Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister. I am of a generation that did not grow up with vapes and therefore I find the whole thing a bit of a head scratcher when I am out for a run or going round the place and see people who are very young indeed with these nicotine inhaling products in their hands.

There are many tragedies in this world and this is probably one of the lesser ones, but it is very unfortunate one, nonetheless, as we have all had the experience. I know of one particular town close to me where the fruit and veg shop closed and has been replaced by a shop for these products. We are seeing these shops all over the place in every town in the country and it is sad. We are seeing - as one often does in towns that are down-at-heel, where many good businesses have had to close - the bookies and the vaping shop still doing lots of business. It makes one wonder about the health of our culture, where there must be a sizeable section of people spending their money wrongly and foolishly, either on excessive gambling or on the purchase of such nicotine inhaling products. One could add other things on which people waste their money. We live in a free society, and one does not want to overly restrict people in the use of their freedom, but when one sees people who cannot afford it spending too much on lottery tickets it is another example of how we go along with some practices and some market activities that really hurt people who are vulnerable in one way or another.

Of course, I welcome this Bill, but I think about what Senator Byrne said when he reminded us of the 3,000 or 4,000 deaths per year as a result of nicotine and the reports of young people being hospitalised as a result of using these products.I am also reminded that only last week we had a debate, brought to us by Senator Malcolm Byrne and others, about the question of giving the vote to people as young as 16. This issue of vaping should be a reminder to us that many young people are very naive and vulnerable and that there is a cohort of young people, a minority who, one has to say frankly, are stupid. We need, as a society, to be protective of people who are immature and who make stupid choices either as a result of peer pressure, a lack of education, the blandishments of advertisers and so on.

There is one question I want to ask the Minister today. He has said that this Bill will reduce health harms and drive down the uptake of these products, including by children. I know that is his aim but how does he know that this legislation will actually work? I believe it does not go nearly far enough. The question I would like the Minister to answer, if not today then at some point in the future, is whether consideration was given to prohibiting altogether the sale of nicotine inhaling products, except by way of a prescription in pharmacies. We are all agreed that there is only one justification for the marketing and sale of these products, outside of pure, hard-nosed freedom of choice arguments about letting the fittest survive and the letting the vulnerable be caught up in new forms of addiction. If we agree that our society is about something more than that, and that we can actually restrict freedom of choice where there is some major harm going on to vulnerable people, as is clearly the case in the context of vaping, then why not give consideration to providing for the sale of these products only where they are intended to help, which is to assist people in getting over a smoking addiction? That is the only justification that I have ever heard for the sale of these products. If that is the case and that is the only real justification for the sale of such products, why would we not seek to ban their general sale and seek instead to ensure their availability only to people who have a doctor's prescription, who are sincerely trying to overcome their smoking habit and for whom this is a way of doing that? Would that not be the proper context for the manufacture, distribution and sale of nicotine-inhaling products in our society?

Some people might say that is overly restrictive of the free market and of people's adult choices but there are lots of ways in which we restrict these. We can certainly say that when it comes to smoking there seems to be no such thing as non-directive counselling. Everybody is on the same page, that it is bad to smoke no matter what one's age. Nobody is going to say "my body, my choice" and that we have no right to be talking about this. We are all agreed that smoking is bad for people individually and bad for the common good as a result because society is affected by the addiction of people. It is affected in terms of the pressures on the healthcare system and in terms of the loss of people's talents and contribution where they get ill and die prematurely and unnecessarily. We are all agreed that it is okay to try to educate people out of the smoking habit. We spend a lot of money trying to do that so why would we not go further? There is a distinction one can make between the sale of cigarettes, which have always been with us, and the sale of vaping products. Vaping is a new phenomenon and there is still time to adjust society's attitude to it in this way and to see it as something more akin to the smoking ban in pubs. Why not say that people can get their vapes but only if they are trying to overcome a smoking addiction? Why not say we will deploy the health service to enable them to do that by providing access to vaping products through doctors' prescriptions and pharmacies? Was any consideration given to that? Was that ever part of the discussion or was that something that people were afraid to suggest because it seems too restrictive? If something like that was not even discussed, then people are not actually serious about the problem they are trying to solve.

Has any consideration been given to the idea of banning the sale of any flavoured forms of these products? As we all know, as with alcopops, the flavouring of such products is clearly intended to capture the young. Again, are we so libertarian that we say that we cannot do that because we must leave people over 18 free to do exactly what they want?If we leave people who are over 18 free to do exactly what they want what will happen is what Senator Malcolm Byrne said in the context of cinemas. People under the age of 18 will see the advertisements and I guarantee the House that people under 18 will access vapes as well. As for calling them "nicotine inhaling products" somehow to try to get away from the comforting, friendly term of "vape", it will not be long before young people are referring to them as NIPs and they will be nipping out for a NIP. We need to do more. I will not make any Second World War references there, actually. We need to do more than try to manage behaviour through light-touch regulation. I submit that this is an example of light-touch regulation. I commend the Minister on making an effort but if we are really serious about the public health problem it already is, not to say it is becoming, should consideration not be given to something much more restrictive than what is on offer today?