Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am disappointed that the Minister for Finance did not examine the introduction of a lid levy. Presentations have been made to the Minister and I have raised the point on a number of occasions. My understanding is that the Minister said the advice from the Attorney General was that he could not differentiate between the on-trade and the off-trade in respect of alcohol sales. However, they are governed by two separate licences that are issued separately by the courts and the Department of Justice and Equality. Completely different statutes are involved, so I cannot understand why they cannot be dealt with separately.

The big advantage of introducing a lid levy is that it would bring in far in excess of €145 million - approximately €200 million per annum. The other big advantage to it, and the difference between that and minimum pricing, is that minimum pricing will only increase profits for the major multinational retailers in this country. A lid levy would bring additional funds to the Exchequer that could be ring-fenced to deal with the problems associated with alcohol, particularly within the health service. I ask the Taoiseach to look at this issue again, because there is a direct correlation between consumption and tax. There is also a strong argument at European level that there is flexibility where a measure is being introduced as a health provision. That is acknowledged by the Minister, who says the legal issue is now at home rather than abroad. One must remember that in 2003 the Government brought in a similar initiative, specifically in relation to alcopops, because of the particular difficulty they raised at the time. I would ask the Taoiseach to examine this.

The budget proposals involve €1.2 billion in taxes, as announced by the Minister for Finance, and €1.6 billion in cuts, as announced by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. That adds up to a figure of €2.8 billion, not €2.5 billion. Perhaps the Taoiseach would clarify that in his response.

See this speech in context