Mr. James Doorley:

I will try to answer the questions. The last point was an issue we discussed at the national substance misuse strategy group because we have seen a huge explosion in the off-licence area. We had a discussion about restricting or reducing the number of off-licences. Deputy Billy Kelleher mentioned that off-licences can spring up and suddenly issues arise.

I was a little surprised that the process for getting a licence seems to be quite simple. One has to apply to the courts first and then go to the Revenue. Everyone pays the same price for a licence. A large multiple selling millions of euro worth of alcohol pays the same price as a small corner shop. I do not think that makes any sense.

The other point related to the sponsorship of sporting bodies by the drinks industry.

I am a big sports fan and a member of the GAA. The sports organisations do brilliant work with young people. However, that work is undermined by the organisations insisting on it being supported by companies the product of which may cause young people a lot of damage. Deputy Billy Kelleher made an interesting point that most elite athletes, including professional rugby and soccer players and inter-county GAA players, were not allowed to drink alcohol because it would impair their performance. There is an irony in that regard. We were very much of the view that alcohol advertising in sport should be phased out over time and ultimately banned. I have asked sports organisations how much they receive from drinks companies, but that information has not been made available. If we knew how much was involved, we might then look at replacing it in some way.

On marketing and advertising, Dr. Kenny has noted that the WHO, the independent science committees at EU level and so on are all very clear that advertising and marketing have a clear role to play in patterns of alcohol consumption. Our view is that the only solution in terms of outdoor advertising is a ban, as Deputy Sandra McLellan mentioned. I do not agree that the current code is strict. In the case of bus stops, for example, one is not permitted to have alcohol advertisements all over a particular shelter, but there is no overall restriction. In my daily commute I pass 15 or so bus shelters, all of which might carry an advertisement for alcohol. There is no restriction on the overall volume of outdoor advertising; the restriction applies only to an individual bus shelter or bus. The code essentially was a case of the drinks industry and advertisers getting together, writing the examination questions and scoring themselves on the result. That is my view of it.

We are very supportive of the minimum pricing proposals because they would put a floor to the price of alcohol. Young people have always experimented with drink, but the issue now is the types and quantities of alcohol they are drinking and the frequency of their partaking in same. Behaviour in this regard is very different from what one would have seen 20 or 30 years ago when young people found it very hard to access alcohol because it was only available in a pub or an off-licence. In fact, many rural areas did not even have an off-licence.