Rónán Mullen (Independent)

Ba bhreá liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire. I am glad the Minister of State is present. From discussing other issues with him, I am aware that he is an extremely practical individual. I am delighted by his attitude and that of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. I welcome the fact that the Government proposes to take action in the matter.

We should consider banning not merely the drugs sold but also head shops. There are those who state widespread bans are difficult to implement both in law and in practice. However, implementing such bans is not as difficult as people might think. There is much we can do in the context of placing the onus on those who provide services in our society and ensuring they meet the standards we set. People should be obliged to seek permission to open certain establishments or sell particular products. I would not see a great difficulty with restricting the sale of these substances and products. We could also do a great deal to hinder and prevent the establishment of outlets such as those under discussion.

A comprehensive approach to banning is necessary in this instance. As long as they are in existence, head shops will find loopholes that will permit them to sell new versions of drugs which have already been banned. They celebrate and facilitate the culture of drug abuse and dependence. One need only consider the paraphernalia and products sold and promoted, whether on t-shirts or through other merchandise, to see how profoundly antisocial these establishments are. Parents and teachers are right to be outraged about the phenomenon that is head shops.

We must pose a number of questions with regard to civic culture. Are we witnessing a breakdown, to some degree, in that culture, particularly in the context of the massive rise in the number of head shops in such a short period? I understand that in Ireland alone one new head shop opens each week. That is an extremely unpleasant reality. At the rate at which they are opening, we cannot afford not to take action as soon as possible. It is terrible to think some of these shops remain open until 4 a.m. to attract the business of young people. In addition, some of them run home delivery services. It is also terrible that a significant percentage of the teenagers who use these products mix them with alcohol.

This problem does not merely relate to people using drugs and bringing upon themselves and others the various social and familial downsides which accompany such behaviour. In the light of the demand for the products on offer in head shops, one must wonder about the quality of parenting delivered in this country. This is another instance of the behaviour which occurs on Holy Thursday and which involves people knocking each other down on the way to the off-licence. What is happening with the Irish psyche when people feel this absurd need to approach the limits when it comes to accessing addictive substances?

I am particularly concerned about the role of parents. Parents have lost confidence when it comes to educating their children. Teachers and civic leaders all have a responsibility in this regard. However, what we see today is the outcome of something which began many years ago. If parents do not actively seek to influence their children or impress values upon them at a very young age, it should come as no surprise that a phenomenon such as the rise of head shops should emerge or that many will not be able to resist the allure of what is on offer.

We must ask serious questions about this matter, not merely with regard to the need to regulate or impose restrictions. We must rediscover our belief in behavioural change. Those who form policy, politicians, civil servants and parents often lose confidence with regard to the possibilities offered by such change. This is not just an Irish phenomenon, it is worldwide. I read an article in The Washington Post in recent days which indicated that abstinence campaigns, when conducted properly, could actually work. The Obama administration is running away from such campaigns because it is afraid of being judgmental and also because it believes they will not work. Such campaigns also arise in the context of the discussion of the AIDS problem in Africa.

If one is intent on tackling social problems in a serious manner, one must change people's hearts and minds. It is not possible to control such problems solely by using the law. The latter is extremely weak unless cultural transformation underlies it. On their own, laws will not prevent problems or bring them to a halt. In that context, it is necessary to work on people's attitudes. The only way to build a civic culture where people have the right attitude towards substances such as those sold in head shops is by starting early. Serious engagement must occur at the earliest stage of people's lives and at the earliest stage of their education. In addition, the State must work with their parents.

What I am saying may sound airy fairy but it is the work which must be done. Otherwise, one will be, to use an Irish phrase, ag feadaíl in aghaidh na gaoithe agus tú ag iarraidh stop a chur le fadhbanna le dlíthe amháin. I do not, however, suggest the law is not a key element. However, it must be integrated within a deeper philosophy. We cannot just have law now because enough people are ringing up Joe Duffy's radio show or because some politicians are jumping up and down about what is happening in their constituencies. Law needs to be grounded in a more long-term analysis of what constitutes the social good.

Last month Britain introduced a ban on legal highs, building on the legislation that had already banned a great number of chemical substances for human consumption in Britain. The drugs that head shops were selling were banned because these highs were directly linked to a number of deaths as we all know. In addition to the numerous deaths, we know of other health problems that have been linked to them, including severe heart problems, seizures, brain damage and so on. With the new legislation in Britain anyone caught in possession of these drugs now faces the possibility of a two-year jail sentence. Even with this breakthrough in legislation, there still exists on-line head shops and head shops in Northern Ireland and the Republic, which have not been banned as we know. The key point about the British legislation is that it has provided us with a precedent. Sadly in Ireland we are very slow to act unless we get example from some other country and we then feel we have permission to act - otherwise we might be a bit timid. It reminds me of the line from the Bible that the meek shall inherit the earth - if that is all right with you fellows. Of course the Americans say that the meek shall inherit the earth, but not the mineral rights.

There are numerous dangers associated with these legal highs as we know. For instance the legal drug GBL is a liquid that was originally used as an industrial cleaner to strip paint from walls and remove graffiti. I apologise for putting on the record what many of us already know. We now see this being actively marketed by head shops. We know of the side effects including serious heart problems, vomiting, anxiety attacks, mood swings, seizures and even death. Again we are back to the same problem. Sometimes it does not seem to matter how many downsides are pointed out to people; there will still be a potential market for risk taking. That is why I regret the type of damage limitation approach that is sometimes adopted in the area of drugs whereby some people feel we should engage in harm reduction strategies or as Senator Norris was proposing the legalisation and regulation of drugs. I believe this is an outdated vision and sometimes wonder why people push these ideas that are so out of date. Are they trying to be daring? Do they have a deep desire to be anti-social or do they cling to the naïve view that these solutions actually work? Certainly based on experience in places like Switzerland and the Netherlands, I do not believe they are happy with having gone down the liberal route. I believe I would be supported in that by, for example, Grainne Kenny of Europe Against Drugs.

On the other side of the Atlantic there has been a weaker approach to the problem, perhaps borne out of a laissez-faire approach in the United States. There are legal grey areas with consequent problems for people.

Mar achoimre gairid ar an méid a bhí le rá agam, ní amháin go gcaithfimid cosc a chur le drugaí ach caithfimid cosc a chur leis na siopaí drugaí seo. Ní cóir go mbeadh muid sásta le dlíthe amháin. Caithfimid breathnú athuair ar cén chaoi gur féidir linn cultúr agus sibhialtacht choinsiasach a chothú i measc daoine óga. Caithfimid breathnú ar an gcóras oideachais agus ar an ról atá ag tuismitheoirí agus caithfimid féachaint cad iad na pleananna atá uainn chun cabhrú le tuismitheoirí ionas gur féidir leo na luachanna cuí a mhúineadh do pháistí le nach mbeidh éileamh ar an sórt siopa nó an sórt drugaí seo amach anseo. While we need law and it should certainly be restrictive, let us not forget we need more long-term strategies to promote the culture that will make those laws credible in the eyes of younger people and their families.