Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 4, before section 2, to insert the following new section:
“2.--The consumption of tobacco products shall be forbidden throughout any place of employment, education, healthcare, sporting venues, areas in the vicinity of such places and in motor vehicles.”.

Again, this is very much in line with what the Minister has said. It is worthwhile for the Seanad to convey its views and I welcome the views of Senator Colm Burke, as always, on health issues. There was a commendable stand, as I recall it, by the trade unions employed in the licensed trade, which pressed very strongly that these licensed premises are places of employment and that employees would prefer not to be inhaling toxic smoke. I look askance at the development of smoking places in the vicinity of places of employment.

I wonder whether it is time to push that out. It is controlled in licensed premises but one does see places around various offices and outside shopping centres where people get together to smoke.

The board of Trinity College Dublin, which I attended this morning, has decided to support Professor Shane Allwright's move towards a smoke-free campus. I understand that other universities are moving towards that as well. There are two dimensions to that. One is that this is applying science for the benefit of society, which is what institutes of education should do. The science on this is so definite, as the Minister has said, that if we can persuade people not to smoke this commodity, their lives will be inestimably improved. If universities have that knowledge, they have a duty to push it out and assist the Minister in what he is trying to do in this regard.

There is also the education aspect. If we have responsibility for very large numbers of people - 16,000 in Trinity College - those in charge have a duty, as part of the education process, to say "We are not allowing smoking here because it is bad for you. It is part of your education to realise how harmful this will be." I mentioned one university that is already working on it and I think there are others planning to do it. Explaining to the cohorts of young people for whom they have responsibility that all the knowledge we have says that this is really bad for and detrimental to them is part of their educational role.

On the previous occasion, we mentioned an eminent surgeon who quibbled or disputed that he was performing expensive heart operations on people who would not give up smoking. People not changing their conduct is a classic illustration of a burden on the health service. The other aspect I have in mind are smoking dens or zones outside hospitals. There is no place for them in the message we are trying to get across that one is not doing one's relatives or friends in hospital any favour by having smoking dens around hospitals. We are expending lots of money to make people healthier and smoking should not take place on a hospital campus.

Smoking at sporting venues contradicts the message of sport. On a recent visit to Croke Park, I was disappointed to find that smoking dens have come into play there. It totally contradicts what sport is about in promoting healthy lifestyles. Smoking seems to break out informally outside places of employment, colleges and schools. Is it possible to extend the non-smoking zone as part of the denormalisation of smoking policy mentioned by the Minister?

There were two concerns about motor vehicles, which relate to the final part of that amendment. Regrettably, Senator Crown is in the US but will be here to support the Minister. It is the fact that a car is such a confined space that makes smoking in it so damaging to children. It is like being put in a wardrobe with somebody who is smoking. We have a duty of care regarding protecting those children from adults smoking in cars. Is this the adjunct to the mobile phone penalties the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport has been imposing? Does somebody trying to light up, flicking out the ash and lighting up a new one represent a danger in addition to driving in a smoke-filled vehicle? As part of the Minister's denormalisation, we do not want people smoking in motor vehicles. They have enough to do driving that vehicle safely on the roads of Ireland. We also have a duty to protect other people present in those vehicles.

That section extends the smoking ban, which has been an absolute boon to people who work in licensed premises. Mandate deserves great credit in tougher times for supporting the Minister in the face of those who said the pub would die if people could not smoke in it. They were major supporters of the Department of Health. Education should take up the cudgel on the Minister's behalf. It involves the promotion of accurate representation of what science has found for the benefit of society, namely, that people should not take part in this activity. It is taking responsibility for 18 to 22-year-olds in universities and younger groups in other areas.

We mentioned the incongruity of people smoking and requiring hugely expensive surgery allied to that. Of course, we want to help people but we require a contribution from them as well. I am disappointed to see that smoking is developing in sporting venues. We mentioned that smoking in motor vehicles is damaging to other people in them and may be a source of accidents. I think smoking is banned anyway where the motor vehicle is a place of employment. Somebody spoke to me this morning about the incredible change in the upstairs sections of buses in Dublin since smoking was eliminated and how much better it is.

That is a selection of ways to promote the Minister's general view of denormalising smoking and moving to curtail it. I would move to eliminate it long before 2030 but if the Minister is looking at a new shelf of restrictions, perhaps some of the ideas we have in there might be of value.