Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to contribute briefly on this legislation. Regrettably, my overall view is that it will have little, if any, impact on the problem it is intended to resolve, namely, anti-social behaviour.

We seem to have a fascination with talking about the drinking culture and its consequences. It seems to be the stock in trade of any Oireachtas term now that legislation is being introduced in this area, yet the problem continues apace. That is a matter we need to reflect on. If we were to stand back and take an entirely market approach to this issue on the basis that people have a fixed amount of money to spend on alcohol and they should be allowed to get on with that, we might find that the structures or artificial controls we are putting in place are more of a hindrance than a help in many respects.

For that reason, I want to make the point that pubs and publicans have taken a hammering, and particularly in rural Ireland. That is happening for a variety of reasons, such as that people's behaviour patterns are changing, but it must be said that the safest place for anybody to drink is probably in a regulated, well-supervised, well-run public house and the problems of anti-social behaviour are often the consequences of people opting out of that environment and drinking elsewhere. That is something we should examine. In fairness to the overwhelming majority of publicans, they are committed to running orderly public houses and to supervising their clients in an acceptable manner. It is worth noting the number of public houses that are closing, particularly in rural areas. I am sure the Ceann Comhairle would be aware of this. It is a factor in Macroom where I live, but is probably equally a factor in every country town where publicans have simply gone out of business.

A significant contributory factor to anti-social behaviour, which is not addressed in this Bill at all, is the cross consumption of drugs and alcohol. As much as alcohol contributes to anti-social behaviour, so too do illicit drugs. That is something of which we need to be conscious.

Another issue that is not addressed in the Bill is that of sequential closing. The previous speaker, the Minister of State, Deputy John McGuinness, made the point that local authorities have power to deal with these issues when planning permission is granted. I am not sure that that is the appropriate place. The opportunity was lost when framing this legislation to take an initiative here in terms of obliging public houses and especially nightclubs to address that issue.

The real problem of anti-social behaviour stems from people pouring out of public houses and especially nightclubs at 2 a.m. or 3 a.m. looking for taxis and chippers. If one took the free market approach and abolished closing times, people would go home at various hours as it suited either their pocket or their obligation to get up for work the following day and so on. There might be some madness initially while such a proposal took root, but there is some merit in examining the proposition. The moral police will probably crucify me for making this suggestion, but we must acknowledge all the efforts made to date have only tinkered with the problem and not brought about a solution.

If we were serious about tackling the problem of under age drinking, we would have addressed the issue of a national identity card, either in this legislation or separately. There is a problem with under age drinking and people acquiring drink for those who are under age. The previous speaker alluded to people consuming drink subsequently on the banks of rivers, unsupervised, and the consequent dangers. The single instrument of a national identity card would substantially stem the flow of alcohol to those who are by age not entitled to drink it, instead of creating these facile impediments dictating how and where alcohol can be sold in a garage forecourt or a supermarket. I fail to see the civil liberty issues that make this a matter no Government appears willing to grasp and tackle, which is regrettable.

As I come from a rural constituency, I am aware, as is the Minister, Deputy Ahern, of the practices of small shops and supermarkets selling alcohol, including bottles of wine and cans of beer and so on. The initial costs associated with the legislation for such merchants will be significant and there will be no benefit in minimising the outflow of alcohol. If a person walks into a local supermarket and wants to buy a bottle of wine, he or she does not want to be staring through a grill. People like to browse when they buy a bottle of wine. As I understand the legislation, all of those products will be behind a grill or counter. A customer might want a bottle of Chardonnay, or to have the option of looking see if the wine he or she had last Saturday when out for a meal is in the local supermarket. The broad thrust of the proposals is bordering on the ridiculous and should be examined. There will be additional costs for small shops, but such costs will not pose a problem for the big supermarket chains such as Tesco, Quinnsworth and so on. I do not have anything against these multiple outlets, but we must examine how smaller shops can survive and trade against them.

There is an issue with below cost selling of alcohol where bonus points are available. This is another issue that could have been usefully addressed in the legislation. There may be ways of encouraging people to consume alcohol in licensed public houses under appropriate supervision. This would be preferable to allowing a person to go to the local supermarket or retail outlet to buy a slab of cans for less than €1 per can, or to buy 24 bottles of Miller or a similar beer for the same price, and go to the bank of the river with mates to drink. This legislation presented an opportunity to tackle this matter, with below cost selling. I do not know if it would be appropriate to ban low cost selling in legislation, but these are measures that would make a practical contribution to stemming the flow of alcohol to under age drinkers. The prosecution of persons who procure and provide alcohol for minors should also have been dealt with in the Bill.

The Minister is not short of advice on the shortcomings of the legislation and what I have said is probably not new. We have a fascination with discussing this matter, but despite all the efforts made, we have made little progress. As a nation, we have a serious alcohol problem. Alcohol consumption is glorified, especially in advertising. Alcohol has too close an association with sports activities. These issues need to be addressed, but without adopting a nanny State approach. Placing alcohol behind the counter and out of sight will not address the issue.

I hope the Minister will accept these comments in the spirit in which they have been offered and be willing, open-minded and consider amendments on Committee Stage which might result in better legislation at the end of the process.

See this speech in context