Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I start by welcoming the Minister to the House and indicating my support for the motion. I add my voice to that call. It was a pity to see a Government amendment to the motion being put forward, given that so much of what we have heard has been in agreement. Senator Warfield's motion opens by directly acknowledging the positive elements in the Government motion. It literally opens by welcoming the report of the night-time economy task force and welcomes the programme for Government commitments around licensing laws and the review of those policies. That is already openly welcomed in the Sinn Féin motion and it was a generous approach to acknowledge these positive elements. It then teases out what that might mean in a very constructive way. It is a real pity that the Government put forward an amendment to the motion that effectively replicates the first two lines of the Sinn Féin motion and then loses some of the other aspects, which I will not focus on because others have spoken so well on them. Other Senators have mentioned the important issues about workers' rights, discrimination and employment law in terms of licensing, and transport. I will pick up on a couple of aspects that are very important.

In terms of the licensing laws, it has been said that special exemption orders are really inappropriate, including the involvement with the court system. The Minister knows how often we talk about the overladen court system. The idea of having to move through the court system in terms of licensing is a wasteful measure. These exemption licences can cost €400 a night for only a couple of hours. What that means is that the kinds of activities for which licences are extended need to be such that they maximise the financial delivery of a business. The important and constructive suggestion that non-profit spaces could diversify and be able to have club nights and dancing as part of what they do was discussed. It is also important that nightclubs are able to put on events that do not have to maximally squeeze profits. There should be a diversification within nightclubs so that they may have, for example, youth evenings, DIY nights, and nights that represent niche musical interests that are important to people, their identity and their community. There should be an annual nightclub licence that gives nightclubs the flexibility to be imaginative and creative and to respond to the needs and ideas of the communities around them, which is very important. Within that, it is important that recognition is given to the need for space to be given to it being at a sufficiently affordable level whereby there can be night-time activity that is not up against the wire with costs and, as others mentioned, has flexibility in terms of hours so that it works to serve different communities. That is an important part of inclusivity, whereby everyone is included rather than everything pushing towards and only being pitched at the narrowest demographic with the maximum return.

I have spoken to the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin, in the past and in great length about l'exception culturelle, the idea that cultural activity is in fact not solely commercial but is a right and part of participation. This aspect has been recognised by the EU. Nightlife is part of that cultural activity. There is something very particular about dancing because it leads to co-creation of a night. Those who are part of it create the experience together. We talk a lot about sport and its importance for mental and physical health. For me as a young person, dancing was - and still is - my physical activity which was crucial to my mental and physical health. It is important in the context of the body and consent, ownership and enjoyment of one's body and engagement in a community. We have, sadly, moved backwards in that regard. People talk about Coco's nightclub in Tallaght. Now, some 70,000 people are without a nightclub. People talk about The Castle nightclub in Galway and nightclubs in Ballinasloe. A strong point was made earlier in that we have moved backwards. People in the Chamber talk about how the geography of places that we share and in which we meet one another is an important form of communication that is now gone. It has not just moved backwards since the 1990s. It has moved backwards since the 1950s and 1960s when people could dance until 2 a.m. or 3 a.m. in a small town in Ireland and that was where people met one another. This is a very important issue.

I will conclude on a crucial area of planning, which has not received as much focus. The Government amendment refers to the impact of clubs on residents. Let us also look at the impact of development and planning on nightclubs, dancing and cultural spaces. We need to look at the agent of change laws that have been introduced in other places, so that we do not have a situation in which a hotel goes up near an area that has cultural activity, starts complaining and trying to constrain it. The provisions of soundproofing grants for clubs is a positive measure but there also need to be requirements on those who build in an area with cultural activity so that they plan for, acknowledge and accept that cultural activity is part of the area.

When we think that the number of nightclubs has fallen from 522 to 85 and that nightclubs are no longer local, there is also a safety issue. People should not have to travel into Dublin city to go dancing if they live in Tallaght or north Dublin. They should not have to travel and pay money to an extraordinary degree. They should be able to access nightclubs. I remember walking home from a nightclub in Galway as a young person of 18 years of age. That is the kind of activity that people should be able to do. That is part of safety as well. I urge the Minister to consider not pressing the Government amendment.If not, I hope at least that she will indicate in her response that she wants to take up the concrete, solid and well-thought-out proposals from Senator Warfield, the activists in Give Us The Night and all those across the country.