Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

We are all very aware of the consequences of smoking. Somebody who smokes today does so in the full knowledge of the possible consequences for his or her health. While I do not smoke and have never done so, both of my parents were heavy smokers for all of their adult lives. Of course they started to smoke at a time when no one was aware of the health risks of smoking. They both enjoyed smoking too much to give it up. Unfortunately, they paid the price when they died in their early 70s from smoking-related illnesses. There is a part of me that can accept the adult decision to smoke. I know there are Deputies in this House who enjoy smoking. However, I think we have to do all we can from a prevention and education perspective to discourage young people, in particular, from smoking. We should also give those who wish to give up smoking every encouragement and incentive to do so.

The statistics in this regard are frightening. The explanatory memorandum that accompanies this Bill informs us that "tobacco smoking is the greatest single cause of preventable illness and premature death in Ireland" and that "approximately €500 million of health expenditure in Ireland is directly due to smoking related diseases". I know the Minister has taken a very firm stand against the lobbying powers of the tobacco companies. We have one of the highest smoking rates in Europe. The explanatory memorandum states that "smoking prevalence in Ireland remains high at 22%", but I have seen reports that suggest that the figure is closer to 28% or 29%. I have observed from my work as a teacher and through my involvement in youth work that the number of young boys who smoke has decreased, but the number of young girls who smoke has undoubtedly increased. This initiative will not work on its own. It has to be part of a comprehensive and holistic approach to controlling smoking nationally. It is obvious that a multi-pronged approach is needed.

It is notable that this legislation is supported by a number of children's and health charities, some of which presented some interesting evidence in a comprehensive briefing document. They argued that if cigarette packets are the same drab colour, size and shape, it will result in a reduction in the number of smokers. I have my doubts about that. If somebody wants to smoke, I do not think it will matter to them what size, shape or colour the packet is. The charities referred to some evidence on plain packaging from New Zealand, Scotland, Brazil and Canada. There is no doubt that drab plain packaging will be less attractive than branded cigarette packaging, but the question of whether that will cause people to stop buying cigarettes is a different matter, given that nicotine and cigarettes are highly addictive. The charities also suggested that plain packaging will eliminate the tobacco industry's last great marketing tool. I have some doubts in that regard, in light of the amount of money tobacco companies spend on marketing. I am quite sure other marketing tools will be found to boost cigarette sales. That is why I am arguing for a much more holistic and comprehensive approach.

This is a very lucrative business. In that context, I was quite bemused to read Simon Carswell reporting in The Irish Timesthat "a US congressman has written again to the Irish Ambassador in Washington urging the Government to scrap plans to introduce plain packaging on cigarettes". It seems that the congressman in question is arguing that this legislation will restrict "the intellectual property of legal products". Given that he represents the state of Virginia, which is home to the world’s second largest tobacco company, which employs approximately 4,000 people in Virginia, I suggest that he has a vested interest in writing this letter. While I am totally in favour of strategies that will lead to a decrease in the number of smokers, I am somewhat dubious or sceptical about the claim that plain packaging will lead to a real reduction in the number of smokers in the absence of other strategies to bring about the tobacco-free Ireland that the Minister is supporting and that I would certainly also like to see.

Australia is often lauded as a success story even though there are conflicting reports about the effect of plain packaging there. It depends on who one believes. According to one source, the number of calls to the Australian quit line increased by 78% after the introduction of standardised packaging. That source did not confirm how many of those people actually succeeded in giving up cigarettes. Furthermore, I understand that the calls in question were made in the months of January and February, which is a traditional time of the year for people to try to give up smoking. According to an alternative source, in the first year after the introduction of plain packaging Australia, some 59 million more cigarettes and roll-you-own products were purchased by comparison with the previous year. What is the truth? There is a need for reliable data that is provided independent of all the lobbies.

I recently tabled a parliamentary question to the Minister, Deputy Reilly, seeking evidence of international best practice in this area. His reply referred to "the wealth of evidence available" in this regard and mentioned an international expert, Professor David Hammond. The Minister pointed out that "research has been conducted in 10 different countries", leading to the view that "tobacco packaging is a critically important form of tobacco promotion". He argued there is "strong evidence that standardised packaging would be effective with regard to four of Ireland's tobacco control policy objectives, namely preventing children and young people from starting to smoke, encouraging current smokers to quit, reducing the risk of those who have quit from relapsing, and encouraging the denormalisation of smoking in society, thereby protecting children from the marketing practices of the tobacco industry". He also referred to other research, such as Moodie's review and Sir Cyril Chantler's independent review, which found that "branded packaging contributes to increased tobacco consumption". The Minister acknowledged in his answer that "a year on from the introduction of plain packaging in Australia, we have a limited amount of research on the effects of the policy". I think this is borne out by what I said earlier.

An issue that must be addressed in the context of these provisions is one I regularly encounter in parts of the constituency I represent, namely, the illicit or black market trade in cigarettes. There are genuine concerns in this regard on the part of small retailers, with some of whom I have spoken. These retailers have been to the fore in supporting other initiatives to help people to stop smoking, such as the ban on the sale of packs of ten or smaller quantities and the prohibitions regarding the display of tobacco products in retail premises. Many of the retailers to whom I have spoken tell me they would support a complete ban on cigarettes but, in the absence of such a measure, they are concerned that the plain packaging initiative will lead to an even larger black market in tobacco, which will have devastating effects on their businesses and their ability to retain and create jobs. A recent seizure by the Garda of illegal tobacco comprised 32 million cigarettes and 4,000 kg of tobacco. There have been reports recently from Britain of foreign crime gangs operating a multi-million pound racket which is flooding that country with illegal cigarettes. There is a more significant problem with such products because nobody knows what it is in them. At least we know what branded cigarettes contain.

If we are serious about safeguarding people's health and encouraging them to give up smoking or refrain from starting in the first place, we cannot be dismissive of the concerns around the illicit trade in tobacco. The retailers I have engaged with find it offensive that their questioning of these proposals is equated with an attempted defence of the tobacco industry. They emphasise that their concern is to protect their own business interests and that so long as the product remains legal, they expect to be recognised as responsible retailers who are competing with a criminal underworld. These retailers, who have willingly complied with Government policy on underage smoking, have genuine concerns that plain packaging will create opportunities for smugglers and counterfeit traders who are unconcerned about whether the person who purchases the product is under age and have no qualms about selling cigarettes in quantities of ten, five or even fewer. Certainly, I have not been convinced by the arguments that plain packaging will not make it easier for counterfeiters.

Retailers have offered several useful suggestions for combating tobacco smuggling, such as the provision of additional mobile scanners at ports, only two of which are in operation at present. They have also called for increased penalties under the Casual Trading Act and the development of an app to enable consumers to verify that tobacco products are legitimate. Such measures would be of great assistance to gardaí in their efforts to combat the illicit trade in tobacco.

I listened to a debate this morning on the radio on electronic cigarettes in which Professor Luke Clancy was a participant. I know people who have had success in switching from cigarettes to electronic devices. However, I am not sure we know enough about those devices to be able to say whether they are a safe and effective alternative to tobacco. I simply do not know whether that is the case. Having said that, if people are finding them a useful aid to giving up smoking, consideration should be given to ensuring their availability outside regular retail hours.

Retailers have called for a regulatory impact assessment to be presented alongside the Bill which would address the issues they have raised. As it stands, they have reasonable concerns about the unintended consequences for their business, the broader economy and smokers. We know this Bill will be passed by the House. I support all efforts to curb, curtail and eliminate smoking, but concerns regarding the potential for an increased black market trade in tobacco are genuine. In that context, I ask the Minister to consider undertaking a serious independent analysis, one year after the enactment of the legislation, to determine its impact on the illicit trade in tobacco.

See this speech in context