Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to speak in support of the provisions of the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill. It is clear this country has a real problem with drink, and the numbers speak for themselves. Twenty-one people will die from alcohol-related illnesses this week and every other week this year. This means that five times more people die as a result of alcohol than from road deaths, and this does not take into account the correct statistics Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy mentioned regarding the contributory factor of road deaths. Alcohol-related illnesses cost Irish taxpayers €2.35 billion each year. Some 1,500 hospital beds are occupied right now by alcohol-related admissions. Some 1.4 million people in Ireland have a harmful relationship with alcohol. We consume 25% above the OECD average. In 2016, some 280,000 workdays were lost to alcohol-related absenteeism. Alcohol features as a factor in half of all suicides in Ireland, and this does not take into account self-harm and admissions in the acute psychiatric setting. It is in the context of all this devastation and heartbreak, the ruined lives and broken relationships, and the huge expense and needless waste, that this legislation is so desperately and urgently needed.

The aim of the Bill is to reduce alcohol consumption nationally, and I believe this can be achieved if the legislation is properly implemented. The Bill targets four key areas. First, the price of alcohol is a major factor in consumption levels. My party and I support the introduction of minimum unit pricing, which is an evidence-based approach to reduce alcohol harm. The price of a can or bottle is directly linked to consumption levels. There is a clear correlation between price increases and reductions in consumption and it is estimated that minimum unit pricing could save the Exchequer as much as €1.7 billion over 20 years.

These savings involve a combination of cost benefits, including health care costs, a reduction in crime levels and policing costs, and improved quality of life generally. It is also proven to be effective at proportionately targeting the type of alcohol causing the most harm, that is, the cheapest alcohol available. This is often sold in bulk and below cost price. Those who disagree need only look to the volume of evidence available, including a recent study by the University of Sheffield which supports the contention.

Developments at European level have also brought more clarity to the legal landscape in which minimum unit pricing, specifically, and the Bill, generally, are being introduced. Moves to introduce minimum unit pricing in Scotland were resisted by the drinks industry in a long, drawn-out process that went all the way to the European Court of Justice. In December last year, that court ruled that minimum unit pricing can be introduced as a proportionate measure where its aim is to protect the health of the population and there are no alternatives measures that could be introduced instead. The situation regarding Ireland's drinking problem is so stark that, unfortunately, there is no better viable option here. Minimum unit pricing has proven to positively change behaviour, particularly among the groups most at risk. It is the only show in town as far as I am concerned.

Another important area the Bill addresses is health information marketing. In a world of fake news this is an industry that is particularly susceptible to well resourced and highly financed multinational conglomerates that aim to obfuscate and confuse consumers with false claims and half-truths. It is regrettable that this legislation has made such slow progress through the Oireachtas. Glaciers have moved faster than the Bill, particularly if we consider its pace through the Seanad and the Dáil. Its slow rate of progress is a national disgrace. The delaying is a direct result of the drinks industry, which has chipped away and eroded the legislation line by line, lobby by lobby, with remarkable persistence and dedication. Only in the past week, for example, we saw the comparison of the link between alcohol and cancer with that relating to toast. I researched the British Medical Journaltoday and did a search for alcohol and cancer. I did not bother researching toast and cancer. There were tens of thousands of references to alcohol and cancer. It is an irrefutable fact that alcohol is a carcinogen that is a contributing factor in tens of thousands of deaths and to significant morbidity development in this country on a daily basis. For the industry to try to confuse this and to inject doubt in the debate is a disgrace. What has happened can be compared with the position regarding smoking and tobacco industry many years ago, when the latter tried to frustrate every public health initiative and bury the evidence. This should not be allowed to go on any more.

These vested interest groups would have us believe that consumption rates here are decreasing. This is more fake news. It is intentionally misleading. While our intake levels may be down when examined over a particular timeframe, the latest figures from Revenue show that Ireland's consumption of alcohol rose by almost 5%, to 11.46 litres of pure alcohol per capita, in 2016. This is the equivalent of 46 bottles of vodka, 130 bottles of wine or 498 pints of beer. Since 1960, Ireland's consumption has increased threefold. Since 2010, our average consumption has been 11.25 litres per capita. The EU average is 9 litres, the OECD average is 9.1 litres and the global WHO average is 6.2 litres. Ireland's problems with alcohol are well documented and it is important that we see our consumption in the true statistical frameworks provided by the OECD and the WHO.

In this environment, clear and accurate information is vital. This is about giving people all of the information so they can make a well-informed decision. I support in principle the proposal to print public health warnings on alcohol products so that people are fully aware of the harm alcohol can do. Some technical changes may be required in terms of the export industry. As far as I am concerned, however, there should be warnings for people about cancer and other issues on the labels of products sold on the Irish market. It is important that the Department and the Minister provide clarity on who is responsible for this in order that there will be no uncertainty in the industry. There must also be clarity in the context of EU law.

The multibillion euro drinks firms have argued tirelessly that this is a waste of time and that it will not reduce consumption levels one iota. I completely disagree with that view. Many in the drinks industry, who emailed all Deputies this week, complain about costs of up to €50,000 for designing these labels. They have multimillion euro profits and they want us to have sympathy over a few thousand euro added to their balance sheet, which would give people factual information about the effects of alcohol on their lives. It is important there are facts on products so people can make an informed decision about their consumption. Their argument is self-defeating. There is a reason that companies invest hundreds of billions of euro in advertising and marketing. It is because advertising works. If it did not, the industry simply would not exist. Exist it does, and it is an industry that is growing.

The advertising of alcohol is now believed to be worth almost €1 billion. That is an awful lot of money for something that drinks firms would have us believe does not work. They say restricting advertising has no impact on consumption. Why then do they advertise? Why do they try to link to events such as those relating to sport? I remarked earlier today that in Dublin city at present there is the advert with the black and white sock, which is a subtle reinforcement for young people about the Six Nations. People saw Sexton's kick and an hour later if they were getting a bus, driving their car or were in a taxi all they would have seen was the Diageo advertisement with the black and white sock, linking Guinness to rugby and participation in sport. This needs to end in our communities. We cannot have alcohol companies profiteering on the back of good sports results. It is important we put public health above the profits of industries that will continue to thrive regardless of whether we have a Public Health (Alcohol) Bill. They can take a pinch in their profits for the benefit of lives and the reduction of cancer.

It is scarcely believable we require a law to prevent these huge firms from sponsoring events where the majority of participants involved are children, but, in 2018, this is where matters stand. There are areas where people have genuine concerns about some proposals, and my party is seeking clarity on some of these areas. It is important that we do not dilute the legislation. Rather, we must ensure that it is fair, capable of being implemented and delivers what is intended. I am aware of issues and concerns expressed by the drinkaware.iewebsite, which has evidence on consumption and the effects of alcohol on people's health. It is important it is not restricted from providing factual information to people. This needs to be clarified in the context of public awareness campaigns. An area where there is confusion is whether the new rules on labelling will mean reference to drinkaware.iewill be removed. The Minister needs to clarify this. It is important that we do not restrict people from making informed decisions in the context of public awareness.

I acknowledge that more clarity is required on who is responsible for these rules. The legislation cannot be successful unless there is a cultural shift in our attitude towards alcohol. The statistics I outlined at the beginning clearly show the problems we have. Education is crucial to properly tackling this. Those who have alcohol problems often begin to drink in their early teens or younger, before they have been informed on the dangers of alcohol by parents or at home. A review of how children are taught in this regard is required. In the past, there has been reluctance by the Government to tackle this country's alcohol problem, and this goes back decades and through multiple Governments.

I am a spokesperson on drugs. Alcohol has been included in the title of the new national drug strategy in recognition that alcohol is as harmful as any illegal substance out there. Unfortunately, there was no funding increase when alcohol was added to the latest strategy. Alcohol was, shamefully, relegated to a footnote and we are now playing catch up as a result.

See this speech in context