Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We support this legislation and welcome its publication and this debate. The Minister alluded to the reasons this Bill is important. It is important for a number of reasons, primarily because it states a policy that Government and society in general are trying to bring about which is a preventative type of culture in our society not only in the area of melanoma and skin cancer but in the areas of obesity, lack of fitness and tackling underlying problems which people end up in hospital trying to cure rather than prevent. That is a philosophy that is beginning to ingrain itself in policy development. The next step is to ingrain it in the minds of people and this legislation in the context of skin cancer and melanoma will be a positive and proactive step in that regard.

There is no doubt that the statistics and data which have been collated from around the world, the research by the World Health Organisation and the experience of our neighbours in the UK indicate that excessive use of sunbeds is something which should be condemned and prohibited for those under 18 years of age. As this legislation will probably not be passed on time, although it could be, we will see the communion brigade where young children of eight years of age will be paraded into tanning shops to top-up their tans for what is, effectively, a religious ceremony in our schools. We should be conscious that we have a lot of work to do to try to establish in people's minds that some policies Government pursues are good for them in terms of adhering to the philosophy behind that policy. We can have a broader debate on the other issues at another time. However, we welcome and endorse this measure.

Looking at the whole concept of preventative medicine, it will only work if the public is well informed and if it understands the rationale behind it. The public should be made aware of it not only in terms of scare tactics but through an educational process. That is very evident in the area of recycling where the educational aspect takes place in schools and children educate the adults. Children are now saying to their parents that smoking is bad for them and that recycling and water conservation are good for the planet. It is a two-way street. We should use not only the stick but we must educate people with genuine knowledge that what we are trying to do is positive for them and society at large. If we collate all the evidence, synopsise it and put it out in basic form, there is no logical reason a person should use a sunbed other than if recommended to do so by a dermatologist or another clinician. The idea of young people being herded into tanning shops over the coming months is quite obscene and bizarre. I do not want to stigmatise individuals who do so but it is something of which they should be conscious. They are playing roulette with their children's lives in terms of potentially contracting melanoma or skin cancer, damaging their eyes or causing some other health fall-out.

The Bill stems from a growing body of empirical evidence collated from around the world which suggests that sunbeds offer few benefits other than cosmetic ones to people. The Bill will prohibit operators of sunbed premises from allowing anyone under 18 years of age to use sunbeds. That is the key and most central issue in this Bill. Obviously, no Government wants to create a nanny state. We do not want to interfere in people's lives. People are educated, they grow up, become adults and make informed decisions but the key question is that if we expect adults to make informed decisions, one would think they would make an informed decision not to put their children on sunbeds in the first place but they still seem to do so. Therefore, we have to become a nanny state, to a certain extent, for those who cannot make an informed decision. We will bring forward legislation which will ensure adults cannot make that decision for a person under 18 years of age and the law will rightly prohibit it. The evidence in this regard is there for all to see.

The Irish Cancer Society's sunbed briefing document is quite clear and comprehensive in terms of its stated mission. It refers to people with type one skin and type two skin and fair skinned people are more susceptible to skin cancer and melanoma as a result of exposure to ultraviolet light. We have to trust that if we educate and inform adults, they might begin to understand that sunbeds are not the best idea in the world. This Bill goes far enough in terms of trying to protect those we are obligated to protect who are under 18 years of age.

There were 158 deaths in 2011 from skin cancer which is an indication that we are not talking about a very unlikely event and that it is something which will not happen to people. This is clearly happening to people and it is affecting their lives on a daily basis. We will have to get over the thinking that it is an abstract statistic and that it will never happen. We will have to get over it not only in the context of sunbeds but in the context of people travelling abroad.

As a people, we simply have no concept of what it is like to contract and suffer from melanoma and other skin diseases as a result of ultraviolet exposure. In many countries in the Tropics, particularly First World countries, there is a proactive policy of ensuring children are protected from a young age, for example, in school. An example of this First World thinking when it comes to preventative medicine is the fact that hats are obligatory in parts of Australia and other areas. By contrast, many people in this country lather themselves up, fling themselves onto the sand in places like the Costa del Sol and bake themselves for hours on end. This happens week in, week out during the summer period every year.

The Bill might raise further awareness of the need to be conscious of skin protection and put on the right sunblocks and sun protections. People need to realise that when they go on holiday, it is not a competition to see who can come back the most tanned. We should try to ingrain in our people the idea that when they lie on the beach for a period of time, they should protect their skin by putting on the proper sunblock, rather than racing down to factor 4, factor 2 or factor 0 to get the ultimate tan. I would like to see the statistics with regard to the contracting of skin cancer and melanomas in this country. I would also like to see research showing how likely people are to contract such diseases from sunbed use or from ultraviolet exposure when abroad. I am quite sure it is available if only we could unearth it. It might focus people's minds on the dangers of excessive ultraviolet exposure from sunrays when they are abroad.

The details of this Bill, including the sanctions set out in it, need to be considered in the context of the policy background, the law as it currently stands and the statistics from the EU, Ireland and the World Health Organization. The Bill does what it says it does. It is about public health. It bans people from making sunbeds available to those under the age of 18. It ensures the operators of tanning shops will follow a code of conduct when deciding who can use their sunbeds. For example, they will have to inform sunbed users of the inherent dangers associated with such activity, such as the damage that may arise from excessive sunbed use. I think that is a very positive thing. Given that we are trying to discourage people from smoking by introducing plain cigarette packaging or changing the graphic design and detail of cigarette packets, perhaps the same point could be argued in the case of sunbeds, which have the potential to threaten people's lives by causing the development of melanoma or skin cancer. Rather than seeing sunbeds as glamorous machines that give one a fine tan for one's holidays, people should be conscious that they have the potential to threaten one's health and one's life. The statistics are there for everybody to see.

We can speak at length about issues we agree on. I would prefer to speak at length about the health service problems we disagree on so that we might be able to come up with solutions. As I have said, I welcome this initiative. World Cancer Day was last week. From time to time, I compliment the Minister on his efforts to make Ireland a tobacco-free country and his initiatives with regard to the EU directive. I emphasise, however, that we will face a major public health policy challenge in the foreseeable future in dealing with the increased prevalence of cancer as this country's population ages, its demographics evolve and, thankfully, people live longer. The prevalence of cancer will increase for many reasons and we will live with cancer for longer as individuals and as a society. We need to start putting the building blocks in place to ensure we have the structural and physical capacity in our hospitals to deal with that. We need to keep pace with technological advances and ensure we have the financial wherewithal to support and develop services in acute hospital settings. Various strata and tiers of medical infrastructure will be required. I do not know whether we are starting to focus on this key area as quickly as we should.

It is evident from the 2014 world cancer report, which was written by more than 250 leading scientists, that the number of cancer cases will increase by 75% over the next 20 years. This report was published by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is the specialist cancer agency of the World Health Organization. It points out that the prevalence of cancer across the world is growing at an alarming rate. It is obvious in that context that an aggressive effort to prevent cancer is needed. This is the ideal solution to many of these issues, but it is not practical in all cases, unfortunately, which is why we also have to deal with the other side of it as a Government, as a State and as a people. Indeed, this challenge must be confronted at European and global levels too. We must use our scarce resources to put a strategy in place to deal with the increased prevalence of cancer that people and society are going to have to live with for many years to come. I hope we do not bury our heads in the sand and let this issue drift to the point at which it becomes a crisis and we are incapable of catching up. As the Minister has often said, there was a time when people who contracted many forms of cancer were condemned. Now that those cancers are treatable, in many cases people make full recoveries and live for many more years. Forms of cancer that people were dying of 30 years ago are now eminently treatable and curable. I hope those advances will continue. A great deal of research and investment is taking place with the aim of finding solutions and treatments. That work is taking place in the whole area of preventative medicine as well. We still have to deal with the broader area.

While we support the Bill before the House, we would like the Minister to examine some areas that have been highlighted by the Irish Cancer Society. For example, the society has pointed out that the Bill does not prohibit people with type 1 and type 2 skin types - the fairest skin types - from using sunbeds. Such a prohibition has been provided for in Australia. While we should not copy everything the Australians do, we should note their aggressive promotion of public health policy. When one visits Australia, one can sense that preventative policies are proactively pursued there. One can see it there. It is everywhere. I appreciate that Australia has a different climate and is a more outdoor-oriented society. The Australian authorities encourage outdoor activities like walking. They encourage healthy living and exercise among all cohorts and age groups. When one goes to the beach there, one sees groups of people over the age of 65 doing stretches, exercises, gym work and all of that type of activity. Similarly, Australians are very aggressive when it comes to protecting their skin from ultraviolet exposure. They insist on children wearing hats in school and not being exposed to the sun for long periods. We do not need to mimic them, but we should take their advice on why they included the prohibition I have mentioned in their legislation. As certain skin types are prevalent in this country - a fair degree of our population has type 1 or type 2 skin - we should consider whether there is merit in adopting such an approach.

If we are not going to do it, at least the legislation should require sun-bed operators to inform people with those skin types of the higher propensity to contract skin cancers and melanomas - it may be in the legislation already.

Eye protection is critical. I once called into a tanning shop while canvassing and saw the goggles it supplied. We need an inspection regime to ensure they are not swimming goggles with a bit of red paint on them. We need to ensure proper goggles are provided to protect people's eyes.

If we pass legislation we need to ensure we provide the resources to enforce it. I do not know what agency will carry out inspections and oversee enforcement of this legislation. The vast majority of people who work in the sunbed industry are there to provide a service that is legal and used by many people. However, people need to be made aware it is a service that comes with many health risks. Forms people sign prior to using a sunbed need to make this clear. As opposed to appearing in the small print, these warnings need to be unambiguous and state in bold that using a sunbed represents a risk to the user's health. This needs to be to the fore so that people can make an informed and conscientious decision to remove their clothing and get into the sunbed or go home.

The purpose of the Bill is to protect people who up to now have been using sunbeds probably largely at the encouragement of parents or older siblings to tan up for a special event. If we did no more today, we should condemn that particular practice for the obvious reasons that we do not want to play with people's lives and health at such a young age. The research provides statistical evidence that the more a young person is exposed to ultraviolet rays the more likely he or she is to contract melanoma or skin cancer. For those reasons we should make it unlawful and explain why we are doing so. Equally we need to encourage our adult population to be conscious of their obligations and not to engage in excessive use of sunbeds.

Inspections are critical to ensure sunbed operators comply with the legislation. It is important this Bill is not just passed and left on the Statute Book. Very often such legislation can drift into people's subconsciousness and they do not take it too seriously. It is not until we have enforcement and a continual education programme around that enforcement that it takes effect and people become conscious of it and more importantly, supportive of it as they have done in other areas. With things such as drink-driving and cigarettes it took time for society to support and buy into a public health policy as they did with the road safety policy on drink-driving. We need to have education or at least awareness programmes on the matter.

There is evidence of sunbed use in advance of first Holy Communion ceremonies and television documentaries have been made on the matter. People going on holidays, particularly to Mediterranean and further south in the Tropics, also need to be conscious of such matters. We do it but we do so at a superficial level. We need to try to bolster it. Public health initiatives and educational programmes and policies encourage an overall interest in individuals' health and that of the people around them - it has a knock-on effect. Healthy living is not just about healthy eating; it is also about exercise, not using sunbeds excessively, not smoking and reducing alcohol consumption. By promoting a strong ethos of public health initiatives in our schools, and through educational programmes, awareness programmes and advertising programmes as well as through legislation and policy, people will buy into it. While it can be slow at times we ultimately get the reward, as we have seen in other areas of public health policy, particularly in the reduction of tobacco consumption.

We still have a long way to go to achieve the Minister's ambition of a tobacco-free Ireland by 2025. While that target will be difficult to achieve it is worth trying to do so. I do not believe anybody will blame the Minister, Deputy Reilly, if there are still one or two people in remote parts of Ireland having the odd cigarette.

See this speech in context