Dáil debates

Thursday, 3 July 2014

Public Health (Standard Packaging of Tobacco) Bill 2014: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

4:15 pm

Photo of Willie PenroseWillie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank my colleague for allowing me the time to speak. I welcome the Public Health (Standard Packaging of Tobacco) Bill and compliment the Minister on introducing it. I also compliment the work of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children following the consultations outlined so eloquently by that committee's Chairman, Deputy Buttimer. Everybody got a chance to make an input, which is important.

Notwithstanding that I am a non-smoker and a non-drinker, I understand that people have a different view on matters and in a democracy every view is entitled to get ventilated and articulated. As a non-smoker and a pioneer, if somebody told me that I had to take up one or the other, I think I would rather have a few pints than smoke. I am vehemently opposed to smoking because of its impact on people's health although I recognise that people are entitled choose to do things. As Deputy Buttimer has outlined, we are all fully aware that 100 people die each week, which is 14 to 15 people each day, from diseases, including cancer, caused by smoking. Many young people are lured or enticed into the smoking habit at a very young age - many below the age of 16.

Many small retailers act very responsibly. They have spent €500 to €1,000 in putting up special cases in order to have cigarettes concealed and not them have on display and impacting on people. Many small retailers and shops across the country take the responsibility very seriously by asking for the age of people and ignoring the usual excuses of getting cigarettes for parents or an older brother. However, we should distinguish between them. Many of them are concerned and I know of many shopkeepers in Westmeath who are concerned. They are aware that the introduction of plain packaging will affect them in ways.

Their concern is it will increase illegal trade by making counterfeit products easier to make, distribute and sell and note that innovative packs, such as bevelled-edged or slide packs, are rarely copied. This is a real concern and every effort must be made to counteract this and, as Deputy McLoughlin stated, to ensure this illegal or illicit trade does not boom and take off in the context of what Members are trying to do. It will lead to down-trading and where price becomes more important as a product differentiator, margins will suffer, which of course probably will have a downstream impact on employment. Members also should be aware of all these factors and notwithstanding that I am in favour of the Bill, it is important to put the counter side of the argument.

I reiterate that I am completely in favour of any measures to reduce tobacco or cigarette smoking. The achievement of the objective the Minister has set out of a tobacco-free Ireland will play an important role in the health of future generations and of the country in general, as well as having an impact on health expenditure. However, to do this, a considerable suite of ancillary measures will be needed to accompany this plain packaging initiative. I acknowledge it is wider than that but to achieve this important public health policy priority, the areas that must be addressed include the illicit or black-market trade in cigarettes. It is this aspect of the market that exercises the minds of the small retailers who already play a positive role in helping to control the distribution and sale of cigarettes. As I stated, they have spent thousands of euro in installing cigarette machines and ensuring they are concealed and not visible and are not openly or flagrantly displaying or advocating cigarette sales. Responsible retailers are trying to compete with the illegal markets. They are paying taxes and everything else and therefore are at the very butt end of this. They are complying in full in respect of the under-age policy and in respect of young people. In particular, they make sure they are not selling cigarettes to children under 16 and in my view, the plain packaging of cigarettes will not contribute a single iota in this area as far as young people are concerned.

There must be an analysis of the impact of this Bill upon the trade and I agree with Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan, who also advocated that this course of action be reviewed in 12 months to ascertain how things are going. The Minister's main objective is to prevent children from smoking, to break that cycle and to intervene at an early age, which is extremely important and with which I certainly concur. However, Members must wait for credible evidence to be produced that will sustain the argument that plain packaging will deliver such a reduction in smoking. I understand that Australia, which is the country cited as being the most advanced in this regard, is due to publish an impact study in December 2014. It would be interesting to learn what emanates from that study, given that country is at the vanguard of this policy, to inform and underpin the objectives of the Bill. Moreover, by the time this Bill reaches the Statute Book and subject to the various evaluations and assessments, this regulatory evaluation in Australia due in December 2014 probably will be available. It might serve to inform Members to enable them to make the Bill's impact even stronger.

The most important issue now is to make smoking unattractive to young people. I know many young people, as well as many older people, who have tried to break the cycle. It seems impossible and I have lots of experience in that I have been described as a food addict. I was, it took me a long time to break that and I know what it is like. It is not easy and I would not lecture anybody. One must give people every help and every encouragement to so do. Were I Minister for Finance, I certainly would use the taxation system. I know doing so will not break that system because I remember the old days when the price of a packet of 20 cigarettes was increased by a thruppenny bit or a tanner. Everyone then would say they would down tools and the same would apply to an increase in the price of a pint. However, the reason that successive Ministers for Finance always increased taxes on those items is they are discretionary and it is easy. I note Deputy Matthews is in the Chamber and he would be aware the cost of these items used to feed into the consumer price index but they were removed from the basket of goods. Ultimately, however, the increase was only a weekly deterrent, in that by the second week, it all was forgotten about. As for the change, the price at that time was £1 1s. 11d., and the old penny was left on the counter. People did not even pick it up, which meant the Minister could even have increased the price by another penny. That is the theory of taxation but were I Minister for Finance, this is an area on which I certainly would focus. The smokers out there should be glad I am not Minister for Finance because I would be very strong in this regard, as I believe it would be a help. However, one cannot put the money that would be gained in the way I advocate into the greedy Exchequer Central Fund. Instead, I would put it into a fund for health promotion and for major projects that could divert young people in areas in which such projects are needed. It is very important to give people alternatives in sport and in health and leisure pursuits and I note the capital sports grants were announced today. There were grants of €40,000 or €50,000 and my own club received €45,000. It would have taken us five years to raise that amount in the small village of Ballynacargy. Consequently, it would be a help to be able to get money from the Central Fund.

Funnily enough, I come from a family whose members were non-smokers but I have neighbours in whose families everyone smoked. Sometimes, that just happens. However, there are huge costs associated with health-related issues arising from tobacco. It costs up to €1 billion per year, not to mention the deaths that arise from cancer that is triggered by or derived from smoking. I also would ban smoking in cars when children are present. Anyone who has travelled with me over the years would know that one could do what one liked in the car but smoking was a no-no. Perhaps I was known as a cantankerous fellow down through the years because of it but that was what I did.

To give some element of balance to this debate, I note some people suggest that adverse consequences will arise as a result. First, the provisions of the Bill will apply to only three quarters of the tobacco market in Ireland, as approximately 24% of the tobacco smoked in Ireland is either purchased in the black market or overseas. This is the reason there must be a whole-of-Government approach in this regard. Indeed, the Revenue Commissioners do not measure rolling tobacco in their calculations, which means the aforementioned 24% should be even greater, which is an important point. There is an argument that the introduction of standardised packaging will flood the Irish market with cheap illegal tobacco products, which then would benefit organised criminality and would make it easier and cheaper to produce counterfeit standardised tobacco packaging and so on. However, I imagine that all these things could be overcome.

The major issue that I have concerns patents and trademarking. If Ireland introduces standardised packaging but it is not applied across the European Union, an incongruity would then arise. The measure would not apply to Irish smokers who chose to purchase their tobacco products in other European Union member states. This is where I foresee an issue arising. Irish consumers who wish to continue to purchase a legal branded product can continue to do so in another jurisdiction at a price discount, because they will encounter lower tax rates there than they would in respect of a tobacco product bought in Ireland. This will be an interesting point. However, the issue I foresee as a barrister is the impact of this measure on intellectual property rights and the possibility or rather the probability, that the Irish State or Government will face action, perhaps at European Union or international level. Members should be honest about this because that is what will happen.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.