Professor Frank Murray:

I thank the members for their comments and for listening to our presentation. If they do not mind, I will respond now and then ask my colleagues to respond. We will work as a team, as we have done previously.

I will make some comments to set the scene. A common thread in all the members' contributions is that we have a substantial problem with the way we use alcohol in Ireland. That is a common theme in all of the comments made and questions framed. They have identified that problem. We would call it a crisis based on its destructive effect on individuals and families and the resources it is consuming within the various parts of our society, including health care, where we are involved.

We have no conflict of interest here. We are not selling any product. The three medics here are at the nidus of the policy group. We discussed the problems we saw in terms of the increasing number of younger people, particularly women, who are presenting with liver failure due to cirrhosis as a result of alcohol. We come to it from the point of view of medics and carers. We do not have any other conflict. We are not selling a product. We are particularly enthusiastic to be here because we believe the debate has changed. We believe there is now a recognition in this country that there is a crisis. We know from the Health Research Board survey that there is enormous support for taking radical steps to reduce the problems.

It is worth addressing the issue of minimum unit pricing. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked what was the most important recommendation we would make arising from this legislation. The single biggest item to us - we have discussed this in our policy group - is minimum unit pricing, because it has proven effectiveness. I would argue with Deputy Ó Caoláin, who I believe is well motivated.

I respect and understand what he says but the social justice argument is very much in favour of minimum unit pricing, specifically because it targets people who are at greatest risk from a health care point of view and the young. It is a very effective measure in that regard and it is evidence-based. In regard to the speed of impact, it is dramatic, particularly for those who are problem and harmful drinkers and have liver failure or incipient liver failure, because the reduction in the amount of alcohol available to them on the basis of cost reduces the risk of their disease progressing rapidly. This results in a fall in rates of hospitalisation due to alcohol-related complications within a year or 18 months. In addition, there is a fall in all types of crime related to alcohol over a more protracted period. This is not speculation. What we are saying is evidence based. No pilot programme is needed. The alcohol industry wants steps, other than the introduction of minimum unit pricing and restrictions on outlet numbers, to be taken because the industry knows those measures will impact on its sales and profits. We come here without any conflict of interest.

Again from a social justice point of view, a recent study from Glasgow showed quite convincingly that the risk of death from cirrhosis due to alcohol was directly related to the number of off-licences in an area. In areas where there are a number of off-licences and supermarkets, there is an increased risk of people dying from liver failure. I will ask my colleagues to comment further.