Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have not received any apologies.

I ask witnesses and members to turn off their mobile phones because they can interfere with the sound system and the recording of the meeting.

The main item on the agenda today is the pre-legislative scrutiny of the general scheme of the sale of alcohol Bill 2022. I am grateful to our witnesses for joining us. We are looking forward to the engagement with them, as stakeholders, to help us with the scrutiny of the general scheme of the Bill. This is the first of two meetings on this matter; there will be another next week.

We are joined by: Mr. Matt McGranaghan, director and spokesperson, and Mr. Jackie Conboy, director, from the Music and Entertainment Association of Ireland; Mr. Donall O’Keeffe, chief executive, and Ms Alison Kealy, chair, from the Licensed Vintners Association; Mr. Paul Clancy, chief executive, and Mr. Paul Moynihan, president, from the Vintners Federation of Ireland; Mr. Sunil Sharpe, spokesperson, and Mr. Robbie Kitt, spokesperson, from Give Us the Night; Ms Elisabeth Ryan, co-ordinator, and Mr. Peter Mosley, chairperson, from the Independent Craft Brewers Ireland; and Ms Juliet Dwyer, principal officer, and Ms Patricia Butler, assistant principal officer, from the Department of Justice. I thank them all for coming.

Witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or to engage otherwise in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue these remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

The witnesses from each of the bodies will be given three minutes to set out their opening statements. Once all those statements have been delivered, I will call on members to ask any questions they have. They will each have seven minutes to engage with the witnesses. If there is extra time, we can go back to other issues. It is essential that members put their questions succinctly in order to give witnesses an opportunity to respond. I ask members both present and online to indicate clearly to me if they want to speak. When all members have indicated that they have had their initial engagement, we may come back to other members for a shorter period.

The available time for the meeting is limited so we will have to keep to time as much as possible.

I acknowledge Ms Ashley Rehal from the University of California, Berkeley, who is working as an intern with Deputy Niamh Smyth. She is welcome to the Public Gallery.

Mr. Matt McGranaghan:

The Music and Entertainment Association of Ireland, MEAI, thanks the Joint Committee on Justice for the invitation to make this submission on the general scheme of the sale of alcohol Bill 2022. Many workers in the music and entertainment sector are reliant on licensed premises for employment opportunities, whether that be in bars, restaurants, hotels, theatres or other venues. Music and entertainment, socialising and alcohol have a long and inseparable association. The local pub is often the first introduction to performing in public for many artists, whether it be an unplugged night or a trad session. It could be argued that pubs have been central to the survival of traditional music and sessions as they have been regular homes to weekly sessions for many decades. A traditional music session in a local bar has also been central to the craic ages ceol image portrayed internationally by promoters of our country for tourism purposes.

The music and entertainment industry is intrinsically linked to and affected by the licensing system in Ireland. MEAI welcomes any effort to modernise our antiquated licensing laws and this Bill on the whole does that. MEAI has two main areas of concern which need further clarification and consideration. Chapter 2 of Part 4 of the general scheme deals with cultural venues. MEAI requests further clarification on the terms "cultural amenity" and "function". Licensed premises often provide employment to workers in the music and entertainment sector. Businesses that use music and entertainment often take the good with the bad. MEAI is concerned that the lack of concise definitions could provide increased competition against licensed premises and potentially decrease employment opportunities and diminish the number of available working days and nights for gigs.

MEAI also echoes the concerns of other relevant stakeholders over the deregulation of licensing and the removal of the need for an existing license to be acquired before a new licensed premises is opened or established. This deregulation could lead to increased competition from multinational and international businesses, and could be a threat to local and family businesses in every community.

As I mentioned earlier, many in the music and entertainment sector are reliant on licensed premises for employment. This became evident during the pandemic. What also became evident for many people was that they wanted to change their business models post pandemic to have a better home and family life. Both sectors are still feeling the aftereffects of the pandemic and trying to navigate the cost of energy and business crises that continue. These issues continue to negatively impact both sectors. Many musicians realised that they had an over-dependence on pubs and hotels for gigs pre pandemic. They now gig in other venues, such as nursing homes, community centres and other social environments where alcohol is not a feature, but still gig in pubs and hotels, albeit not on as many nights of the week. It is important that these changes are supported to ensure livelihoods continue.

Recent schemes by the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, the night-time economy support scheme and the local live performance support scheme, successfully supported the creation of cultural activities and gigs across the night-time economy and local authority areas throughout 2021 and 2022. Both these schemes were invaluable to workers in the music and entertainment sector in creating and protecting employment and would be valuable ways to support both sectors into the future. However, both these schemes have ceased and no further funding has been allocated to continue them into the future.

Unless clear definitions, terms and conditions are given to the terms we have highlighted, the general scheme of the sale of alcohol Bill 2022 will undermine and negate the Government’s own rural development policy commitment to pubs as community hubs. It is important our archaic licensing laws are modernised, made more efficient and designed to reflect and adapt to modern life. It is also vital that we protect those elements which are crucial to our way of life, our employment, and also our identity as communities and a nation. We believe that properly addressing the issues we have raised will help better protect those elements.

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

I thank the Acting Chairman and members of the committee for the opportunity to appear at this meeting to consider what is a critical issue for the licensed trade, namely, reform and modernisation of licensing legislation. The National Vintners Association is represented by chairperson, Ms Kealy and me. We would like to acknowledge the Government for its support of the hospitality sector during 2022. The 9% hospitality VAT rate, the temporary business energy support scheme, TBESS, and the 50% cut in the cost of sectoral employment orders, SEOs, are important supports for the licensed trade. A further extension of the 9% VAT rate through 2023 is warranted.

I will now set out our position on some key policy issues in the Bill. First, the LVA welcomes the trading hours proposed in the Bill for traditional pubs, late bars and nightclubs and believes they are appropriate for a modern economy. In particular, we are pleased by the proposed introduction of an annual late bar permit and an annual nightclub permit as a suitable basis for licensing the late trade. We are delighted that the special exemption order, SEO, system is to be abolished under the Bill. An annual permit system for both late bars and nightclubs is a far better option. We agree that a publican’s hotel licence or a public house licence should be eligible to apply for late bar and nightclub permits. However, we strongly object to wine on-licences being allowed to apply for the late trading licences on the grounds: first, wine on-licensed premises are not allowed to have a bar; second, they are obliged to only sell alcohol with food; third, they are not permitted to sell spirits or beer; and fourth, there are fundamental operational management differences between running a food-led business with a wine on-licence and running a late bar and drinks or entertainment-led business or nightclub. Accordingly, it makes no sense whatever that wine on-licences be allowed to apply for late licences.

On restaurant licensing, the LVA supports that the new restaurant licence will permit restaurants to sell the full range of alcohol products. This is appropriate in this day and age. We also welcome the fact that the Bill is expressly clear alcohol can only be sold in conjunction with a substantial meal and the restaurant must not contain a bar counter. We feel that two additional provisions are warranted to ensure compliance with the intention of restaurant licensing as follows. First, a table service only provision should be included and, second, the restaurateur or operator should give an undertaking to the court that the premises does not contain a bar at licence grant or licence renewal.

Turning to cultural amenity licences, we support greater diversity in the night-time economy and recognise the role of appropriately defined cultural amenity licences in this regard. However, we do have concerns around the potential operation of such licences and the possibility that they may be used as a backdoor entry into the licensed trade. Our concerns are based first, on previous negative experiences and abuse of theatre licences and second, on the potential for an increase in the total number of licence outlets in urban areas as cultural licences are mainly going to be located in urban locations. Accordingly, we believe it is extremely important that the criteria for designation of both cultural premises and cultural events must be strict; the premises itself must have planning permission to operate as a cultural premises; and the use of cultural amenity licences by external third party promotion not be permitted. We have given other reasons which I will leave out for now.

The our core concern around the Bill is the proposed change the extinguishment requirement. We oppose this for new pub licences on the following grounds. The current licensing regime does not exist to protect publicans from competition but is there on public health and public order grounds and to provide regulatory control. The country is severely over pubbed with 6,800 pub licences. Some 1,800 pubs, or 20% of pubs, have closed since 2005, confirming a total oversupply. On-trade alcohol demand is in long-term structural decline. The combination of too many pubs particularly in rural Ireland together with falling demand means that overall pub numbers will continue to fall irrespective of any changes in the extinguishment requirement. New pubs are not going to open in rural Ireland due to too many pubs being there already and low prospects for viability. There are obvious public health concerns and public order concerns associated with a fully liberalised trade. Any new licences sought will be in areas of higher demand, namely cities, provincial towns and tourist locations. Who wants more pumps in these areas? In summary, removing the extinguishment requirement will not achieve the Minister's objective of enhancing rural pub viability and will prove a failed policy initiative.

It is clear that a huge amount of work has gone into the development of the general scheme. The LVA welcomes its publication and supports its objectives of modernising and codifying licensing law. We oppose the proposed change to the extinguishment requirement on the basis that will fail to deliver on the Minister’s objective of enhancing viability of the rural pub trade. Full liberalisation of the pub trade would be a serious policy mistake.

Mr. Paul Clancy:

I thank the committee for the invitation to attend today's meeting. I am joined by the VFI president, Mr. Paul Moynihan, a rural publican from Donard, County Wicklow. As VFI chief executive, I would like to welcome the publication of the general scheme of the Bill. For many years we have been promised legislation that would modernise the various laws that govern the sale of alcohol so it is positive to see such legislation coming to pass.

At the outset, it is important to note that through this new piece of legislation the sale of alcohol will remain a restricted practice, a decision by the Department of Justice which we very much endorse. The seven-day licence is recognised by the Minister as the cornerstone of the licensing trade and the commitment to retaining its relevance is an important point. We also welcome that the legislation states that all licence applications, including licences for restaurants, hotels and all other venues selling alcohol, will be processed through the District Court, a recommendation contained within the VFI’s original submission 12 months ago.

As a key stakeholder in the process, the VFI understands any consolidation of existing licensing laws will have a sizeable impact on its members - the holders of seven-day licences. This impact is most evident through the issue of extinguishment, the process whereby a new pub can open only when an existing licence is first transferred or, as its technically known, “extinguished”. Our members are gravely concerned about this section. If enacted as presented, new entrants to the pub market will no longer need to extinguish an existing licence to commence trading. As a consequence, the VFI argues that the number of pubs in rural Ireland will decrease, the exact opposite of what the Minister for Justice says is intended to happen.

According to the Department of Justice, removing the current requirement to extinguish an existing licence will stimulate the growth of new pubs in rural areas. This is a flawed premise. Pub numbers in rural areas are in decline and not because of the lack of licences. Research undertaken by Anthony Foley from the DCU Business School demonstrates that, since 2005, 1,829 pubs, or one in five venues, have closed. While making licences easier to obtain would theoretically benefit the consumer by increasing the number of pubs, one could reasonably argue that existing pubs will suffer as a result of an increase in supply in what is already an oversaturated market.

For the record, there are more than 10,000 on-trade licences in operation in Ireland at present and more than 7,200 of these are pub licences. That is one pub for every 496 adults in the country, so competition is part and parcel of the pub sector. The issue is sustainability. The Irish pub trade is run by publicans who, in many cases, are operating pubs that have been in their families for generations. These family-run pubs play an integral role in the country’s tourism offering. Tourists to Ireland mention visiting pubs as one of the main reasons they come here. We need to protect this valuable cultural asset.

The majority of rural publicans run businesses that turn over less than €190,000 per annum, so these are not large businesses. The typical pub is a community centre as much as a pub and, as already stated, the publican plays a vital role in that local community. In fact, the cultural value of our pubs is so important that the VFI is in the process of applying for pubs to join the UNESCO list of intangible cultural heritage, which protects the world’s living heritage. We are also working with the Minister, Deputy Heather Humphreys, and the Department of Rural and Community Affairs in relation to the pubs as community hubs pilot programme that seeks to reinvent what the rural pub can offer local communities.

Any form of deregulation will precipitate the closure of many of these pubs as the owners decide to exit the business in the face of unsustainable competition. While the adage “the market will find its level” is strictly true, it fails to take into account the cultural and community value of existing pubs. Other sections of the Bill are also of some concern, notably the cultural amenity licence. Exact definitions are required for venues and types of events that qualify for this licence, along with confirmation that all licence applications will follow the same criteria.

In summary, our message is “let’s keep rural pubs alive.” We hope this Bill will be amended to help secure that aim. I thank members for their time and we are happy to address any questions they may have.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Mr. Sharpe of Give Us the Night.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

I thank the committee for having us here today. I am joined by Mr. Robbie Kitt, my fellow spokesperson from Give Us the Night. We are happy that the general scheme of the Sale of Alcohol Bill has been published and we would like to commend the Minister, Deputy McEntee, and her officials on bringing it this far. It is nearly 20 years in the making, during which time the night-time industry has noticeably downsized. When we protested outside the Dáil in 2008, we predicted that the nightclub industry was going to be destroyed if the sudden and unnecessary amendments in the Intoxicating Liquor Act were introduced. Unfortunately, we were right. When people ask what happened to nightclubs, and why we have approximately 85 now versus 328 in 2008, this is not simply down to changing social trends or rising running costs. It is also because the Government went out of its way to obstruct our industry by providing no workable licence, ending late opening on Sundays, which was at that point our “industry night”, and piling on unaffordable licensing costs that caused many venues to shut. The Government committed what is the biggest sin if you are a DJ or live performer - it cleared the dancefloor.

I will keep it brief for now as I know we will have time to go through this in greater detail shortly. I am going to prioritise some of the top issues for us, which we see as still being unresolved in the Bill as it currently reads. We are happy to provide more thoughts and solutions in regard to these issues during today’s discussion.

First, we need the current exorbitant licensing costs for all late-night venues to disappear.

Venues should simply pay a yearly court administration fee for the newly created late permits, no more than the European standard, which ranges from €500 to €2,500 per year. We asked that dance venues be given a specific venue licence. Instead, a nightclub permit is proposed, which keeps us tied directly to the pub licensing system. A club is not a pub and vice versa. They are completely different business types. Given the severe downturn of the nightclub industry while fully fenced into this system since 2008, it has proved to be an unhealthy union. This is set to continue.

While the removal of extinguishment is designed to enable easier access to the market, for a full three years after the legislation is enacted new nightclub operators will still have to purchase a seven-day publican’s licence on the open market, currently selling for approximately €60,000. Given the set-up costs of a nightclub, the limited trading hours and escalating running costs, with some insurance premiums that have quadrupled post pandemic, adding the hefty cost of a pub licence will be enough to dissuade new entrants to the market. It should not be assumed that new operators, especially younger ones, have access to an endless flow of money or come from generational wealth. New nightclub operators should be encouraged into the market and exempt from any extinguishment process.

Although the cultural amenity licence sounds promising, it is a culturally regressive development considering that it has been spawned from the current theatre licence, which was once the premier late-night licence. Unlike purpose-built bars and nightclubs, other cultural venues that currently use the theatre licence will have no new permit to operate late, unless they purchase occasional late hours orders - the renamed special exemption orders - in court. This needs to be addressed. Similarly, we feel that adjustments to the national cultural institutions licence are unnecessary. The proposal to create a new national cultural amenity licence should be scrapped.

Despite a succession of ill-judged amendments to licensing laws post millennium, the Department of Justice has never reviewed the effectiveness of these specific changes on the night-time industry, and their necessity in the first place. It is our view that the current proposed reform is moderate and could go further, and that regulations may continue to hinder the sector. With this in mind, we believe that a review, potentially independent, of the reform should take place within two years of the laws being enacted.

Issues involving safety of all types, inside and outside of venues, have been a priority for the night-time economy taskforce. We welcome a new safety-related subgroup being formed within the taskforce that, it is to be hoped, will help to inform safety policies and staff training for night-time venues in Ireland. Work has also commenced by the HSE to look at health and social responses in nightlife settings. We believe that work will continue to develop this year based on European best standards.

Mr. Peter Mosley:

Independent Craft Brewers of Ireland represents the majority of operating Irish microbreweries and is one of a very limited number of trade organisations in Ireland that entirely represents the interests of genuine micro and small enterprises. ICBI members welcome many of the measures being proposed by this Bill, including the move to the District Court for licence applications; the abolition of the licence extinguishment requirement, which we believe leads to anti-competitiveness in the market; the standardisation and extension of opening times to include the removal of Sunday trading restrictions; and the abolition of discriminatory wine licensing, which favours wine over domestically produced beer.

It is our belief that the current licensing regime restricts competition and stifles innovation. The largest issue that Irish craft breweries face is developing a route to market, particularly as regards the pub trade, a problem that has been seriously exacerbated by the onset of Covid, leaving many small breweries struggling to survive. A significant deregulation of the current licensing laws would lead to increased competition, as the existing barriers to entry to this sector are based on the cost and availability of licences. The current stagnation in the licensed drinks trade contrasts with the excitement of Ireland’s vibrant food, café and wider hospitality sector.

There is and always will be a place for the traditional Irish pub, not least due to the association for the tourism sector and, most important, its roots in the community. However, as a modern society, we are changing and evolving. This includes the settings in which we may want to consume both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks. ICBI members believe that the key to delivering on consumer demand is to open up the market to allow other non-traditional channels to proliferate. The proposed revised producer’s retail licence maintains the very restrictive opening hours and conditions in the existing licence. We would like to bring these hours in line with proposed off-licence hours for both on-premises and off-premises consumption, and to see the condition for ticketing and full tours removed.

Brewery and taprooms are a large part of the tourism sector in the UK, USA, Canada and beyond. Many small producers see visitors and sales from site as an essential part of their income and marketing strategy. We would also like to see an easier monitoring and enforcement policy of licensing in place for the Garda and local authorities and would welcome such measure as mandatory training schemes for all staff selling alcohol, similar to those existing in other countries, such as Australia and Canada.

Finally I will re-emphasise a few of the points from our submission to the committee. The proposed abolition of the extinguishment requirement should also apply to off licences. Checks and balances can be put in place in the granting but also possible revocation of a licence. Manufacturers of craft beer should be able to sell their product at their premises under the existing manufacturer's licence or proposed producer’s licence. At a minimum, this type of licence should extend to off-sales. Manufacturers of beer should also be able to easily extend their licence to occasional community events such as local food markets. We propose hours for any special producer’s licence be in line with other off-licence hours. The simplification and consolidation of the licence application process is welcome. However, we continue to advocate that court appearances should not necessarily be required to gain a licence. It is worth noting that the current process of application is unduly expensive, predominantly owing to the unnecessary requirement for legal representation and paid professional witnesses. However, we are hopeful that the requirements for these costly fees will be negated by the move to the District Court. On behalf of myself and my colleague Ms Elisabeth Ryan, as well as the wider craft brewing community, I express our thanks to the committee for inviting us to be a part of these proceedings.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. Time is relatively short so I will ask two main questions. The Labour Party supports this Bill and will table amendments as it proceeds. Anyone may respond. I am not directing my comments at anyone in particular.

The industry in general is typified by two main issues which I will raise. These will be commented on as the Bill goes through the Houses. One is the nature of workers' rights in the general industry. It is typified by minimum wage work. The industry will now be asking workers to work later to serve people who will be drinking longer into the evening. No improvement in workers' rights regulations has ever been welcomed by the industry. Whenever there is a movement on minimum wage, an improvement of sick pay or whatever it may be, it seems to be a difficult matter for people to grasp. How can we improve the working life of people who work in the industry at the lowest level and ensure this will not be a further negative impact on their careers? We are asking them to work later, deeper into night with people who have more alcohol on board.

The second issue is public health. Alcohol is a drug and it costs the health services approximately €3 billion every year. Approximately 100 people die of fatal overdoses of alcohol every year. We must put our minds towards those who will be dealing with what happens on the street outside the various different venues, pubs and so on. An Garda Síochána has its point of view about how it will be policed. The health service has its point of view as to how it will be dealt with. Those are the main criticisms we as Oireachtas Members will get about our evaluation of this Bill.

The Labour Party feels it is beyond time that this legislation was changed and upgraded. From a Dublin perspective, Dublin city centre is dying and needs to be revitalised. We must treat people as adults in this field and therefore I want to hear from the witnesses about regulations around this. I do not mind who responds on the workers' rights piece about people who are generally poorly paid in the industry and do not have great conditions and how will the industry will deal with the criticisms from those who work in An Garda Síochána or the health service about how they feel they can come on board with these changes.

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

On workers' rights, late trading is a demanding working environment.

Our last survey, which was taken just prior to the Covid pandemic although the trend it illustrates in Dublin has been exacerbated since, shows that the percentage of workers on the minimum wage has declined precipitously as we have come nearer to full employment. We pay practically no one the minimum wage any more. We certainly do not pay those working late the minimum wage. While it depends on the costs imposed by the State in respect of late trading, late bar and nightclub permits, I do not imagine we will be paying it in those areas either. A full employment economy simply means we will have to pay more to get workers.

On a second issue regarding workers' rights, the industry should of course uphold employment law. Good employers are doing that. What we are now finding in our sector is that employers are competing for staff on the basis of working conditions. We are now seeing great flexibility in rosters. Most of the time, staff tell us when they will work. They tell us the hours they are going to work and we have to work around that. That is the reality of it.

We tend to attract people who want to work in the sector because of their personalities, their energy levels and their connection to customers. They like bar work. They want to do it. Lots of them develop long careers in the bar sector and we are really glad about that. Commercially, it will be down to us to make it attractive enough to work late at night. Part of the impact on commercial viability will be down to the cost structure imposed on late trading.

The issue of the impact of late trading on public health furthers the argument for the extinguishment requirement. Adding to the number of outlets in city centres, which is where new licences will go in the event of full liberalisation, would not be a welcome development. We do not want a UK pub culture in Dublin or any of our major cities. We do not want the public order issues that go with it. The importance of licensing as a carrot and stick to encourage responsible trading is really important. We have a strong pub culture in this country, which is partly down to the licensing regime and mostly down to the licensees following the law and An Garda Síochána understanding how to enforce it. A threat to the licence is a serious issue and something any responsible publican will take seriously. Deregulation would be a disaster for city centres. We do not believe anybody is calling for more pubs in Dublin city centre.

The last point I will make on trading hours is that we believe the argument for sequential closing is positive. If the Bill goes through as it stands with regard to trading hours, traditional bars will close at 12.30 a.m., late bars will close at 2.30 a.m. and last drinks in nightclubs will be at 5 a.m. The bulk of people will go to traditional bars and, perhaps, late bars and a relatively younger cohort will go to a relatively small number of large venues for nightclubs. There will be a pretty severe onus on nightclub operators under the new licensing system. It will be demanding to get such a licence and it will be expensive as a result of what is required of the operator of the premises. That is correct and proper and we support all of those requirements. While it again depends on the costs, which we have not had sight of, I again suspect that this new system will result in a small number - I cannot put an exact figure on it - of large, dedicated and specialised nightclubs trading four or five nights a week. They will be expert in what they do and will generally be well run. What some people outside the trade fail to understand is that nobody, neither staff member nor customer, wants to be in an environment where people are drunk out of their minds and the place is uncontrolled. Ensuring a controlled, managed and safe environment is paramount if you want to build a long-term business. The late trade and the nightclub industry, if it comes to 5 a.m. trading, will be highly specialised and run by a small number of guys and women who have the capacity to run such businesses. The vast majority of those in the pub trade will not be interested in it or set up for it. It just will not be their business.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all of the witnesses for their opening remarks and for their attendance here today. I will just raise a couple of issues. Following on from what was just discussed, one of the possible outcomes of this Bill would be more pubs opening, particularly in the large urban areas, as has been mentioned. I wonder about the possibility of chain pubs arriving, as we have seen in other jurisdictions. I personally feel that would be a retrograde step from an Irish perspective. We have a model in the pub industry in Ireland that has been replicated across the world.

Travelling around the world, we do not see Spanish bars but we do find Irish bars and pubs. We sell that culture and tradition as a tourist attraction not only here but everywhere in the world. That shows its uniqueness and we need to hold on to that. I am interested in the possible negative impact it would have, were that to happen.

A comment was made on rural pubs. I come from a rural part of the world and many rural publicans tell me they have been trying to sell their pubs for the past ten years and nobody will buy them. I know a pub not far from me which would get a better price if it were sold as accommodation for people to live in. This shows there is a big problem, particularly in many rural areas and small towns.

Extending the hours of opening, the working hours of the staff who will have to be there and the conditions under which they would have to work have been mentioned. Have insurance costs and other costs been factored into the business model that would be developed from this legislation if it were to move forward as it is?

In regard to the entertainment industry, what will happen with regard to the one-man bands, the people who arrive in the bar and play until the late hours? It is another aspect of the unique model in Ireland that we need to enhance and develop. Many international stars made their debut in a local pub. That is where they began and they developed from there. We need to recognise that as well.

I support the appeal by craft brewers that they be able to sell their products on their premises. The tourism aspect of that is something we need to develop. If there are comments on those points, I would welcome them.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

In our opening statement I alluded to and was quite clear about the fact there is a marked difference between a pub and a nightclub. Many people who would be operating in the later hours would still work normal shifts. They would go into work at about 10 p.m. or 11 p.m. and work shifts of six or eight hours. There should be no question of people working too many hours. Mr. O’Keeffe touched on it regarding staff who get into this industry. I am the same. We work in the night-time industry and know what we are getting into. That is not to say that those working at the bar, running these venues or working hands-on serving drinks are not in stressful, intensive jobs and working environments. If we separate it and look at the model for late-night venues, these will generally start at 10 p.m. or 11 p.m. A few different models will be needed around the country, some that will open from about 10 p.m. until 3 a.m., others that will open between 11 p.m. until 4 a.m. or thereabouts, and others that probably specialise in opening at 11 p.m. or even midnight and go through until 6 a.m. In all cases there will be shifts that will be more than reasonable.

The next question is about transport and who sorts that out, particularly in rural areas. Even in Dublin we see a great many employees who must wait around for a few hours on the premises before they can get early morning transport home. That is a fault of the Government for not providing enough public transport. That is probably another discussion.

In regard to the response from insurance companies, we have not heard anything back yet as to how much insurance premiums will be when this new nightclub permit comes in. They have already ballooned, as I mentioned, even quadrupled in some cases. It will be prohibitively expensive to enter the market, as Mr. O'Keeffe also mentioned.

Mr. Peter Mosley:

In regard to pub chains and pub groups and the concern about them coming into Ireland, the reality is that there are already many pub groups trading in Ireland. Many groups operate numerous bars within the State, especially in Dublin. That is already occurring. Whether it is a situation that necessarily presents a big problem, I do not know. We currently have large groups with multiple bars, so I do not see that there will be change there.

In regard to rural pubs, maybe the bars are currently just not fit for the environment in which they are operating. Maybe that needs to be addressed. They might be oversized, for instance, for the population they service. Bars have a fundamentally important role within the community.

I do not think anybody disputes that. However, the current offering is not necessarily what the public requires or expects. It is not then profitable for the business operator.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will call Mr. McGranaghan first because he indicated first.

Mr. Matt McGranaghan:

In regard to entertainment, Deputy Kenny is correct that many people cut their teeth in the entertainment industry. Not only that, but many people rely on it for their professional life. That is where they make their money. They raise a family on it, build a house, contribute to the economy and do all those things. That seems to surprise people. It certainly did during the pandemic when we were trying to fight for supports for that cohort of people. There was a reluctance to accept or believe that this is where people make their living. There is an assumption that if you are not famous in the music or entertainment industry, then you are obviously not successful at it. The opposite is the case.

There is a reliance in the entertainment industry on the rural pub and pubs in general. That needs to be protected moving forward. Since the Covid-19 pandemic ended last year, work has declined. People are not going out as much and pubs, entertainers and musicians are having it tough. We needs to do more to support them. Going back to the schemes I mentioned, it would be great to see that in order to support the night-time economy.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are over time but I will let Mr. Clancy in because I said I would.

Mr. Paul Clancy:

Touching on innovation, our members, particularly in rural pubs, have been very innovative in trying to encourage people into their pubs. We have seen since the pandemic and the reopening of the trade, particularly with hybrid working, that there has been a bounce back. Many pubs have transformed the service that they provide to encourage people back in. Remember, these are family-owned pubs. In many cases, they are third generation. They are built into their communities and provide a very important service from a cultural and social point of view. Our concern is with extinguishment and bringing in someone who is not familiar with the running of a pub in a rural area. Many pubs are holding on with their fingernails at the moment. They have come through Covid-19 and are trying to rebuild their business. Bringing a second pub into that environment right beside them will make that first pub, which is integrated into the community, unviable. It is a vital part of the tourism offering because of the special experience it has. We do not want to lose that cultural asset by allowing another pub in there beside it and possibly affecting the future of that viable pub that is trying to survive. If that happens, we could have rural villages with no pub whatsoever. That would be contrary to what the Minister is trying to achieve, which is to encourage more rural pubs to open.

Fintan Warfield (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses. I will ask about the cultural amenities licence. Give Us the Night believes it should be scrapped. From a reading of the proposed new cultural amenities licence, in the absence of a national cultural institutions licence, would events such as the Haunted Dancehall in the National Concert Hall and events that have been taking place in the National Museum of Ireland be allowed to go ahead?

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

To clarify what Senator Warfield said, we support the cultural amenity licence. It still needs some work. We believe the national cultural institutions licence should be retained. It does not need to be transformed into what is being proposed.

Mr. Robbie Kitt:

To elaborate on what Senator Warfield is referring to, in the general scheme the cultural amenities licence which is being proposed to replace the national cultural institutions licence would require our national cultural institutions, of which there are seven in the country, to apply for temporary late-hour orders to open late. Within the current framework of the licensing regime, our national cultural institutions can open at any time. If they are providing a cultural event, as they are de facto the most culturally recognised institutions we have within the State, they are allowed and afforded the possibility to open at those hours. Typically, our national cultural institutions do not find much reason to open into the late-night market. However, the Senator referenced the Haunted Dancehall, which is a good example of that. Last October, as a pilot event, a sold-out, two-night electronic art and music festival ran in the National Concert Hall. It went on until 3 p.m. on Sunday afternoon. That is not afforded to any other licensed premises in the country.

It was able to utilise the licence in that instance. With this new amendment, the only way a national cultural institution could go until 6 a.m., let us say, is if it were to get a publican's licence and apply for a nightclub permit. That is the only path by means of which it can access that market.

Responding to some of the things that have been said, such as the idea of deregulation being a disaster, I totally understand that from the point of view of pubs. However, it needs to be noted that the only entities that can access the permit system are publicans. We called for the establishment of a stand-alone licence type for nightclubs, late night entertainment and cultural venues. Instead, we got this permit system. It ould work, but, for some reason, cultural amenity licence holders are excluded from the late-night market in its entirety. They cannot access those permits. They have to go through an effective system, which means that they have to apply every single night that they open late, which will completely disincentivise any growth in that industry.

We need to be explicit with regard to the numbers. We outlined the significant decline within the provision of these dance spaces, from more than 500 20 years ago to 85 today. If we are talking about the number of theatre licence holders, who will be grandfathered into this cultural amenity licence holder system, that is 87 licences.

On the idea of the possibility of a backdoor, this whole reform means that the entire system is moving through the courts. Previously, theatre licence holders got their licences from Revenue. It could be argued that there were different standards for different processes. In respect of this reform, I do not understand how it can be a backdoor if it is the same door. Everybody is going through the same door; everybody is going through the courts. As I said, there are 87 theatre licences. Even if we were to see a 100% increase in the number of cultural amenities licences, we would be talking about 170 licences. That is not going to happen. What if we saw a 10% to 20% growth in this? There are not people queuing up around the corner to open up cultural venues in Ireland. We need to create incentives and ways in which these people can access the market. We are talking about tiny numbers, so I do not think there is any fair reason to exclude these business types from the same process. Cultural amenity licence holders would have to go through the same court process, meet the same criteria that, as Mr. O’Keeffe said, is significant. We welcome those types of criteria being established as well. They would be subject to the same methods of appeal from the Garda, residents and the fire safety authority. Why are these types of businesses excluded from the permit system?

It has been outlined even by previous contributors that we are "over-pubbed". However, we are talking about a different type of business. We are talking about cultural providers and their access to the late-night market. There has not been any suggestion that we can understand that is a reason to exclude these types of businesses from that entire market. We think that is something that needs to be address within the general scheme.

Fintan Warfield (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a question for the vinters. Do they accept that there are people who are itching to get into their industry who are opening coffee trucks and cafés all across the country? People my age are opening cafés and are itching to get into hospitality - the vintners' industry, which is losing members - and cannot do so because of how much a seven-day licence costs. That system just does not work.

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

Absolutely. I accept that there are people itching to get into the sale of alcohol on premises. Many people want to get into that business for their own reasons. We are concerned about there being a level playing field. It drove us batty through the noughties when people were opening theatres or theatre licence venues without meeting the same requirements that we were meeting. All we are saying is that from a competition point of view-----

Fintan Warfield (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How many theatre licences were there at that time?

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

The figure of 84 that was mentioned is correct. However, we do not believe there are 84 bona fide theatres in this country, and we certainly do not believe that the licensing regime needs to be amended to accommodate them. The sale of alcohol is supposed to be ancillary to the main event under the legislation, and that is correct. The main focus of a cultural premises and a cultural event should be around the event they are putting on. Our concern, based on what happened with theatre licences, is that people will use it as a backdoor into the pub trade, late bar trade and nightclub industry and that the sale of alcohol will become the commercial driver of that business. We fully support and think it is brilliant that a level playing field is being brought to bear and the requirements to sell alcohol on the premises are the same. We do not agree - and many people around the table have suggested this - that we should now go from putting everything into a pub licence, hotel licence and restaurant licence back to loads more different types of licences, such as cultural events licences, craft brewers licences and separate nightclub licences, and bring a whole raft of complexity back into it.

Our submission is based on how there should be three forms of licences: a pub licence for people who are in on-trade alcohol sales, and that is their business; a restaurant licence for people who are in the food business, with food leading their business; and a hotel licence for people who are in the accommodation business. If people want to sell drink, they should get a public licence like everybody else. They should meet the same fire officers’, building, insurance and commercial rates requirements, pay the same labour rates as we pay and then compete with us. We are not afraid of the competition; 6,800 pubs compete with each other every day. However, we do not agree that there should be millions of new types of licences, with different angles for different cultural institutions. On-trade alcohol sales should be subject to the same regime, full stop.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are out of time on that. I might come back in on that later that if I can.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is hard to know where to start. There are more than 400 pages in the heads of the Bill, and we are probably focusing on only parts of them. There are definitely threads across all of the submissions that I read, and certain aspects are coming up. Obviously, I worked in addiction for a long time, so my public health hat is always there. However, I often feel as if people's health is scapegoated in order to keep out of spaces in terms night life, culture, the arts and all those things. Back in the 1990s, when the nightclub scene was practically squashed - the Ormond closed - raves popped up in communities where public health was more at risk. They pop up now in warehouses. There are illegal raves all over the country all the time that are not being managed.

I am admitting to being at them now, but I have never seen any need for gardaí outside any warehouse that I have ever visited. Therefore, the idea that there is a public order fear is quashed somewhat as well when there is that phase-out over the course of the night. Some people will go home at midnight and some people will go home-----

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am very sorry to interrupt the Senator, but I do not think her microphone is on and it is very difficult to hear her.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It usually turns on itself. What I said before might not be on the record now, which is grand. Well done, lads. Well done.

In all seriousness, there are a few conversations around public order and public health, which are then squashed into this idea that if there are more venues and people are out longer, that somehow is counterintuitive to ensuring that there are fewer public order offences or less impact on public health. One only has to look at the number of drinks ordered as soon as last orders are called to see where the public health issues lie, when people go up, buy six or seven drinks and try to get that amount of alcohol into them before they leave the pub, Everything on the table in front of them is finished before they leave. If that intake is spread across the night and people leave when they are ready, then they will probably drink less.

On the general scheme, the first thing I would do is change the name of the proposed Bill. The conversation happens on two extremes, namely, the sale of alcohol versus public health. There are also conversations regarding culture, arts, theatre, community and everything else. We made efforts to make sure that the witnesses covered that cultural space, but, unfortunately, there were people who we invited who could not come along. We have ended up with those two dichotomies of conversation when looking at the next one.

I have some questions marked out and I will get them straight to the witnesses. Mr. Kitt and Mr. Sharpe referred to the cultural amenity, a matter on which Senator Warfield asked a question. I think Mr. Kitt and Mr. Sharpe answered that question.

I have a question for Mr. O’Keeffe. He mentioned wine licences. Can he elaborate a little further on that matter? Is it just because it is not in addition to some other event happening? There are many wine bars across Europe that are open late into the night. They seem to work quite well.

The sunset clause was mentioned. For three years, there would still be selling of licences. Somebody else recommended that it be eight years. Are the witnesses saying there should be no sunset clause?

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

We do not want to get involved in pub matters and what they do with extinguishments. We only started talking about extinguishment when we were asked in the public consultation not so long ago. Our proposal is that late night venues, that is, nightclub be exempt from that. Trying to get anybody to enter the market is already very difficult. There are all sorts of additional costs involved in even kitting out a space or getting your hands on a building to be able to open a night-time venue. Young business owners might invest their money elsewhere if they feel they have to pay an additional €60,000 to open up a venue. Any new operator in the industry should be commended for taking that risk. It will take some risk takers to get our night-time economy and night life scenes moving again. With that in mind, it is very specific but it is very easily done. Night club operators already have to tick a lot of boxes to be able to get that nightclub permit, which was mentioned earlier so once they have done all of that, they should just be able to go. They should be given the green light in court and get their licence if that what it comes to. We still feel we should have our venue licence. We should be exempt from the sunset clause in the next three years. New operators should be exempt.

Mr. Robbie Kitt:

We are also slightly cornered into speaking about this because the only way to can a nightclub permit is to have a publican's licence. We again have suggested that we get a stand-alone licence. That is not the case anymore. Even when I talk about the cultural amenities licence having access to this nightclub permit system, we need to talk about the stunning lack of diversity in our night-time economy relating to social infrastructure. Where are the places people can be together? As a musician and DJ, I can see answers within the cultural amenities licence but it does not afford those licence holders access to the nightclub permit system. We are cornered into that conversation that we can only really talk about extinguishment because that is the only way in which someone can access a nightclub permit.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could Mr. O'Keeffe answer the question on the wine licence and why the period should be eight years? I cannot remember who wrote eight years.

Mr. Paul Clancy:

The reason we put eight years is we feel that if this legislation involved extinguishment, there would be a major exit of existing publicans and they would need a lot of time to get themselves organised to exit the trade. That is why we do not support the extinguishment but we feel that three years would definitely not be enough. We suggested eight years because we feel a lot of people will leave the trade if this Bill is passed as it is.

Ms Alison Kealy:

It should not be represented that we are in opposing camps. As a Dublin publican, I am very clear that we want the night-time economy to be very vibrant. We have all struggled coming back from Covid. Things have moved earlier.

Regarding the cultural amenity and theatre licence, we are talking about the 1990s when we all knew there were theatres operating as nightclubs around the clock. That is what our members fear. Regarding what was said about young people wanting to come into industry, I have coffee trucks and loads of staff who want to get into it and I support that 100%. It is really important in our industry to see innovation coming up and bringing new people into it all the time but the reality in Dublin is that the biggest blocks to that is the cost of premises and the planning to get into those revenues.

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

I expect that lots of people who have wine-on licences will apply and seek to transfer to a restaurant licence under the new licensing regime because a restaurant licence will give them more flexibility in the products they sell. The new restaurant licence, which we support, will allow wine, beer and spirits to be sold so customers can have a cocktail, gin and tonic, wine or beer with their food. That makes sense 100%. The current wine-on licence has a number of restrictions. The premises is not allowed have a bar so it is a table service restaurant venue.

Licence holders can only sell alcohol with food so somebody cannot come in, have a drink and go. He or she must have alcohol with his or her meal. They are not allowed to sell spirits and beer with a wine-on licence. They can get a restaurant certificate that allows them to sell beer but with food. There is no restaurant certificate under the new licensing regime so that will go. We think there are fundamental differences between running a food-led business that sells wine with its food and running a late bar and nightclub that principally sells alcohol late at night. The challenges are different so the notion that this licence would be allowed to trade to 5 a.m. with those restrictions - no bar, wine only and food-led - is nonsense.

Ciarán Cannon (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for attending for what I suspect will be the beginning of an important and long conversation. It is fascinating to hear, particularly from Mr. Conboy, Mr. McGranaghan, Mr. Sharpe and Mr. Kitt, about the thrust of this legislation, a significant part of which seeks to develop cultural enrichment across all our towns, cities and villages. It is exceptionally important that the voices of our artists and musicians are heard in every aspect of this legislation. I encourage further engagement with practitioners such as musicians and DJs, who are the raison d'être for going to these licensed and unlicensed premises. I am not asking questions of any one individual but I thank them for being here and for their input. It is exceptionally important that we listen intently to what they have to say through every aspect of this legislation because there is the potential there to undermine that ecosystem that seeks to develop and nurture artistic endeavour, particularly in the area of music. Mr. McGranaghan mentioned that people make their living from this. Many friends of mine make a good living from the pubs of Galway alone, have done so for many years and hopefully will do so for many years in the future. We need to be careful. There is no question but that we need to open up opportunities for late night entertainment and cultural experiences but in doing so, we need to be exceptionally careful that we do not threaten any other opportunity for artists and musicians to earn a successful living in other aspects of the industry.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am totally opposed to the removal of the requirement to extinguish a licence if someone new is opening up. I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. O'Keeffe and other witnesses who want this to be retained. I will let the committee know where I come from. I have lived in a pub all my life and I understand what publicans around Kerry and even in north west Cork and south west Cork are going through. Knocknagree had seven vibrant pubs but is now down to just one that is open throughout the week and one more that is open for two nights a week. If people want to sell alcohol, it is clear to me that they should have a licence to do so. Regarding getting it through some other means such as a cultural amenities or theatre licence, if they want to sell alcohol, they should have a licence to sell alcohol.

When we talk about what is happening in rural Ireland, no consideration was given to publicans when changes were made regarding off licences and supermarkets. We see more places like Knocknagree that have gone from three pubs to having just one. Places like Farranfore and Curragh have gone from having two pubs down to one. I could go through the whole lot.

This idea that someone could open up as a café or whatever name, maybe a chipper, is unfair to the publicans who regulate the measure of alcohol they give. Like someone said there, in many villages or communities they are the community hall where people meet and they provide space for IFA meetings, ICA meetings or whatever. I do not think the present Government gives too much talk about it but they provide space for politicians to have their clinics, whatever their political affiliation or political party.

No one in rural Kerry looked for this or asked for it. There is very little thought being given to enticing people to stay out until 6 o'clock in the morning. They will not be the better of that for three weeks, to be totally honest. That is being unfair to the publican and the ordinary punter. They need to go to work. We have to be fair about this. You cannot travel the roads in rural Ireland in a car. If you are a small bit above the limit, you are off the road for two or three years. There is no real thought being given to this. How many extra gardaí will be provided for these late-night venues and who is going to keep law and order at that time of the night?

The other thing that was mentioned by one of the earlier speakers is people working at that time of night. It is a different thing to go to work in the dark at night, at 11 o'clock or midnight, and not come home. You might have to wait somewhere for a couple of hours for a bus or a taxi or for someone to show up to take you home. People would have to be paid a lot more for that. I am against this Bill unless there are amendments made to it. Certainly the extinguishment of an existing licence has to be in a Bill that I will support. This is being unfair and it will be another nail in the coffin of publicans in rural Ireland if new entities are allowed open up beside them. They may not be too near them but it will draw their punters and customers away and make life harder for them to continue. The vast majority of publicans - 99% of them - run good houses and they have to obey the law. They have to renew their licences and I do not see why any other group or entity should not have to do that if they want to sell alcohol. If they want to have venues and a late night and they think they should not have to pay for a publican's licence, they should forget about selling alcohol. They should open the house with whatever other enticement to bring people in but if you need alcohol to bring the people in, you must have a publican's licence in the same way as other small publicans around rural Ireland. I see Deputy Smyth smiling. That is true, whether it is in her constituency of Cavan-Monaghan, Kerry, Cork or wherever. We have to be fair to the people who have stood the test of time, kept their communities going and kept their doors open to give people entertainment. Like the man from the entertainment sector, we are proud that these entertainers come into our pubs. Many of them started off in rural pubs and pubs in general.

That is why we can identify with them, because they are part of what publicans provide and have provided over the years.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have read what the LVA and the Vintners Federation of Ireland have to say about these cultural amenity licences. I have noticed that since Covid there is a hunger for events. They will draw people out to places. There has been an explosion in the number of coffee shops and non alcohol-selling events. The boom in off-licence sales is unfortunate. I would prefer if people were gathering together in particular places. Some venues that are not licensed for the sale of alcohol currently want to have plays, gigs, book launches and that kind of thing. The Vintners Federation of Ireland does not seem as opposed to the cultural amenity licences as the LVA, based on their submissions. This question is for both organisations. The Vintners Federation of Ireland is looking for an exact definition. What would it have in mind for that? What the LVA has said in relation to the various criteria it would like, such as planning permission and being open for 12 months beforehand, might make it very difficult for one of these types of venues to host such an event. What exactly do the witnesses have in mind? Do they have a proposed definition?

Mr. Paul Clancy:

We are looking for a definition of what a cultural amenity actually is. It is not clear in the proposed Bill. If it is museums and art galleries, that makes sense but if it is a community centre in a rural town that can modify itself to become a museum one night and an art gallery the next, on a particular Saturday night for example, it is only going to take trade away from a pub that is trying to survive on that particular night. That is when pubs make their money. If a community centre was franchised out, the chances are that it would become a business proposition for somebody who would again compete against the local pub and take away the local trade. We are looking for clarity on what is a cultural amenity and how a venue can get a particular status. That is our concern. We understand allowing museums and art galleries. We would like restrictions around opening and closing and when alcohol is served but in principle we agree with the cultural amenity licensing. However, we do not want it to be something that anybody can open up anywhere without any proper regulation or abiding by the standards that a publican has to abide by.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The hour or two pre or post-----

Mr. Paul Clancy:

Yes.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do the witnesses have any view on that? Should it be shorter or longer?

Mr. Paul Clancy:

No. An hour before and an hour after is fine. We have put in our submission that we are okay with that.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it better than a temporary transfer of a licence, for example? I remember when Nathan Carter came to Brosna, the concert was moved into the square and it had that type of a licence. Do the witnesses think this idea is better?

Mr. Paul Clancy:

Yes.

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

Just to be clear on the LVA position, we welcome diversity in the night-time economy. People coming to cultural events like museums, theatres, plays or poetry readings is good for our business. It gets people out and about and they will hopefully come to us for a drink before or after the performance. That is not in question. The concern we have is that we saw with the theatre licence that it became very difficult to oppose them on the basis that the definition of a theatre and, more important, the definition of performance, were so loose that anyone could claim anything was a performance. Back in the 2000s, people were claiming to put on a performance that ran to 3 a.m., 4 a.m. or 5 a.m. without the cost we were incurring with special exemption orders, public liability insurance, security and so on. A level playing field is the single most important element of this. We understand the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media is looking at developing guidance around what a cultural premises may be and what a cultural performance will be. We had hoped to have an opportunity to submit our observations on it. We remain concerned that it will be extremely difficult to define that in a way that is not open to abuse. How do you define a cultural event or cultural performance?

As for the trading hours, we understand the regular trading hours of 10.30 a.m. to 12.30 a.m. will be the maximum under the licence. That seems fair enough. To us, the conditions under which premises can go late become really important.

It strikes us that if they want to go into 1 a.m., 2 a.m. or 3 a.m. with a cultural event, they are essentially setting up to sell alcohol.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let us say there is a cultural event, such as a gig. Should there be a maximum time for when it would start and finish?

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

No. Something like the opening of an art exhibition could run for seven or eight hours on the evening. We do not want to get into saying certain types of events are cultural. If it has the designation as a cultural premises, if it has appropriate planning permission and if it pays commercial rates partly on the basis it sells alcohol, it is fair enough. However, we remain intrigued as to how the cultural premises will be defined and how the cultural event will be defined.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the LVA have any suggestions?

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

No. We can give it some thought. The way we left it with the Department of Justice was we would wait to see the draft regulations that come out because there is a working group across the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media and the Department of Justice, and possibly Revenue, taking a look at what this may be. It is a tricky area to define.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Daly. I will call Deputy Costello and then Deputy Niamh Smyth, and that will be the first round completed.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will begin where we finished with the previous speaker in relation to the cultural stuff. When we look at other European countries that have a successful night-time economy and thriving cultural industries, we see cultural licences operating in those countries. I guess I would be interested in exploring the difference between what is proposed here and what works well in other countries, and what are we missing. This kind of licence could work well. I appreciate that Germany, for example, has strong protections for its nightclub industry and sees it as a valid part of its cultural expression and its night-time economy. Around that, I guess I would ask the Give Us The Night guys what are we missing compared to other European countries that we could do better through this legislation.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

The way things are set up means that local authorities have no hands-on management of the night-time economy and licensing. I am not saying, "at the moment", because I would not really trust the local authorities, as they are now, to oversee licensing, if I am to be honest. They do not do a good job right now. They could grow into that role but they do not do a particularly good job now. The difference in other countries is that it is a job in some areas but the places that do it well are pro-nightlife. For instance, they set up meetings with venue owners each week.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To be clear, the licences are managed through the local authority as opposed to a courts system.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

Quite often they are. They are managed locally, yes.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Stop me if I am wrong, but I assume a slightly more liberal approach like that allows more careful control over, say, the public health aspects we are talking about. The issues of overcrowding of venues or overconcentration of venues can be addressed more subtly through that kind of approach.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

One of the areas where a lot of these places have transitioned to is where we talk a lot about the overconcentration of people onto the streets at one time. It has been proved over the years that this is a recipe for disaster. An emerging trend that is happening in a lot of these countries is they are moving nightlife out of city centres. At present, that is a big problem.

There will be a lot of resistance to elements of this Bill from residents who do not want to see new licensed premises opening in the centre of the city down to planning and the fact that we are short on accommodation for many different types of communities. We will see more people living in cities. There is definitely a more practical hands-on approach from local authorities but we do not have that system here.

Something came up about wine licences earlier as well. I am going somewhere else with this now, but we would not have Leeson Street if it were not for these wine licences. For better or worse, that is what facilitates those type of venues to open. We have always been working with loopholes and with these weird licences. I would like to ask somebody from the Department of Justice to clarify. I am taking this somewhere else completely but I think we should ask this. Has the wine licence been included there for late night?

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We cannot involve them here.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

You cannot do that. Okay.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They are really here to listen.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the witness would like to ask it rhetorically, perhaps it can be followed up at another time.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

Apologies. We have always been operating within the pub licensing system. A Deputy said earlier that nobody is looking for it down in Kerry. We have seen some comments come through that nobody is looking for it. It is not that nobody is looking for it; it is that those particular business owners are not asking for it. There is a much larger cohort and community of people involved in the night-time industry who have been looking for it for many years. It comes down to the division between the pub industry, which traditionally operates up until midnight, and our industry, which needs to have a foothold post midnight into the early hours and the morning hours. We need a separate licence or permit that works for us for access, and we need fewer barriers to entry. That will facilitate growth. We can change these licensing laws tomorrow. It does not mean we will get operators to open these places.

Mr. Robbie Kitt:

I will make a point on that as well. Mr. O'Keeffe suggested that the only reason a business would open past 12 midnight is to sell alcohol. If one has a pub that makes sense, but if one is a cultural operator that is not the perspective. There was mention of Berlin. If one goes to nightclubs in Berlin, it is clear that the reason they are open past 12 midnight is not to sell alcohol; it is for a very specific provision from their business. We are largely talking about the needs of one business type within the night-time economy here. Obviously, these businesses are very large. I agree with Ms Kealy when she says there are a lot of solutions within the pubs for cultural operators and cultural practitioners. Historically, it has been an incredibly important place for cultural practitioners to share what they do in Ireland and present themselves to audiences but the problem is it is in decline. The decline that we have highlighted in the cultural sector is even greater. We have to be clear here that the system we have now is set up in the image of the dominant business type in the night-time economy. That is not a knock on the pubs. That is just the fact of the matter. It also influences the culture and the conversation that we are having, and even the shared vocabulary of what we are talking about when we are talking about post-midnight activity. We have highlighted the decline - how the system does not work for our industry and for our sector - for decades. The Give Us The Night campaign is 18 years old now. This has been going on a long time. We need, as Mr. Sharpe says, a dedicated licence, or at least access to a permit which suits the type of operation we are describing.

Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious of the time ticking away. I want to ask the independent craft brewers about the producers' licence, how they have found that operating currently and the challenges faced currently. I am aware they mentioned it in their statement. They are concerned around some of it. How would it need to look to work for their sector?

Ms Elisabeth Ryan:

In terms of the producers' licence, in 2018 there was a licence brought in which we welcomed at the time. There was massive support for it. There is big support for Irish craft brewers because of their community roots. I suppose they have an ethos that even works against criticism from the anti-alcohol lobby, etc., because it is about the story, it is about the community and it is a different kind of affair.

In any event, the current licence is restricted to work from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. and has to work on a ticketed system. If one wants to have anybody on one's premises, for example, a work group, an evening group, maybe a small wedding or some kind of ceremony where somebody wants to have a drink, there is really no issue with that licence. It is not really very useful. It is not working terribly well for people. It does not work terribly well after 7 p.m.

Overall, our massive issue is that if one is a manufacturer of beer, one should be able to sell one's own beer on one's premises. There may be a significant distinction between on-sales and off-sales in terms of how that is managed, and we do not want an unfair advantage in any way, shape or form. I suppose our overarching opinion would be that a bar licence should be easy to get for all premises which would mean that is how a microbrewery could operate. There is a distinct difference between having a bar licence and operating a type of bar in one's premises that means one is able to pour a pint of one's own lager or beer on the premises and serve it to somebody after a tour. While we welcomed the particular licence that is in place, there are an awful lot of hoops to jump through to get it. It costs theoretically €500. In fact, it costs €10,000 to €12,000 by the time one has hired legal people to do all the various bits and pieces. We want a situation where somebody can go to a brewery, say "That is a lovely brewery", and buy a small case of beer and bring it home.

That does not seem like a lot to ask when compared with examples in other countries.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will have to ask Ms Ryan to wrap up. I am conscious of time and we have one more member to get to. I am sorry to cut Ms Ryan off.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am coming to this with two hats: the artistic one, having worked in the Garage Theatre in Monaghan for quite a number of years before landing here in Leinster House, and my tourism and hospitality sector hat. As somebody who lives in a very rural neck of the woods in County Cavan, I have seen the demise of our local pubs, which were of great importance, and am now seeing our hotels going as well. I am really worried about the future of that industry. The witnesses have the answer to some of that with regard to expanding our night-time economy. I am very interested in the debate happening here today. We will continue with this. I am mindful that we need to find a balance and to extend our night-time economy and give our cultural institutions, artists and musicians time beyond midnight. On something Mr. O'Keeffe said, I have never seen the opening of an exhibition go on for seven or eight hours. The longest I have ever seen was an hour with a small cheese and wine reception. In my experience, people then flood out to the little pubs and restaurants around the town. There is a balancing act involved here. I am also very mindful of everything Mr. Moynihan said. Bailieborough had more than 20 pubs at one stage and is now down to three. Before the Covid pandemic, it had more than that. There is a meeting of minds here. It is just about extrapolating from this conversation the fact that we can do both.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. I said I would let Mr. Sharpe come back in.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

I will just address what Deputy Smyth said. She made a great point about hotels. We talk a lot about protecting, retaining and hopefully growing the traditional pub. The nightclub is a modern creation but, if we are to talk about the tradition, it has been within hotels. Even the most well-known nightclubs that are still around, particularly in Dublin, are within hotels. What I have seen develop, particularly over the past five years, can be summed up in the phrase "eat, drink and play" changing to "eat, drink and stay". Many places that had entertainment spaces are now building rooms instead. The entertainment space is lost or turned into a gym. We definitely need to give that option to existing businesses. Getting our hands on space and getting planning approval to actually open one of these venues is particularly difficult. One operator we know in town has been waiting for longer than a year to open his premises for one reason or another, although that relates to another discussion regarding fire and safety requirements, which can sometimes present difficulties in opening places. On access to spaces, there are a lot of ready-made spaces and we believe that this permit could facilitate more activity. Perhaps we can revisit that tradition and, I hope, see more entertainment spaces.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have to agree. I never thought the day would come when parents would come to my clinic to complain that there was nowhere for their youngsters to go at Christmas but, this Christmas, that actually happened. I will use Bailieborough as an example again. We have three pubs and a hotel but, since the Covid pandemic, the nightclub or disco at night has been cut. This St. Stephen's Day, for the first time ever, young people were out on the streets at 11.45 p.m. with nowhere to go. Their parents are really concerned. We have to look at that very honestly. Our young people have missed out on two or three years of their social life because of Covid and everything else and they are continuing to miss out because places have not reopened. Some places may never do so. This is really important. There is an opportunity here. It is a meeting of minds. I equally do not want to see the rural pub undermined in any way. I believe we can do both.

Mr. Robbie Kitt:

I just need to make a point. I was thinking about this when Deputy Danny Healy-Rae was speaking about new operators coming in. There is nothing new about dancing. Dancing has been around for a very long time. Even in rural Ireland, while it has not been the case for the last few decades, in the era of the dance halls, there was a lot of additional social infrastructure in rural Ireland. We are talking about a different era but there is amazing documentation about this including things like posters from dance halls back in the 1950s and 1960s talking about dances on Wednesday and Sunday nights in Cahersiveen going on until 3 a.m.

There is precedent in the history of rural Ireland and in the types of social provision that were available in those places. As the Deputy has said, there are a lot of opportunities here. It would be great if we could look to our past and the traditions we have in the country.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a lot of interest in this. I am going to bring in Mr. McGranaghan and then Ms Kealy and Mr. Moynihan. I will give each 30 seconds.

Mr. Matt McGranaghan:

It is all about striking a balance. Many people in the music and entertainment sector rely on pubs. Certain parts of this legislation could threaten their livelihood in a short period of time. That may need to be looked at over a longer period of time, perhaps ten years or more, so that people in the entertainment industry can learn how to access different spaces and make a living between pubs and other spaces. It would also allow pubs to find other ways to make a living within the community and not rely on the existing models. Time needs to be given for that to happen. Schemes like the night time economy support scheme, NTESS, including its licensed premises strand, will support that.

Ms Alison Kealy:

With regard to the Deputy's tourism and hospitality hat, I reiterate that, as well as looking after the rural pubs, it is really important that we are seen to be reinvigorating our city centres. Dublin is struggling. As the Deputy was saying, everything has moved as a result of the Covid pandemic. People are going out earlier and coming home earlier because they cannot get in and out of the city centre. That is having a very significant impact, as is the fact that office staff have not fully returned to the city centre. That all needs to be focused on as well.

Mr. Paul Moynihan:

The Deputy was talking about her locality but, if an operator cannot make a living running a nightclub in Bailieborough, there is an issue. Opening up the market to allow somebody else into Bailieborough is not going to solve that problem. We have to look at rural taxis and transport and getting people home. We also have to look at insurance. There are issues all over the place that are affecting people running late night venues. It is a bigger issue than just opening up the market. That is not going to solve the problems in Ireland.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the point that Mr. Moynihan is making and with regard to the venue I am talking about, which I am just using by way of anecdote, if another venue does not open, the young people will have nowhere to go. Transport is a very substantial part of this conversation. While it does not fall under this committee's remit, we cannot ignore it. It affects urban and rural areas. I have heard a great deal about the taxi services in Dublin and I have listened to the debate. Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, has a very significant amount of work to do here. From my understanding and my research on the issue, it has ignored this problem for years. We are now at a cliff edge. There is nobody on the streets to take young people home. If you have public transport, that is fantastic, but out in rural areas there is not even a taxi to be had. I do not blame the taxi drivers. I know I am getting off the point but this is all part of the question of our night-time economy.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is. I thank the Deputy. Before I bring in Senator Ruane for the last bit, I will just say that I particularly agree with what people have said about the night-time economy because it is not just about the Sale of Alcohol Bill. Since the Covid pandemic, it seems every sector of our economy shuts at 9 p.m. That is really regrettable because services are not there for people who work late and people coming home from friends' homes. You cannot even get a pint of milk after 9 p.m. in some places. I particularly support what people have been saying about reinvigorating that economy and bringing forward measures. I hope the Bill will do that.

The simplification of the process is very important. I note that the Bill will reduce the variety of licences available. That is a really positive step. I am a barrister but I am a layperson with regard to licensing law. I know very little about it professionally. However, it seems to me that our system is grossly archaic and overcomplicated. I am of the view that, if you treat people like adults when it comes to alcohol, they are more likely to behave like adults. However, I understand that there is empirical evidence to suggest that is not the case. One of the Deputies mentioned earlier how people have to go to work. I remember discussing with a friend years ago how I believed pubs should be allowed to open all night if that is what they wanted to do. He said that people would be out drinking all night. Perhaps they would for the first night but they would then realise they had to get up for work or whatever else the next morning and would not do it again very often. A mature and modern perspective on licensing is very welcome. I appreciate everything that everybody has said.

I will point out that the officials are here to listen to what we have to say. All of this will feed into the committee's report. I am very grateful to Ms Dwyer and Ms Butler for being here. I will give the last word to Senator Ruane.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will try to be quick. I just have so many thoughts. The first is that seeking to define what constitutes culture is such a shady area to try to get into. Either Mr. Kitt or Mr. Sharpe spoke about the lack of diversity. In Temple Bar, our new communities, our migrant communities, our different populations, are not being served. The traditional Irish pub setting is not necessarily for a new Ireland either. Maybe we are a hanging on a bit to how things were to ensure the continued existence of the institution of the Irish pub, when that is probably not a draw for people any more in the wider, general sense. Someone mentioned community centres. I am thinking of intercultural centres in communities that probably want to hold their own events with their own communities and with their own styles of music. Not everybody wants to spend time in Temple Bar listening to traditional Irish music as if they were American tourists. I definitely do not enjoy that. I might be a bit nostalgic for the 1990s. In the 1990s, when we came into town from Tallaght, which felt like a million miles away at the time in terms of transport, we would have been willing to walk halfway home in our bare feet from the Tivoli and various other venues because we enjoyed them so much. Of course people have to protect their livelihoods, but somehow the conversation today feels like it is very much led by protecting the business owner and maybe not listening to the changing nature of cultural trends in a country that is trying to tell its providers that we need different, that we need something else. We will travel to the city centres, we will find transport and we will advocate for ways to get in and out if what is on offer is what we are looking for. So many people from suburban parts of Dublin will not go into town because there is nothing on offer to keep them there. They are not willing to rush out to the street at midnight and spend hours trying to get a taxi, but they might be willing if they know that the nightclub industry is booming again and is willing to have that more phased out approach to people going home. That will pull in those from areas of Dublin that are not near the city centre.

I have one question. Mr. O'Keeffe mentioned a few times the potential of people coming in through a back door, as he said. He stated that they should be subject to the same fire protection, commercial rates and planning regulations. Is he saying that those industries would be exempt from proper planning and safety measures or commercial rates? I am just wondering what Mr. O'Keeffe's fear is. I would assume that safety standards are required across the board, regardless of the type of service provided or the time at which it is provided.

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

Yes, but, in simple terms, the safety standards required, the building regulations required, the public liability insurance required, the CCTV requirement and, most likely, the door security requirement for late trading are different for pubs. They are just different. They are much more costly to implement. To set up and to develop a building to sell alcohol on premises costs a lot more. What we are saying is that if a cultural amenity premises wants to sell alcohol on premises, the regulations have to be the same for everybody, full stop. The cultural amenity licence is a new proposal. We are clear that we welcome it once the definition is reasonable, but those premises must face the same building regulations, the same security requirements, the same insurance requirements and the same rates if they are to sell alcohol on the premises. My average member pays €24,000 a year, €2,000 a month, in rates. They sell alcohol on the premises. Therefore, if a cultural amenity premises is to sell alcohol on the premises, it should be rated like a licensed premises.

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Really, what Mr. O'Keeffe is saying is that if there are different categories of licence, there still should be the standard-----

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

Those bases are the same for everybody. If alcohol is being sold on the premises, those basic requirements around the premises itself, its toilet accessibility, its fire safety capacity-----

Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That should be covered for in other types of legislation as well in terms of service provision of-----

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

As it stands, however, those premises would get planning and meet the building regulations and the insurance requirements to run as cultural premises, not licensed premises. We are saying that if the law is to be amended to allow them to sell alcohol on the premises, their planning and all those other issues have to be amended to be the same as ours. If they are to sell alcohol on the premises, the requirements should be the same.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If there are no other questions or issues from Members, I will give each group a very brief opportunity to sum up any issues or raise any others they wish to raise. I will go in the same order as before. I will give MEAI a minute, if that is all right.

Mr. Sunil Sharpe:

If these cultural venues need to tick all the same boxes as a normal licensed premises with a seven-day publican's licence, does that not mean they should also have access to the late market through a late permit? I just pose that question. It seems that we have regressed with the theatre licence. That was the leading late-night licence and now it is this cultural amenity licence that does not really support the kinds of cultural activities we have been discussing in recent years in initiatives that are led by the culture departments of this country.

We are hearing much about the back door. If we want to talk about the back door, it could be argued that the pubs were given a back door into the nightclub industry which really hurt the nightclub industry overnight back at the turn of the millennium. That has developed into a really good late bar model that works and Irish people obviously wanted that model. However, it was more than a back door; it was a big open patio double-door into the late-night industry, into the nightclub industry, which really hurt us. When talking about back doors we need to consider the history of this. We had an industry that worked for us and then overnight the pub industry moved into that space so we need a little bit of fair play.

Amendments were made to the theatre licence in 2008. For something that was supposed to be such a big problem, there were only 97 theatre licence holders. While no one knows, I would wager that a number of influential pub owners drove that at the time to get rid of that loophole. I do not believe it was as big a problem as it seemed. More is made of that than should be.

Mr. Paul Clancy:

I appreciate the time we have been given today. Fáilte Ireland surveys have repeatedly shown that the Irish traditional pub experience is really important in bringing tourists back. As was mentioned earlier, Irish pubs are copied all over the world but they are never equalled. We do not want to lose that. It is a fine ecosystem that we have.

We support the development of the night-time economy. We support the cultural amenity licence. We support the night permit, the club permit. However, we have real concern about the extinguishment element of it because we believe that puts the future livelihood of existing pubs at risk. Families have built pubs over three and four generations, and are integrated into the community. Let us not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Let us be very careful about what we do. What we have is very precious. It is part of what we are, it is why people come here and it allows people to recognise Irish society is back. We need to look at other forms of supporting that visitor experience in the night-time economy. I think the provisions of the Bill largely support that. It is not necessary to bring extinguishment into the discussion to deliver what the night-time economy needs for its next stage of development.

Mr. Paul Moynihan:

I say to Senator Ruane that there is more to Irish traditional pubs than what people see in Temple Bar. The heart and soul of an Irish pub is that people can come in, sit down and feel part of a community. That is what tourists love to see in our pubs. We think Ireland is moving forward etc., but why do people from throughout the world want to come here to experience what we have? I would be afraid that in 20 years we might look back and say, "What we had was great. Why did we throw it away?".

Mr. Peter Mosley:

I will outline an example from my local village, Castlefin. Since one of the pubs reopened last year, the opportunities for paid employment for musicians have decreased by 50%. That gives an idea of where musicians are at and where the pubs are at.

When the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, announced pubs as community hubs, she said:

The local pub is part of the fabric of Rural Ireland. Traditionally down through the years, it’s where people in rural communities have come to meet with their friends and neighbours to socialise...

As part of ‘Our Rural Future’, I committed to developing a pilot scheme to support the use of rural pubs as community spaces and hubs for local services.

That shows the Minister for Rural and Community Development supporting the pubs and now the Department of Justice is potentially creating a way for community centres to become pubs.

On the one hand, one Department is helping the pubs to stay alive by becoming a more intrinsic part of the community. On the other side, there is the idea that community centres can take over the business from pubs and that is where we would have a concern. We believe that the term "function and cultural amenity" needs to be clearly defined within this legislation so they cannot threaten existing businesses.

Mr. Donall O'Keeffe:

It is the nature of these debates that we focus on the issues we are concerned about or oppose. The bulk of the Bill makes a lot of sense to us. We welcome the proposed trading hours. We welcome the late bar and nightclub permits and the conditions attached to them. We welcome the abolition of exemption orders and those costs because they were absolutely ridiculous. We also welcome the levelling up of the licence grant and licence renewal criteria. We think those are positive steps in tandem with modernising the Bill into one 21st-century single point of legislation around the licensed trade. We think that is all very welcome.

We have one principal area of opposition and it has been well ventilated today. I refer to our opposition to the changes to the extinguishment requirement for the on-trade. We think this will prove to be a failed policy initiative and we will continue to engage on that over the course of next few months as the Bill moves through the Oireachtas.

Ms Elisabeth Ryan:

Independent Craft Brewers Ireland has not commented on very much outside of what is done by craft breweries because we do not necessarily think it is our place. The one thing that I would see overall, having worked in hospitality for many years as well, is that there is undue complication in the legislation. We welcome the simplification process that is in place at the moment.

I would say the following about nearly everything within the Bill: we should not legislate against bad actors in the whole process in order to not simplify this area to the utmost extent. Instead, we should have a system of checks and balances in place, such as they are now, and utilise them to make sure the selling of alcohol happens in a responsible fashion. We are all aware that staff need training and certain things need to be in place but we want the market freed up a little. Obviously my organisation represents producers of craft beer and we clearly want our product to be widely available. We are looking for a way that people can sell the wonderful and amazing product that they produce. Many of our producers are often demonised in the whole process when really they are just trying to work alongside the producers of craft food within their communities, sell a really nice handmade product, show people their story and take them through it. Our members just want to be allowed to do that in a fashion that is not too restrictive and does not impose silly, unnecessary regulations. We want common sense to be used to physically legislate for this, as opposed to being in written legislation, while also having checks and balances in place.

ICBI genuinely welcomes the Bill because there is much in it that is aimed towards a much more modern and simpler system. I say that because some of the laws in the Bill date back to 1887, and reference her majesty the Queen and things like that. Overall, we welcome the Bill. ICBI seeks the fairest channel in which producers of craft beer can sell it in an easy fashion.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Fair enough. Do the Department officials want to comment?

Ms Juliet Dwyer:

I sincerely thank everybody for their proposals and insights. This is the first of two scheduled pre-legislative scrutiny meetings. They are very important and today's debate demonstrates that. We will continue to work with our counterparts in other Departments, particularly in the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media on the cultural amenity space.

Barry Ward (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose that we publish the opening statements that all of the delegations have provided to the committee on the committee's website. Is that agreed? Agreed. Go raibh maith agaibh go léir as teacht anseo. Oibríonn na cruinnithe seo toisc go bhfuil na finnéithe réidh le teacht isteach chun labhairt linn agus díospóireacht a dhéanamh linn. I thank everyone for their attendance. Is there any other business? No. That concludes the meeting.