John Crown (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I must correct Senator Barrett, who is normally very numerate and statistically astute. He is incorrect in this regard. The reality is that Ireland is placed approximately third in the global league table for the documented consumption of raw alcohol, as measured in terms of litres consumed per head of population. The figures referred to by Senator Barrett related to litres of alcoholic drink. In that league table, a litre of beer, which might be 4% alcohol, would count the same as a litre of whiskey. That is the problem we have there.

The reality is that Ireland's consumption of pure alcohol, per head of population, increased from approximately three or four litres in the 1960s to approximately 17 or 18 litres at the height of the Celtic tiger before dropping slightly to approximately 14 litres in recent years due to recessionary pressures and, perhaps, some issues relating to health consciousness. If one tries to convince the few citizens who are aware of what is discussed in this Chamber that we are somehow in a healthy place in the international alcohol league table, or if one tries to make that point outside this Chamber, one will be incorrect.

I would like to make it clear, with deference to my colleagues, that publicans are not social workers. It has been suggested in this House and at the Joint Committee on Health and Children that alcohol is somehow healthier when it is supervised and administered by friendly apron-wearing publicans who care for one when one enters the premises, who make sure one does not over-consume and who see one safely home. That is not the case. I am sure there are individual publicans who are deeply dug into their communities and are highly responsible people. The alcohol industry collectively exists for the sole purpose of selling alcohol. The governmental public health process is diametrically opposed to the entire apparatus of the alcohol industry, from the friendly local publican to the member of the board of a major international drinks conglomerate. We are adversaries. We are trying to do different things. They want more people to drink more alcohol. We want fewer people to drink less alcohol. This is the exact reality. We should not engage with them other than to rein them in and discipline them. It is insane to see them as partners in a process of reducing alcohol consumption.

A comparison can be made with the new codes of practice that are developing around the issue of tobacco. There is a worldwide movement to have no contact between politicians and those representing the tobacco industry. The same thing should happen in the case of the alcohol industry. We should be trying to rein in its activities. We should set our noses into the wind as we strive to accomplish our goal of decreasing this country's alcohol consumption dramatically - perhaps to a level one half, one quarter or one third of what it is now. On the way to that nirvana, we should set a goal of having zero advertising of alcohol. I remind the House again that it is an addictive, cancer-causing toxin. Who should be allowed to advertise the sale of an addictive, cancer-causing toxin? I suggest that this prohibition should extend beyond the classic paid or for-profit advertising that is administered by the advertising sector. We should have no more pictures of Taoisigh, Presidents or Ministers using wine, beer or other types of alcohol as the centrepiece of their welcome to dignitaries who are visiting Ireland. It is no longer appropriate. I am sure they can be socially photographed with a glass of wine in front of them if they are at a dinner.

I wish the Minister of State well. He has taken on a tough job in a big tough macro-health-economic situation. I believe we can afford to make changes in this area. We cannot afford not to make them.

I would say to him to be bold, brave and revolutionary.