Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)

I support the Bill and note the progress made in tackling the problem of smoking. One of my favourite television programmes is "Mad Men", a series about the birth of the advertising industry in the United States in the late 1950s and early 1960s. One of the striking aspects of the programme is that virtually all the characters smoke and do so at all times and in all settings, whether at meetings, at home or socialising. Friends who are a little older than me and also watch the programme say this was normal at that time in the types of businesses featured.

Deputy Finian McGrath asked why people who smoke should be lectured when those who eat lots of burgers do not tend to receive lectures. There is a tremendous difference between eating lots of burgers and smoking, namely, the presence of what are known as externalities. If Deputy McGrath eats 20 burgers each day, the impact of is confined to him, whereas if he smokes 20 cigarettes beside me each day, his habit impacts on my health. This is one of the reasons we must take a different approach to tackling smoking and its effects from the approach we would to someone who eats lots of burgers.

On the issue of demand for tobacco products, there is much to be said for the broad approach being taken, for example, the use of certain imagery in advertising. We must also adopt strategies at a micro-level, which means identifying what action can be taken to help specific groups of smokers. It never ceases to amaze me when I see, as I often do, pregnant women smoking outside a maternity hospital. We should develop a specific plan to make mothers-to-be aware of the consequences of smoking for their unborn children. It would be especially beneficial to target this group.

Several speakers noted that 29% of the population smokes. I have examined statistics which provide a breakdown of the various categories of smokers. They show, for example, that 49% of people who are unemployed smoke and 44% of persons with a disability smoke. Can anything be done for these two groups, particularly the unemployed who must already cope with great stress and difficulty in their lives? We must make clear to them what are the effects of smoking on their health, ability to cope with stress and personal financial circumstances, which is an issue to which Deputy Ross alluded.

On the issue of supply, I have been struck by statistics from 2009 which indicate that 40% of retailers are willing to sell cigarettes to minors. While I understand the figure has declined from 49% or 47%, which indicates some improvement, it is unacceptable that two in every five retailers appear to be in breach of the law governing the sale of tobacco products. Legislation was introduced which established a tobacco register from which retailers found to be in breach of the law would be disqualified. This approach works well with regard to people who supply alcohol to minors. Progress in this area would contribute significantly to reducing supply to people who are too young to smoke and do not understand the health consequences of smoking.

On the issue of requiring people purchasing cigarettes to provide identification, research was done to show that when minors attempting to buy cigarettes were asked to provide identification, 96% were refused cigarettes. We still have a long way to go in regulating the supply of cigarettes by retailers. Progress in this area would have a beneficial impact on health.

I strongly agree with Deputy Dowds's point on introducing generic cigarette packaging. For too many people, particularly the young, using cigarettes is still considered cool. As Deputy Dowds said, if generic packaging was to be brought in, combined with the use of images that this legislation allows for, we could raise public awareness of the consequences of smoking. It would also make clear that doing something that could cause cancer in future is not cool.

See this speech in context