Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I acknowledge the Government's support for the thrust of the Bill and its willingness to let it go to Committee Stage for further discussion. However, that must be set against the statement by the Minister of State, Deputy Paul Kehoe, that based on the advice from his officials, what is contained in the Bill cannot be done. More accurately, of course, it will not be done. His contribution reminded me of some of the commentary I have heard from members of Government outside the House in recent weeks in response to the local and European elections. The problem, they tell us, is that their communications system is broken and their message is not getting across. I agree there is an issue with the Government's communications system, but it is really to do with its ability to receive the messages coming from the Opposition and some of its own backbenchers.

Were the Government to have more regard for those avenues of communication, there might be greater success awaiting it. Ministers should, for their own sake, be mindful of what they are being told. Issues arising from the so-called review and scoping exercise in regard to medical cards, for example, were flagged two years before a solution was proposed, and the warnings in that regard did not come only from this side of the House. The Ministers for Health and Finance should bear collective responsibility for initiating that exercise rather than fingers being pointed at one person in particular, who might well be made the fall guy next week. However, that is for another day.

I will now respond to the specific points made by the Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, in his response. He said that because of the Registration of Clubs (Ireland) Act 1904, it would be very difficult to subdivide clubs in terms of the different activities taking place within their facilities. Where the premises is licensed to sell alcohol, for instance, he claimed there would have to be a mapping exercise, limits would supply and so forth. In fact, all of that is catered for in the licensing legislation, which is under the aegis of the Department of Justice and Equality and applies where an application is made to the courts for a licence or renewal of a licence.

It comes down to the question of whether or not there is a willingness and commitment on the part of those with responsibility to amend existing legislation based on evolving circumstances in our communities. The Government either wants to do make those changes or it does not. Ministers either want to instruct their officials or they do not. They either want to take heed of representations from fellow Members on behalf of constituents or they do not. As I often say, we in this House have the privilege of exercising the rights of citizens on their behalf. To hide behind legislation is just not acceptable. Deputy Bernard Durkan, in what Deputy John Paul Phelan observed was an uncharacteristically limited contribution, said that we must come to some sort of solution while being careful not to offend such and such a group. In fact, it is up to Government to take its responsibilities at face value, either enact amendments or not and suffer or enjoy the consequences thereafter. Deputy Anthony Lawlor spoke about how there must be local solutions and advised that clubs and organisations should sit down with county managers to reach an agreement based on local knowledge and whatnot. He emphasised, however, that legislation cannot be amended. That is gobbledegook. A county manager or whomever is charged with responsibility to act on behalf of a Department or the State must be guided by enabling legislation.

The Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, claimed that these proposals would have a grave impact on local authority funding. Many Deputies have alluded to the problems that exist in regard to the rates system as we know it. We all accept it is archaic, suited to a different era and must be overhauled radically and completely, being cognisant, as Deputy Brendan Griffin said, of the role the current system has played in damaging the vibrancy of towns and villages throughout the country. It goes without saying that all of this must be addressed. Local government revenues have been destroyed in recent times in large part as a consequence of the lack of income coming into local authorities by way of rates. The system must be overhauled in such a way that less will give us more, and my party and I have made recommendations to the relevant Departments in this regard.

Again, the Government must take responsibility to address this issue or not address it. If it does not want to do so, it should be honest about it. However, members of this Government made certain commitments in this regard and in respect of upward-only rent reviews when they were in opposition and in the mouth of the last election. The Taoiseach told us this week that, unfortunately, the legal advice precludes him from carrying out those duties. I ask again what legal advice was available to him before the election that is not available to him after it? Has the advice changed? The bottom line is that rates will have to be altered to take account of turnover and, by extension, profitability. They will have to be better aligned to commercial reality and commercial rents than they currently are.

The Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, also referred to the remaining part of the facilities, premises and services offered by clubs and the potential for exemptions being put under threat where a section of a premises is exempt. I cannot comprehend the point he is trying to make here. If the issue is addressed in the first part of the Bill, it is automatically catered for in the latter part. Again, we are back to the point that where there is a will there is a way.

Several Deputies referred to the competition element and the impact on licensed premises in towns, villages and rural areas. Nobody knows better than I do the difficulties that exist for the licensed trade. I was reared in a pub and was glad to have the opportunities I had by virtue of the income that derived from it. What we are proposing can be done while insulating local pubs from any impact on their trade. It is not about poaching business; it is about freeing up local sports clubs. There is a separate and more serious issue in regard to the pub trade. If Government Deputies wish to address that issue in the way it should be done, they must examine the problems with the licensing laws and the below-cost selling taking place in multiples throughout the country which is leading to a spate of binge drinking and the social problems deriving from it. The Government must examine the issue of the controlled and managed environment in which alcohol can be consumed in a licensed premises. It must separate the revenue it is deriving from liquor sales from its social obligation to prevent the abuse of alcohol in our society from running out of control, which it is doing in many instances.

Deputy Durkan and others expressed concerns about the impact of what is proposed on that trade. If he and others are serious about helping or assisting that trade, they are the issues they need to address. As regards clubs and sporting organisations which have licensed premises attached to their facilities, it is mainly in large urban centres and mainly over the past 20 years that these have sprung up but the legislation on the registration of clubs was enacted in 1904. It was never envisaged that those same clubs could be as vibrant and as important, from a commercial perspective, in providing the services and the facilities to their communities which are needed. That is the point and to hide behind that Act is an abdication of responsibility.

Deputies from Meath, Kildare, areas surrounding Dublin, Cork and elsewhere talked of support for the thrust of this legislation. If they really support the thrust of it, they need to insist on the Government possessing a will to change. I take with a pinch of salt the cheap jibes about the legislation in 2001 and the failure of the previous governments. I do not carry a candle for previous governments, ten, 15 or 30 years ago. I do not carry a candle for those who had the wherewithal to bring in a 1904 Act. We all have a responsibility to be cognisant of the changing situation in our communities.

As I said in my initial statement, I would ask that this Bill is not put on the shelf, that is it brought to committee and that the Minister with responsibility in this area engages with his officials with a will to amend the existing Act to accommodate the thrust of this proposal.

See this speech in context