need to be very clear on that issue.