Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I echo what Senator Coffey said. This is serious business. Nobody has a monopoly on zeal. Nobody in this House has a special pulpit to talk about the effects of alcohol on our society. We should consider this section and the amendment carefully. We are on Committee Stage. We are not in a position where we are simply making Second Stage speeches on the principle of the Bill or reiterating where we stand on these issues. We are entitled to ask questions and get answers to those questions because we are on Committee Stage.

I echo what Senator Wilson and others have said about the price differential in Border areas. That is a practical thing we have to consider. There is no point in codding ourselves. We have to consider it. I note the Bill provides for different commencement dates which may cover some of the concerns being expressed here. As somebody who agrees with the concept of the minimum pricing of alcohol products and bearing in mind that subsection 10(1) fixes a 10 cent per gramme minimum price of alcohol, I would like to ask the Minister how it translates into a can of Dutch Gold or Heineken? One can look at the formula in the Bill. It is a bit like looking at the Finance Bill when one wonders what the actual outcome is. How will it actually change the minimum price of these slabs of beer which we are all concerned about? I know from my student days that the biggest constraint on my drinking was the fact I did not have much money. Whatever money I had ran out fairly early on in the evening and that was it. I know also from being a family man that cheap beer is now so cheap it could not get any cheaper. Could somebody give us an indication of the actual difference it will make to an ordinary can of Dutch Gold or Heineken? I am not singling out those two brands. I mean the kind of beer that is sold in slabs. That is what I would like to know.

Is it okay if I talk about the section now or should I confine myself to the amendment?