Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Like others, I begin my expressing my sympathies to the families of the 1,709 people who have passed away because of Covid-19 and my solidarity with those who have been ill.

Unusually for the Opposition benches, I congratulate the Minister and his team and NPHET for handling this unique crisis with great dexterity and skill. The Minister has not been right in everything he has done but one cannot in the midst of a crisis make the right decisions all of the time. All of the actions to date have been based on expert health advice and have been explained setting out the reasons and underlying science for each decision. This has resulted in a response from an intelligent Irish people accepting and supporting each restriction and action to date. It is in this context I want to raise a number of questions, the first of which relates to the leaked guidelines and protocols for the reopening of pubs because I believe they require some explanation.

I appears that pubs that serve food are to be allowed to reopen and pubs that do not serve food will not be able to reopen. This is anchored in the Intoxicating Liquor Act of the 1960s referenced by Deputy O'Reilly, which is about controlling the consumption of alcohol and has nothing to do with infectious diseases. How is it that the consumption of food is an issue and that an arbitrary figure of €9, which apparently is an updated figure on the 5 shillings that was provided for in the 1962 Act, is to be the criterion? Under the protection of health criteria, it is not permissible for a person to attend a licensed premises for 90 minutes and not consume food. All regulations to date are anchored and designed to combat viral transmission. This has to remain at the heart of everything we do. Like others, I am contacted daily by hairdressers and people in other businesses who want to reopen. We need to have sound, logical expert reasoning to give to them. I regret that what is happening in terms of these draft guidelines erodes that. Consuming food provides no additional protection. Consuming a chicken korma or a cottage pie does not provide a person with extra protection against the virus. Why would that criterion be a determinant? I ask the Minister to explain that. Also, why is 90 minutes a determinant? We had a long debate on the two-hour rule in regard to this House. We need to bring people with us all of the time. The Minister mentioned complacency. We cannot be complacent. We must have very clear guidelines. We brought people on this journey with us on the basis of explaining the facts and people understanding and accepting that this was the best advice. I ask the Minister to explain the science in regard to the 90 minutes and the consumption of food.

See this speech in context