Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is welcome that the Bill is before the Dáil and not before its time. The previous Cabinet signed off on it in February 2015. We must be realistic and acknowledge that there is a serious problem with drink and the drink culture in this country and that it must be addressed. No one can argue against the facts, which are that an increasing number of people are presenting in hospitals with liver disease and that the average age of those presenting with it is becoming younger. This is not coincidental but because of the availability of cheap booze.

A welcome consequence of the Bill is that we will, straightaway, tackle below-cost selling of alcohol. The availability of cheap drink encourages excessive drinking, particularly in poorer socioeconomic regions. Collectively in this Dáil, we should work together to ensure the legislation will proceed through the next Stages as rapidly as possible because the problem needs to be tackled.

On advertising, it is welcome that the Minister is proposing to introduce a ban between 3 a.m. and 9 p.m. That is all very well and would probably have worked a couple of decades ago when most people had access to no media other than RTÉ One and RTÉ Two and the stations they could receive on a transistor radio. Given the advances in telecommunications, I wonder whether the initiative will have a real impact. I do not believe it will. On the flip side of the coin, it will cost Irish media companies millions of euro. As I said, I do not believe it will make a huge difference. Many people of my age and younger are accessing media through iPads and mobile phones and by streaming, etc. Consequently, I wonder whether the advertising aspect of the Bill is worthy.

Let us consider the tourism industry. Perhaps I am misinterpreting the legislation in believing that under it places such as the Guinness Storehouse will not even be able to advertise on the outside of their own buildings. The Guinness Storehouse is one of the main tourist attractions in the country. People do not go there to drink excessively. One gets only one pint when one goes in and it is part of the Irish cultural experience enjoyed by tourists from abroad. The same applies in a smaller scale to Locke's distillery in Kilbeggan, one of the only distilleries still in operation in all of Ireland. I was surprised to learn recently that 70,000 visit it. It will not be able to advertise on the roundabout outside Kilbeggan in order that people entering the town will know where it is located. If I am wrong, the Minister can correct me. If I am not, we need to address this issue.

It is welcome that the Minister made concessions on the issue of separation. It was common sense.

Whose responsibility is it to have labels on bottles? What is the position on small-scale distillers of specialist gins and brewers of craft beers that are predominantly for the export market? Are we using a sledge-hammer to crack an egg in that regard? Will we impose too many costs on small businesses considering that the majority of their products will be going to a market that may not require the proposed labelling?

Most people who buy drink in duty free shops are on their way out of the country. One very seldom sees people entering the country picking up drink in duty free shops. What we are doing is placing an unnecessary burden on duty free shops which support large-scale employment where they operate, be it at Shannon, Knock, Dublin or Cork Airport. Perhaps this issue might be examined. Is there a need for labelling in that context?

I acknowledge that excessive drinking is very harmful. In that regard, I mentioned the increase in the incidence of liver disease, particularly in the younger age categories. What we should refer to on labels is the abuse of alcohol. Having a glass or two of wine per week or fortnight is not as harmful as having a bottle or two of wine per night.

See this speech in context