Keith Swanick (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

As I have said previously, any legislative measures to curb alcohol abuse and excessive consumption are to be welcomed. This Bill unfairly penalises responsible consumers and puts smaller stores at a competitive disadvantage. Fianna Fáil is proposing these amendments with responsible retailers and small retailers in mind. They will require the part of a premises where alcohol is being sold to be separated from the remainder of the premises by means of a physical barrier, but they will not require the complete removal of alcohol from public view. We believe they represent a fair alternative.

I acknowledge that the Government has tabled additional amendments to section 20. They are minimal at best and would apply to just 130 stores, which is a fraction of the total. Fianna Fáil will facilitate the Government by withdrawing our amendments to section 20, but we reserve the right to reintroduce them on Report Stage. I welcome the Minister's intention to liaise with stakeholders. I accept everything he has said this evening in good faith.

The changes envisaged in amendment No. 43 would require significant store reconstruction work to be implemented in over 2,500 shops across the country. This work would include the installation of barriers, new shelving units and new fire exits and the reconfiguration of store layouts. According to the people in the industry who are best placed to know, this volume of work simply cannot be done within the one-year timeline that is proposed. They believe a two-year timeframe is more realistic. If we want this to be done right, we need to allow time for retailers to do it right. We will withdraw the amendment, but we reserve the right to reintroduce it on Report Stage.

Amendment No. 44 has been tabled because it is envisaged that the introduction of large barriers to ensure alcohol products are not visible from outside alcohol selling areas would cost the industry €70 million. By contrast, the erection of waist-high barriers or gates would meet the separation of alcohol requirements that were originally at the core of the Bill while bringing this country into line with best practice operating in Northern Ireland and across Europe. I would like to remind the Minister of what the Taoiseach said on this matter in 2015, when he was serving as Minister for Health:

When it comes to structural separation in stores, we did not go ahead with the original proposals introduced in 2009 .... because they were probably too onerous. They required separate entrances, separate tills and large physical barriers. We are not going that far, but we want alcohol to be separated in stores. It will not bankrupt any small to medium shop to put in a partition. I am sure they do that type of work all the time as part of their general trade.

My genuine belief is that this proposal could put many local retailers under financial pressure. We have agreed to withdraw amendment No. 44, while reserving the right to reintroduce it on Report Stage.

We are proposing amendment No. 45 because we believe the proposal to require alcohol products to be sold behind darkened doors on the shop floors of smaller stores is completely disproportionate. It would unfairly penalise responsible consumers while placing smaller stores at a major competitive disadvantage. I remind the Minister that over 2,600 stores have subscribed to the Responsible Retailers of Alcohol in Ireland, which was established in 2009. This body carries out its own auditing each year and makes reports available to the Minister for Justice and Equality to show the level of competence of retailers. There is a compliance rate of over 90% in this regard. No evidence has been supplied to justify such a radical and costly proposal. The amendment we are proposing facilitates the separation of alcohol from other beverages and food products, which was one of the original requirements at the core of this legislation. I ask the Minister to consider this amendment, which will enable us to achieve the same outcomes, or better outcomes, without unnecessary expense. While we are withdrawing this amendment on Committee Stage, we reserve the right to reintroduce it on Report Stage.

I believe the Minister understands the reservations that underpin amendment No. 46. The lack of precision in the definition of a stand-alone off licence is potentially open to abuse, which is not the intention of the Minister or the Government.If remains as it stands, the clause offers the possibility for stand-alone off-licences to become quasi-grocery stores while still meeting the mainly-alcohol-sales requirement without being subject to the provisions of section 20. I need not point out the risks of abuse that could stem from this provision. We are happy to withdraw that amendment and reserve the right to reintroduce it.

On amendment No. 47, as I have said, the volume of work according to those in the industry simply cannot be done within the one-year timeline proposed. We believe that a two-year timeframe is realistic.

Regarding amendment No. 48, the relevant subsection, as published, prohibits any other product whatsoever from adjoining alcohol products in smaller-store formats. In small stores, the practical application of this section does not appear to be feasible. A product would be next to another in a small store. In larger supermarkets, entire aisles are devoted to, for example, toiletry products or confectionary. This is not the case in smaller stores. I agree entirely that it should not be adjacent to confectionary or other products that entice children in particular, but it is worth noting the level of compliance of members of Responsible Retailing of Alcohol in Ireland in this regard. The amendment tabled by Fianna Fáil is consistent with the original separation of alcohol from other beverages and food products requirements at the core of the Bill by confirming that storage units containing alcohol products shall not immediately adjoin units containing non-food products such as detergents. We will also withdraw this amendment and reserve the right to reintroduce it on Report Stage.

We are happy to co-operate with the Minister in passing this section without amendment. I thank him for his work. While he will probably not do this, I respectfully ask the Minister to proceed with Report Stage prior to Christmas - I ask the Leader to facilitate this - in order that we can complete the Bill.