Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senators for their important contributions. In particular, I thank Senator McDowell for highlighting an issue on which I will seek further legal clarity. I wish to assure him about what we are trying to provide for in section 11(1) of the Bill. It is intended that it will be an offence to import a product for sale without the labelling information. Where a product is imported, the label changed and the product then sold, we do not wish to make that an offence nor would it be an offence if it were imported for one's own personal consumption. The idea is that people who would import a product into the country and then sell it would not have an advantage over those selling Irish indigenous products. I will seek further legal clarity on the current wording in the Bill before Report Stage. However, that is the policy aim we are trying to achieve.

Senator Buttimer had to pop out but, for the record, there has been a lot of back and forth on the issue of airports. The Senator decently and honestly admits his own all-party committee had a clear view of the issue of labels and we have very much inputted that into the Bill. However, some concerns were expressed that airports would be significantly impacted by the requirements of the Bill. I wish to put on the record of the House, as I think it is important, that there have already been a number of concessions and changes and people have taken cognisance of the slightly different position airports are in. However, they are not entirely different. If alcohol is a danger in one place, it is still a danger in others, but airports will have exemptions from the minimum unit pricing requirement in the Bill.The provision relating to the separation and visibility of alcohol products in mixed retail outlets, as it applies to other outlets, will not apply to airports. There is a modified version of the requirement and one that reflects the display of alcohol in airport shops currently is all that will be required under the provisions of the Bill. The requirements are that cabinets containing alcohol products should not contain non-alcohol products unless packaged together and that a non-alcohol product container should not adjoin a container with alcohol products. In response to Senator Boyhan, that is generally the norm at our airports. As a result, there is a variation regarding the separation and visibility at our airports reflecting the way they carry out their business.

Regarding advertisements for alcohol products at airports, the Bill provides that such advertisements can be displayed in or around the relevant container and the labelling provision is applicable to alcohol sold at airports. It is important that this is the case. It means that a customer in an airport shop will be provided with the same health information and other information about the product he or she is buying as his or her fellow customers in non-airport shops. Regardless of whether a person is going through the airport or the supermarket, he or she is entitled to the same factual information from a health perspective in terms of alcohol.

Senator Lombard said people are drinking high-end whiskies. This is obviously about the consumption of alcohol. I will reflect and engage further on that between now and Report Stage to familiarise myself further with the issue highlighted by the Senator.

Senator Paddy Burke asked a lot of questions, some of which involve getting information from the HSE about how much it spends on advertising campaigns relating to smoking. I can tell the Senator that it definitely spends far less on campaigns encouraging people to quit smoking than it does on dealing with cancers that arise from smoking. I would hazard a guess that it also spends far less on advertising campaigns to encourage people to drink responsibly than it does on campaigns dealing with the cost to the health service of cancer. However, I will get the Senator a statistics document on that. It is very fair to say that there has been very significant success regarding the no-smoking campaigns. I have a document with me - the Healthy Ireland Survey 2017 - which was published in recent weeks and which shows that approximately 22% of our population are smokers. There was a time when that number was in the region of 40%. A total of 18% of people smoke daily while 4% say they smoke occasionally. Men are still more likely to smoke than women. Interestingly, 35% of smokers who saw their GP in the past 12 months discussed ways of quitting smoking while 25% of those who saw a hospital doctor had this discussion, as did 22% of those who had the conversation with a nurse. More people living in Ireland have quit smoking than currently smoke so it has been a very successful campaign. I will get information on traffic to the website. It is important to say that, obviously, smoking is highly addictive so while the numbers are consistently coming down, we cannot be complacent in any way.

The Senator makes a very valid point about the idea of role models in our communities, particularly male role models for young men. I would be very interested in exploring the use of the GAA structure along with that of other sports clubs. I am sure our Healthy Ireland unit would have a view on that because it makes sense from a range of points of view, including mental health, obesity, physical health, good practice relating to drinking and not smoking. I thank the Senator for that constructive suggestion.

I take the point Senator Boyhan makes about whiskey trails. Once they comply with the advertising and marketing standards, it is okay. We are not banning marketing or advertising. It is a matter of complying with marketing and advertising standards, which is an important differentiation.