Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

1. To ask the Taoiseach if he will provide an update on the work of the working group on regulating sponsorship by alcohol companies of major sporting events; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40960/14]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The interdepartmental working group on regulating sponsorship by alcohol companies of major sporting events was established as part of a package of measures to address alcohol misuse agreed by the Government in late 2013. In the case of sports sponsorship by alcohol companies, the Government acknowledged the public health concerns associated with alcohol sponsorship of sport but also the potential impact of any regulation on funding for sport, and established the working group to consider the "value, evidence, feasibility and implications of regulating sponsorship of major sporting events".

The working group was chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach and included representatives from the Departments of Health; Public Expenditure and Reform; Finance; Social Protection; Transport, Tourism and Sport; Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht; Agriculture, Food and the Marine; Children and Youth Affairs; and Education and Skills. It held a public consultation process seeking relevant information from interested parties. Nineteen submissions were received in response to this request and these are available on my Department's website.

The working group finalised its report in December and it has been considered by the Cabinet committee on social policy and public service reform. The report is also available on my Department's website.

Arising from consideration by the Cabinet committee, the Minister for Health finalised proposals on the Bill in conjunction with his ministerial colleagues and brought these to Government last week. The Government gave approval for the drafting of a Public Health (Alcohol) Bill and the Minister for Health has published the general scheme of the Bill. Any questions on the Government's proposals can be referred to the Minister for Health. I also anticipate that the relevant Oireachtas committee will have an opportunity to consider the general scheme he has published as part of the pre-legislative scrutiny process, which is another element of Dáil reform.

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On what moral or ethical basis does the Taoiseach believe it is appropriate that we impose a ban on tobacco sponsorship of sport in this country, yet he has failed to grasp the opportunity to impose a similar ban on alcohol sponsorship, given that alcohol causes far more damage to individuals and families throughout the State?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not accept the Deputy's assertion. This was given careful consideration. Clearly, marketing and advertising are inherent parts of sponsorship. The Government and the working group looked carefully at this in the 19 submissions that were made. There will be serious regulation of both the marketing and the advertising, which have an impact on young people and particularly on those who are vulnerable to excessive drinking.

As was pointed out by every group, access and affordability are the key issues that have an impact on young people in respect of drink and the consequences of continuous over-drinking. Under the proposed legislation the Minister will be able to introduce restrictive practices for marketing campaigns to ensure that alcohol products are not produced, designed or promoted to appeal to children. On those grounds, the difference between drink and tobacco is quite clear. Marketing and advertising are inherent parts of sponsorship and for that reason the general scheme of the Bill published by the Minister will regulate those aspects of marketing and advertising which might impact directly on young people and particularly children.

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach said he does not accept my assertion. Does he accept that the Government's steering group on national substance misuse in September 2012 found that a quarter of Irish adults binge drink every week and that the average Irish person drinks the equivalent of 482 pints of lager, 125 bottles of wine or 45 bottles of vodka every year? Does he accept that 1.5 million Irish adults are drinking in a way that is harmful to their health, that over 50% of 16 year olds have been drunk and that one in five 16 year olds drink on a regular weekly basis?

It is extraordinary that the Taoiseach does not see the correlation. The most lucrative, targeted and effective form of advertising is to link a product to sport. Sport is sexy and the vast majority of people, particularly young people, are interested in sport. That is the reason the alcohol companies sponsor these major sporting events. It is the reason that Benson & Hedges sponsored cricket, Embassy sponsored darts, Winston and Camel sponsored the FIFA World Cup, Silk Cut sponsored the rugby league and Regal and Winfield also sponsored rugby. It is the reason that motor sports were sponsored by Imperial Tobacco, Rizla and so forth. In this State, Carrolls, Benson & Hedges and all the familiar cigarette companies sponsored almost all of the major sporting events until the ban was introduced and the sponsorship was phased out. There was no difficulty finding alternative sources of sponsorship funding. I have no doubt that the many foreign companies investing in Ireland, such as Google and the technology companies, would love the opportunity to be associated with major sporting events in this country. I cannot understand why the Government, which made such strong noises about this subject earlier in its terms, has caved to vested interests.

The gap is €20 million. That is the sum for alcohol sponsorship in this State in a range of sports. Why can the Taoiseach not see beyond the short term? Why will he not agree at least to phasing this in? I do not understand it; it is illogical. It worked with tobacco and is effective. Along with other measures, it is reducing the number of young people who are taking up smoking. As somebody who was formerly quite a heavy smoker, I consider that an extremely positive step.

The problem is that we have a huge number of mental health issues and an unacceptable level of suicides, which is directly linked to alcohol consumption in many cases and particularly in respect of young men. However, the Government is burying its head in the sand. It appears to be unconcerned about trying to address it.

Finally, does the Taoiseach agree with his fellow county man and former GAA president, Dr. Mick Loftus? He said: "As a doctor and former coroner, I know first hand the damage alcohol does. Eighty-eight people a month die in this country due to alcohol related reasons. If that number of people were dying any other way they would be taking all sorts of action to try and stop it, but instead they are promoting it." That is the stark reality. I urge the Taoiseach to listen to the expert medical advice of his fellow county man, who also happens to be a very prominent figure in sporting circles and especially in the GAA.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Creighton failed to address in her question the two fundamental issues that are accepted by everybody - availability and affordability. She will have seen the pallets of cheep beer being sold in every small shop throughout the country. Availability and affordability are the key determinants of access to drink and abuse of drink, particularly among vulnerable and younger people. I do not accept-----

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On a point of order-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, resume your seat. You had a good run.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy made no point about that.

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is not the question I asked.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Resume your seat. The Taoiseach is entitled to expand on his point.

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question was specifically about sponsorship and advertising. The Taoiseach can answer the question I asked or he can answer a question that he wanted me to ask.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy, please resume your seat.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am entitled to reply to the Deputy's question-----

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish he would.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----by pointing to what the Deputy failed to address in her question, the two key determinants.

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked about advertising.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is the reason minimum unit pricing will be introduced-----

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Answer the question.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----as well as segregation and separation within commercial outlets. There will be proper regulation of the advertising and marketing where sponsorship is involved.

The Irish cricket team is in India. It failed to get sponsorship from the companies the Deputy mentioned which are not associated with either drink or tobacco. For the last number of years the Irish Open has had to be funded by the taxpayer through Fáilte Ireland. There was no take-up from commercial companies, where one might think it would be easy to sponsor such an event.

It is true that there are serious mental health issues in the country. That is the reason ring-fenced moneys have been made available for the past number of years by the Government and there is more help available then ever before. Young people in particular are advised to talk about these matters and to open up, discuss and connect with their peers.

I do not accept the Deputy's statement that the Government has caved to vested interests. This matter has been discussed here for six years and nobody has done anything about it.

In this case, the Government has acted decisively. Everyone will have an opportunity to say his or her piece during the course of the discussion on the Bill being drafted by the Minister. The Bill will set out the areas in which there will be regulation and a serious impact in terms of labelling, minimum unit pricing, enforcement powers for environmental health officers, regulation of advertising and the marketing of alcohol. All of these things will have an impact on access, affordability and the way alcohol is perceived by young people and vulnerable drinkers.

Dr. Loftus has been for many years an advocate for sport and physical well-being. He still has the opportunity to jog a few kilometres every day himself, being someone who was a noted Gaelic footballer way back in the early 1950s. He has been very consistent in his view on alcohol. Even he will accept that the introduction of regulations on advertising, marketing, separation within commercial outlets and the introduction of labelling will have an impact on general physical health and, as a consequence, mental well-being, and that access and affordability, as the Deputy well knows, are issues which impact on many young people. I accept the person involved has been a very strong advocate of better lifestyles and well-being and of people taking better care of themselves. The Bill will be very much be in line with this.

I ask the Deputy to read the report which is on the website. She will see the difficulty in trying to separate sponsorship from marketing and advertising. The Deputy is also aware that, as a country, we are limited in many ways on this issue because in many ways we cannot regulate multimedia outlets and particular products. The focus of Government is on separating out sponsorship, which has an inherent impact on advertising and marketing. It is coming after six years of discussion, during which no one wanted to do anything about this. Now it is being done and I hope it will have a very beneficial impact.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have raised the issue of alcohol abuse in society and, in particular, the public health (alcohol) Bill with the Taoiseach many times. There are good things in this Bill. Let me say that and also that we welcome these. However, on the issue of drinks sponsorship of sporting events, the Bill will fail miserably. This is despite the fact that this is one of the issues it is supposed to tackle.

I have a whole pile of statistics from reputable agencies but I do not have the time to go through them in this House today. Professor Joe Barry puts it best when he states that, simply put, alcohol sponsorship of sports works in terms of increasing sales and alcohol consumption and that, if it did not, the alcohol industry would not be spending so much money on it. It is also scientifically proven that teenagers and young people are most at risk through this promotion and the alliance between some of the drinks companies and sporting events.

To keep this short, the Minister, when he was putting forward his Bill, stated that the sporting organisations need the €30 million which such deals bring in. It appears to me that this is the nub of the Government's acquiescence on this issue. I appeal to the Taoiseach. It is not too late. Only the heads of the Bill have been published. The Government can still rescue this by listening to the public and, in particular, the experts and by doing the right thing, which is to ban alcohol sponsorship of sporting events. Will the Taoiseach consider this and amend the Bill accordingly?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This appears to be a complete U-turn. We were led to believe for the past two years that a ban on sponsorship was going to happen and that it was going to be phased in. The Minister for Health, who should be standing up for public health, was in a very weak position because when he was Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, he railed within Cabinet against the idea of banning alcohol sponsorship. He was very much against the views of the then Minister of State, Deputy Róisín Shortall, who initially pioneered this legislation.

I put it to the Taoiseach that many measures on reducing alcohol consumption have been taken. One of the most effective measures has been random breath testing, which was brought in by the former Minister and Deputy, Noel Dempsey. This had a very significant impact, as it did in other countries, although he took a lot of criticism for it at the time.

The issue of sponsorship and the recipient bodies in sport, arts or culture was faced by Australia many years ago in the context of tobacco sponsorship. It was also faced by us. When I banned tobacco sponsorship in Ireland, the major sporting event was the snooker championship. The marketing and promotion unit of the Department of Health took over the sponsorship. We turned what was a negative in terms of public health into a positive. It may have seemed unlikely at the time, but the event was festooned with positive health messages and anti-tobacco messages for approximately three years. Australia did this much more comprehensively in the context of positive health and its promotion by turning around the tobacco sponsorship agenda and supplanting the money with money from the Australian exchequer.

The sense is that the industry got its way on this. Sponsorship has been controversial for quite some time. Within the GAA, we have had the Guinness sponsorship for quite a long time. Many young people, some of whom I know, were so absorbed by the quality of the sponsorship and all that went with it that they could draw Seán Óg Ó hAilpín with a hurley and a pint of Murphy's at the end of it. They would readily draw and depict Amstel sponsoring the European Champions League. It does have an impact. We have to face up to it.

In advertising, it is more complex. We have terrestrial television, Sky, multiple channels and so on. It is very difficult, therefore, to regulate that which is global. In terms of sponsorship, the situation is different. The idea of identifying how to bridge the gap has not been effectively explored. This goes down to the local festival. Many of our festivals are alcohol-soaked, whether we like it or not, because they depend on the sponsorship of an alcohol company to support them.

We did not have real debate on this in the House. The Government kept this very tight until it made the announcement that the Bill was in and the decision had been taken. We did not have a wider and more open debate on ensuring that cultural, artistic and sporting associations would not suffer, for instance, by a combination of other sponsors and some State support. Does the Taoiseach not agree that such an examination should take place on Committee Stage in this House? It could look at the issue in terms of the various groups and how we might best bridge that gap. We could have a proper assessment of how one would bridge that gap and how bridgeable the gap is. We have not had that debate or worked through those particular mechanics and implications of the Bill.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How on earth can the Taoiseach speak about separating sponsorship of sports events by alcoholic drinks companies from marketing and be serious? What is the point of the sponsorship by the alcohol companies except to market their product? More fundamentally, is it not perverse in the extreme that major alcoholic drinks companies are allowed to advertise freely and use massive funds to advertise the product ethyl alcohol, which is by far the most destructive drug in society at present? People who push illegal drugs are despised and denigrated in the media. However, the biggest legal drug pushers of all are the major alcohol companies and they are lionised and validated. Does the Taoiseach not see a huge contradiction in how his Government and the establishment have for decades and generations treated alcohol companies?

Can I ask the Taoiseach to agree that it would be very socially progressive to ban all advertising of alcoholic drinks products and to confine information on alcohol in any advertising to places where alcohol is and should be available to people? It should not be glamorised and outed in the way that is done at present. How can the Taoiseach seriously talk about divorcing the general advertising of alcoholic products from appealing to children? Does he not see on the national television channels, for example, that by far the most expensively produced, technically brilliant and artistically imaginative advertisements are usually those for alcohol? Given that they incorporate colour and movement and invoke themes that attract children, such as the heroic legends of the past, how on earth can the Taoiseach speak about a type of alcohol advertising that does not attract children?

I am by no means an abolitionist. Alcohol is a pleasant product. It is a good substance in its place. People should have the right to enjoy it. The lethal side effects of alcohol unfortunately have to be recognised. In my view, any drug of this power should be publicly owned. It should not be the source of private profiteering by privateers. Any excess made in the sale of alcohol by a publicly owned entity should be devoted to education, harm reduction in relation to that drug and health remediation where unfortunately there are casualties of it.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask the Taoiseach to reply again now before I call the last two Deputies. We have spent 23 minutes on this question so far. There are other questions.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Should we not come in first then?

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. It would not be practical to get back to the points made by the other Deputies.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The points made by the Deputies are very valid. The Government considered this matter carefully before it arrived at this decision. Discussions have been going on here for six years. Sponsorship cannot be considered as an isolated issue. It is directly related to marketing, advertising and other forms of promotion. That is the problem. That was identified clearly by the working group that dealt with 19 different serious submissions, which are published on the website. That is why the Government looked at this in a comprehensive way. It dealt with promotional activities, labelling, outdoor advertising, television and cinema advertising and sponsorship. As Deputies are aware, a number of channels come in on people's mobile phones, tablets and televisions from other countries that have different standards. One cannot just block out an advertisement that suddenly goes beyond the jurisdiction of its own country.

It is clear that alcohol marketing has a very important role in fostering consumption of alcohol. A range of studies have shown that young people who are exposed to alcohol marketing are more likely to start drinking at an earlier age or, if they are already drinking, are likely to drink more. These points have been made by Deputies. That is why the Government has now decided to act in respect of minimum unit pricing; availability and affordability; and marketing, advertising and sponsorship.

Deputy Martin said we did not have a discussion here. No, we did not. We have had discussions for six years. We are now at the pre-legislative scrutiny stage. I guarantee the Deputy that everybody will have an opportunity to state his or her case. When the Bill comes back here, there will be full discussions at the committee and back in the House.

Deputy Higgins made a good point. It is true that much of the advertising seen on television is technically brilliant, very artistic and full of movement and energy. That is exactly the reason the Government intends to regulate marketing and advertising. Drink can be advertised, but young people cannot associate alcohol with being impossibly thin, beautiful or world-famous. Equally, the laochraí of the past and the wonderful things that happen in sport cannot be directly associated with the consumption of alcohol. That is where the regulation of marketing and advertising, about which Deputies have made points, will take place. Just because drink is advertised, it will not be possible for it to be associated in young people's minds with prowess on the sporting field or the athletics track, with accuracy or with all of these other things. That is exactly why the regulation will be introduced for marketing and advertising.

While it will be possible for festivals to be supported in terms of sponsorship, the marketing and advertising associated with that will not be focused on young people being all-achievers as a consequence of alcohol consumption. The same thing will apply to cinemas and other places where this will apply. The Government has made a series of decisions here with particular reference to labelling, general health, the carrying of identification, minimum unit pricing, affordability and accessibility. All the studies show that this will have an impact on young people and, in particular, vulnerable people. For those who might be more experienced in drinking in terms of their years, it is not going to have an undue impact on the current situation where the alcohol consumed is of a level where people appreciate its quality. In that sense, I think the pre-legislative scrutiny will give Members and other groups an opportunity to state their case.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Deputies Mathews and Boyd Barrett to be quick because we want to get on to the other questions.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is obvious from the contributions that have been made and the questions that have been raised that this is a key issue in Irish society at the moment. As Deputy Martin said, this process has been going on for six years. I agree with Deputy Creighton that we have now reached the crunch time. As the leader of the country, the Taoiseach should not suggest that the Government says this or thinks that.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Deputy put his question, please?

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, a Cheann Comhairle-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry too. We have spent almost 30 minutes on this question. I have to think of other Deputies who have questions here. We cannot make-----

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Maybe in future the Chair might like to ask me first.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, I do not have to ask you at all, Deputy.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am just giving you a suggestion.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not your question.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a suggestion.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do not have suggestions - we have questions.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Every time it comes to my turn to make a contribution-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is Question Time. You have to ask a question.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----or ask a question, you say "we are out of time, look at the clock, blah blah blah". It is the same business.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Please put a question. You have no question down on this.

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am putting a question. I am asking why the Taoiseach is not grabbing this by the neck and saying, "I want the Government to bring in a restriction on sponsorship, marketing and advertising". If the leader of our country cannot join up the dots, we are in a bad way. It is very simple.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to come at this issue slightly differently. I certainly have no particular truck for the drinks industry as it pumps its products at young people through advertising. I would like to hear a little more detail in this debate about the precise link between advertising and levels of alcohol consumption. To my mind, there were chronic problems of alcohol abuse in the days before there was any advertising. This was often linked to deprivation. We need to discuss these things. I do not make that comment in defence of the drinks industry. Alcohol abuse among any group in society, including young people, is quite a complicated issue.

As I am coming at this from a slightly different angle, I want to know whether the Taoiseach believes it would be worth considering putting extra taxes on the corporate profits of the drinks industry. Is there not a case for that, given that problems related to alcohol abuse have such a huge cost for Irish society at so many different levels?

Setting aside the wider debate on corporation tax, which as the Taoiseach knows I feel is too low, is there not a good case for applying a special levy on the profits of the drinks industry and using that money for rehabilitation programmes, sport, youth services and community services? The conundrum of where to get extra revenue for sports and young people could be solved by directly taxing the enormous profits of the alcohol industry.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I said, the Government has made a decision. It has asked the Minister and given him authorisation to go and produce the Bill. It will deal with below-cost selling, minimum unit pricing, advertising, marketing and labelling. It is not as simple - believe me, Deputy Mathews - as just saying "Ban the lot," because-----

Peter Mathews (Dublin South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We did it with smokeless fuels.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----sponsorship of any description carries with it an inherent association with marketing and advertising. That is why, as I said in response to other questions, the Government will regulate this very clearly.

There is a massive amount of evidence available - a compelling body of evidence, I might say, a Cheann Comhairle - that where young people are exposed to alcohol marketing, whether it be on television, in public places or in the cinema, this encourages access to alcohol and, as a consequence, abuse for those who are vulnerable, particularly for those who have started to drink or who are likely to start to drink. It impacts more in terms of low-cost alcohol being freely available at very low prices. The Government has made a decision to act really decisively in this area so that many hundreds of festivals around the country can still be sponsored, but the marketing and the advertising associated with those festivals will not and cannot be focused on young people to create a perception that the use of drink, such as is involved, allows them to do all things in an extraordinary way. That is where the regulation will apply and that is where every Deputy can have a say at the pre-scrutiny stage when it comes back here.

As I said to Deputy Creighton in the beginning, while it might be easy to assume that companies will take up the opportunity to sponsor, it does not always happen. As I said, the Irish cricket team is in India and the Irish Open has been sponsored by the taxpayer for the last number of years. If particular companies wish to get involved in sponsorship, then that is their right.

This is a genuine attempt by the Government to deal with something that is a scourge to many families and that results in the use of up to 2,000 beds per night in public hospitals because of drink-related consequences for those who are unfortunate enough to get locked into that.