Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

I would like to share my time with Deputy Stagg, if he comes into the Chamber before I finish speaking.

The Labour Party supports the Bill. We will facilitate its passage. It is one of a number of measures recommended in the McCarthy report to reduce the number of bodies, boards and organisations of all kinds that may have been considered necessary when they were set up but are much less necessary now, particularly in view of the measures in the recent budget whereby the poorest of the poor had their social welfare incomes cut and the minimum wage was reduced.

I put this legislation in the context of the need for more reduction in such bodies and their incorporation back into their home Departments or, as in this case, the HSE. On the Order of Business this morning, Deputy James Reilly referred to this morning's article in The Irish Times, which indicated that there are 291 places on various boards and bodies to be filled by the end of February and that 96 of them are under the aegis of the Minister for Health and Children. The Labour Party believes there is scope for significant further reduction in the number of these bodies. It would be better to save money by merging them or incorporating them into their Departments than by taking measures that hit people at the bottom of the income scale.

There should have been greater focus on implementing the recommendations of the McCarthy report. That might have saved money for people who are struggling to get by. All of these organisations have boards, big offices, staff, chief executives and all kinds of associated costs. We can no longer afford them. It is a good day's work to abolish this body. We should be abolishing more of them. I look forward to hearing more proposals from Government in this regard. We intend to do this after the election.

I compliment the Office of Tobacco Control on the work it has done. Positive measures have been taken to control the use of tobacco in this country. I have no doubt that work will continue following the passage of this legislation.

We need to focus on a number of areas. There are two categories of smoker. One is the person who already smokes, is beginning to realise that health problems are associated with smoking or that it is costing too much money and decides to quit. The vast majority of people who smoke want to quit. The other is the person who is beginning to smoke. I would like to begin by focusing on that category. I am aware of the large number of young people in the Visitors Gallery. The three previous speakers were also aware of this without referring to it. We should get the views of young people on the most effective measures to stop people taking up smoking in the first place. This has much to do with peer pressure, image, what people think is cool or not cool and how young people behave together. It is vital that we get their views on what would be effective in discouraging them from starting to smoke in the first place. I welcome the Minister of State's assurance that this will be the focus in the future. She specifically referred to an emphasis on young people.

One of the factors that cause people to take up smoking is the measurement of its good and bad effects. When we are young, healthy and fit we are not concerned with cardiovascular or any other type of disease, because we think we will go on for as long as we want. However, we might think about effects such as smelly breath or cost. These issues are more likely to sway young people. The emphasis in advertising should be on these areas. I do not like being around people whose breath smells of cigarette smoke. That kind of message might make young people less likely to smoke, rather than health messages, which are very effective among older age groups.

Cost is also a factor. The Irish Heart Foundation and the Irish Cancer Society came together to make a pre-budget submission, which I support. They wanted to see an increase in the cost of cigarettes in the budget. They made a threefold proposal. One aspect of the proposal was to increase the tax on loose tobacco and on cigarettes by 50 cent per packet. It was stated that this would generate approximately €77.8 million in additional revenue. They also wanted to ring fence €12 million of this amount to fund a major programme of cessation activities. Furthermore, they wanted to invest in a comprehensive package of measures to tackle tobacco smuggling. Combating the latter effectively could lead to a potential saving for the Exchequer of €67 million each year.

If the measures I refer to had been implemented, they would have given rise to a significant increase in income to the Exchequer and also to consequent savings. However, the measures in question were not implemented and I hope the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady, will address that matter when she replies to the debate and will indicate why the Government decided to nothing with regard to either the price of cigarettes or the issue of tobacco smuggling. If the measures had been implemented, it would not have been necessary to take the €77.8 million out of the budget and thereby oblige the poor to take a hit. If we had taken action to apprehend the tobacco smugglers, the Exchequer would have obtained additional moneys.

Tobacco smuggling is a significant problem. There are those who offer the argument that if we continue to increase the price of cigarettes, there will be a consequent rise in tobacco smuggling. That argument is ridiculous. It implies that the Government cannot implement the laws relating to smuggling and, as a result, must do without the extra money it could obtain through increasing the tax on tobacco products. An opportunity has been missed. It was extremely disappointing that the measures to which I refer were not introduced in the budget.

All the available evidence indicates that cost is a real factor when it comes to young people deciding whether to take up smoking. It also has an impact in the context of how much these individuals smoke if they do take up the habit. How much young people smoke is as much of an issue as whether they smoke.

The most important aspect on which we must focus is preventing people from taking up the habit in the first instance. Most of the people who smoke want to stop. Most of us who know smokers are aware that they are great at giving up smoking and have done so on many occasions. However, the difficulty they face is not taking the habit up again. What are required are smoking cessation programmes that really work. A recent article in Irish Pharmacy News refers to such programmes. The article is welcome because pharmacists, as well as GPs and other health professionals, are in a position to provide people with assistance. I agree with Deputy Reilly's comments to the effect that anti-smoking products should be more widely available. I am of the view that people should be able to purchase these products wherever cigarettes are available. If it is acceptable and safe to sell cigarettes, then it must be equally acceptable and safe to sell products which assist people to stop smoking.

The statistics provided in the article to which I refer are extremely stark. Some 7,000 people in this country die from smoking-related diseases each year, 90% of lung cancers are caused by smoking, 50% of smokers will die from smoking-related diseases and smokers have an increased risk of contracting cancer, heart disease and many other diseases, suffering strokes and experiencing low birth rates. Smoking is the single most preventable cause of illness and death. It costs €1 billion per year to provide health services for smokers. Passive smoke exposure increases the risk of stroke by 82% and smokers lose an average of ten to 15 years from their life expectancy.

I am not a smoker. I have smoked on occasion but I have never become addicted. However, I am aware that I am wasting my breath reading these statistics into the record because while smokers really want to kick the habit, they find it extremely difficult to do so. We must focus, therefore, on making it easier for people to give up smoking and less attractive for young people to take up the habit. In the context of making it easier to give up smoking, there are many products available and a great store of knowledge has been built up with regard to the psychology of encouraging those who smoke to kick the habit. What people need is ongoing support. There are many who have the best of intentions and on 1 January next I am sure a large number of people will stop smoking. The question arises, however, as to whether they will still be off cigarettes on 1 February.

Supports for people who are seeking to stop smoking are extremely important. If the measures to which I referred earlier had been included in the budget and if the €12 million identified by the Irish Cancer Society and the Irish Heart Foundation had been invested, then the existing supports could have been greatly enhanced. There is no doubt that we need to take action in respect of this matter and I hope the Minister of State will be able to provide specific information with regard to how the Government is going to ensure that measures such as those I have outlined will be put in place.

There must be real determination in respect of dealing with this issue. It is extremely tough to watch people trying to give up smoking and finding it difficult to do so. Many of those who have difficulty in the context of stopping smoking also have problems with regard to their incomes. The statistics show that people who live in relative poverty are often very dependent on cigarettes. These individuals perceive cigarettes as assisting them in retaining their sanity when they are having a difficult day. Such people may live in areas where many problems exist and they may have difficulties relating to their incomes. These people may also have social problems.

There is a need to be more imaginative in the context of how we provide programmes for these people. Such programmes must be delivered locally, through community organisations and structures. It might be possible, for example, to promote these programmes through local women's clubs, senior citizens clubs or men's clubs. If programmes were linked to existing activities and structures, they would be more effective.

I reiterate that the Labour Party supports this measure. However, we are of the view that many more of the so-called quangos should be abolished. I accept that many of these bodies do good work. However, there is not necessarily a need for independent bodies to carry out such work. In that context, we encourage the Government - if it has time to do so before the general election - to amalgamate or abolish as many of these organisations as possible.

See this speech in context