Seanad debates

Thursday, 18 April 2013

Public Health (Tobacco) (Amendment) Bill 2013: Second Stage

 

1:05 pm

Photo of James ReillyJames Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators for their support in the battle against tobacco. I understand the sentiments expressed about the European Court of Justice's ruling. In my opening contribution I alluded to the fact that I had asked my Department to investigate how we could amending the directive - in other words, change the legislation - in order that it did not apply to matters of public health, which clearly would be in the common good.

There is no need for me to rehash what we have said about the damage this product causes to people and the fact that the industry focuses on children, which is particularly disgraceful. I acknowledge the dissatisfaction expressed about the ending of the minimum pricing of cigarettes. I know Senators understand Ireland has an obligation to comply with this decision. We are bound by the European Court of Justice's ruling; there is not an á la carte menu available. As Ireland is bound by the legislation in Europe, the way to tackle this issue is to go through the legislative process to try to get support in Europe for this approach.

The tobacco directive is going through the European Union. It is one of the main planks of our Presidency and I want to see it progressed. We are gathering support for it, but some countries have very strong tobacco lobbyists and industries and we will meet resistance. For instance, it was made very clear to me that if I went for plain packaging in the directive, it would not get through, but I want to bring that in here and have given an undertaking to that effect. I hope to bring a memorandum to the Government in the next few weeks to seek support for this.

The directive is very important because it refers to the percentage of a pack that can be given over to the health warning and pictures. It also refers to flavourings. Commissioner Tonio Borg has made the point that tobacco should look like tobacco and also taste like it. Adding menthol and other flavourings to disguise the bad taste does a disservice. Sometimes the human body has an innate ability to avoid danger and taste is one method by which it does so. Pure tobacco tastes bad because, as we know, it is. Why should we allow the industry to disguise the nature of its product in the way it advertises, packages or flavours it?

I have no objection to the sentiments expressed by Senators in terms of sending a message to the European Union that we find this ruling extremely difficult to understand, that it runs counter to the common good, that it allows commercial enterprise to supersede the well-being of people and that it pushes forward a theory that there is a choice to be made between jobs and lives when it does not have to be this way. As I have pointed out and Senator John Crown re-emphasised, we should encourage people into other industries which do not carry such catastrophic consequences for the children whom they are trying to get to use their product and the citizen of Europe.

Many Senators repeated the well established link between price and cigarette consumption. As I said, there are 5,200 deaths per year in this country which are attributable to smoking. That works out at a figure of 100 citizens each week, including friends and family members. I lost a brother who was a doctor - an epidemiologist - who had studied the tobacco industry, had much information on what it was at and how it was striving to reach nirvana where following the consumption of one 20-pack, one would be addicted. So strong was his addiction that he kept smoking even until the day he died.

We must protect our children and I know that everybody in the House agrees. I must apply the law and that is why I must introduce the Bill. I have said in the other Chamber, and I shall say it again here, I intend to make this a pyrrhic victory for the tobacco industry. It might have a slight smile on its face but it will be nothing when compared with the moans and groans it will endure under this Government and for as long as I am Minister for Health.

More than 5,200 people die prematurely each year which is 19% of all deaths here. We know that one in two smokers will die from their smoking habit. Smoking is lethal and the Government must and will act. I shall repeat a point that I have made on several occasions. I have never met a smoker who wanted his or her child to smoke. Not even the representative of the smoking industry at the European hearings by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, ENVI, was prepared to do so. He said that he did but he certainly did not say that he wanted his children to smoke.

Forest is an organisation that represents smokers but its use of the term is cynical. Forests are the lungs of the world but the organisation promotes a habit that wrecks lungs, lives and the environment.

It is heartening that research shows that the number of children smoking has reduced but I accept that we must do a lot more. The younger people are when they start smoking the longer and more heavily they are likely to smoke. We know that the majority of smokers became addicted in childhood and I mentioned a survey revealed that it was 78%, a fact worth repeating.

The introduction of warning pictures on packets and the ban on displaying products in shops will, in my view, have a significant impact on young people in the long term. The plain packaging of tobacco packets is another initiative that will assist in making smoking less attractive to children. Offering a cigarette from a plain packet, even if one is a child, means that any child with two eyes in their head will wonder about cigarettes. They will decide that they do not want to look cool and end up with a disease.

All of the little things that we do to tackle the problem will give us what we all want, a tobacco-free society. De-normalising smoking will play a great part in achieving same. The strategy that is being finalised in my Department will strive to achieve such a society.

We have already discussed the introduction of the smoking ban in cars when children are present. We know the initiative is about protecting the health of children, not infringing the rights of people. Other initiatives include banning smoking in playgrounds, sports stadia and other places where children and young people congregate. I congratulate and acknowledge those who have already taken steps in this regard. Many local authorities, including Fingal in my constituency, have made the decision to ban smoking in public playgrounds. The Aviva Stadium is part of the European healthy stadia network and operates a no smoking policy. The HSE is rolling out its tobacco-free campus policy with a view to having it operating on all sites by 2015.

Let us think of the unintended consequences of actions. A ban on smoking in hospitals has resulted in people standing at the front door of the premises acting like an advertisement hoarding when sick people enter. An alternative smoking area should be provided off campus where smoking is allowed.

I understand how difficult it is to stop smoking as I used to smoke. Luckily, like Senator Norris, I was not as heavily addicted to smoking as two members of my family. They smoked two cigarettes each before having breakfast.

The illicit trading of cigarettes was mentioned. From a public health perspective, it is my job to prevent people from smoking cigarettes whether they are legal or illegal. The bottom line is, tackling the illicit trade of tobacco directly rests with the Revenue Commissioners. It is an enforcement issue. The Revenue Commissioners attaches a high priority to combatting smuggling and the illegal sale of tobacco products. It is implementing its comprehensive strategy to tackle the problem. In 2012 nearly 96 million cigarettes and 5,000 kg of tobacco were seized and there were 132 convictions for the smuggling of illegal cigarettes or the illegal sale of tobacco. Therefore, we should not allow the illicit trade of tobacco to become an obstacle or an argument against the introduction of public health tobacco policies and legislation. Successful public health policies and strategies for tackling illicit trade can operate effectively side by side and one is never an excuse for the other.

I have said on record before that I would love to see cigarettes cost €1 each so people would think long and hard before inhaling. It has been shown elsewhere that people are price sensitive. A lot of prices are introduced incrementally but a sudden shock increase would make many people stop and think about smoking.

So many of the legislative measures that we have undertaken have put us to the fore internationally. I acknowledge one of my predecessors, Deputy Micheál Martin, who introduced the smoking ban. Many of the measures were facilitated by developments at European level. It is important that our tobacco policy and legislative framework continues to develop within the context of a European Commission.

I shall return to a key point made by Senators. I want to change the law rather than break it and that shall be the focus of the tobacco unit in my Department. I welcome the Tobacco Product Directive. I know that it shall not be as easy to progress as Senators may think because many forces are at play. As I spoke, I was reminded of an episode of the "Yes, Prime Minister" television series that was devoted to banning smoking. I am confident that the outcome of the revision of the directive, together with the publication of the tobacco strategy, will go a significant way in moving us towards a tobacco free society.

Senator Barrett and other Senators spoke about driving down profit. I agree with them that we should do everything that we can to drive down profit while driving up the price.

A couple of other issues were raised. The HSE is still running two successful campaigns and the number of calls to its helpline has greatly increased in the past number of months.

Senators Norris, Crown, Quinn and other Senators alluded to the fact that they have never seen three-for-one promotions. They have not because such promotion has never been necessary. As opportunities to sell tobacco products diminish further the Senators can be damn sure that the industry will explore every avenue to promote their products. I do not want to see a large multiple advertising a promotion offering customers 20 free cigarettes with every €100 worth of groceries. The legislation will prevent such promotions.

Very often we are reactive rather than proactive. The Bill is proactive and will send a message to the industry. I am aware that the Office of Tobacco Control was broken into in Europe. The perpetrators scaled down the building from the roof, cut holes in the glass, entered the premises and stole hard drives from computers but from that office only. Ceist beag de gach éinne anseo, who has the money, the sophistication and the motivation to carry out such an operation?

In conclusion, I am not pleased that we must reduce minimum pricing for tobacco products. I am concerned that it makes our issues surrounding the minimum pricing of alcohol very difficult. I shall seek support in Europe to amend the legislation that underpins this decision so that it does not apply to areas of public health and the common good. I ask Senators to support the Bill because we must act within the law. I understand the sentiment behind the Senators who called for us to send a message. I commend the Bill to the House.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.