Seanad debates
Wednesday, 31 March 2004
Smoking Ban: Motion
5:00 am
Camillus Glynn (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I move:
"That Seanad Éireann:
—notes the role of cigarettes as one of this country's greatest killers and that heart disease, cancer and any number of other illnesses can be directly traced to cigarettes,
—accepts that smoking is the single most preventable cause of cancer and that medical statistics show smoking is responsible for up to 30% of all cancers and also that up to 90% of lung cancers are caused by smoking,
—acknowledges the damaging effects of tobacco and second-hand smoke and that the World Health Organisation has listed Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a carcinogenic substance with no safe level of ETS,
—maintains that the basic human suffering caused by passive smoking is immense, as is the pressure smoking places on the health system,
—believes that the Government is duty-bound to do everything in its power to tackle smoking related illness,
—commends the Minister for Health and Children on the introduction of the ban on the smoking of tobacco products in the workplace as the most pro-active health measure undertaken in this country in recent times,
—supports the primary purpose of the prohibition which is to afford protection to workers and the public who are exposed to harmful environmental tobacco smoke,
—recognises the health benefits of this measure and that the legislation has been introduced in the interests of health and in the interests of the Irish people,
—notes that the prohibition is based on the result of unequivocal expert advice which states that the best way to protect workers from the effects of environmental tobacco smoke is through legislative measures, and
—is confident that this measure will provide a health legacy, not just for current but also for future generations, and will ensure that workplaces are a clean, safe environment, free of tobacco smoke, and that this will make a significant contribution to the health and quality of life of our population."
I congratulate the Minister on his unrelenting, focused and admirable commitment to enforcing the ban on smoking in the workplace. It was not easy to implement. There were many nay-sayers denying that he could or would do it. One can only admire his determination to ensure that the thousands of people who are affected by passive smoking every year are protected in the workplace. The date, 29 March 2004 is significant and will go down in the history books. It was an opportune time to introduce this proactive legislation in the interest of promoting health especially when we hold the Presidency of the EU and the Minister as chairman of the Council of Health Ministers has given a lead in introducing this ban.
The ban on smoking in the workplace will not only affect the health of non-smokers but will also have a great effect on smokers. There are many who, as a result of this ban, have made a real, and hopefully lifelong, commitment to giving up smoking. Almost every smoker I know has not had a cigarette since Sunday night and has told me this is the best opportunity he or she will ever have to give up smoking for once and for all. I know it is a difficult habit to break because I was a heavy smoker. When I played cards socially I would smoke four large packets in the course of a game but I am pleased to have been off tobacco for many years. One very well known international leader who was a heavy smoker and also hooked on heroin was able to give up heroin but could never manage to give up tobacco. This indicates the addictive nature of the substance. Most people fail in their attempt to quit on a Friday night in the pub when they have a pint in one hand and feel the need for a cigarette in the other. The fact that this temptation will no longer exist will be instrumental in assisting those who truly want to kick the habit.
It is indisputable that the ban on smoking in the workplace will save thousands of lives. Despite recent falls in the numbers of smokers, Ireland still has a high number compared to other countries. A worryingly high percentage of women smoke. I was disappointed to read recently that the Republic of Ireland, at 31%, occupied joint third position with Germany in a league table of the percentage of women who smoke in different countries. None of us would aspire to that place on the table, but we are there and it is nothing to boast about.
Smoking starts young for both sexes and tobacco addiction begins in adolescence for 80% of Irish smokers. A Midland Health Board survey indicated that a large number of young people in secondary schools smoke on a regular basis, which is disappointing. Surveys show that more than two thirds of all children here experiment with tobacco before they reach adulthood. It is worrying that approximately 30% of Irish people over the age of 15 years smoke. I believe that we will see a dramatic drop in these figures as a result of the smoking ban and I am optimistic that the next generation will have a totally different view of smoking thanks to the ban.
Some people however, are still trying to fight the ban on economic grounds. What a farce. Some of them will attempt not to adhere to it. We must make it perfectly clear that these people are putting lives at risk. They are acting from self interest rather than in the interest of the common good. We must act together to make the ban work and must not allow those who refuse to stub out to get away with it. These people pollute our air and break the law. Most people are law abiding and responsible and the vast majority of employers, employees and the public will respect the new measure.
I worked in a profession for many years where the people in my care, psychiatric patients, were particularly attached to the consumption of tobacco. The effects of smoking over the years provided a depressing view of those people. Many statements have been made in the Chamber pertaining to the health services and the need for new facilities. Many health facilities could be closed or would never be needed if tobacco was no longer consumed. Experts have said that we could close up to 50% of our facilities in that event, which clearly indicates the adverse impact of tobacco consumption on health services and the taxpayer. It is in everybody's interest that the ban is implemented effectively.
I commend all in the licensed trade who have adopted co-operative and responsible positions as far as the ban is concerned. Their positive response to the ban will be instrumental in making it work and will save lives in the future. Persistent smoking is of itself a death wish and as sure as God made little apples, it is a kind of long-term suicide effort.
Smoking is becoming more anti-social. Many smokers have said to me that they feel embarrassed when lighting up in public. What was once seen as attractive and social is more and more being seen for what it is — dirty smelly antisocial behaviour which causes illness and can kill. The main point is that smoking can kill. It kills approximately 7,000 people every year. People exposed to second-hand smoke are up to 30% more likely to develop cancer and 25% to 30% more likely to develop heart disease. These are facts we cannot ignore.
The World Health Organisation's international agency for research on cancer recently declared, without equivocation, that environmental tobacco smoke is carcinogenic to humans and includes more than 50 known carcinogens. This is frightening when one realises that these are being inhaled for prolonged periods by many non-smokers every day of the week. The bottom line is, if one works in an atmosphere where one is forced to breathe environmental tobacco smoke, one's health is at risk.
We need to ensure this ban is enforced so that nobody in Ireland will be forced to put their health at risk in order to earn a living anymore. Our EU Commissioner, David Byrne, has been inspired by Ireland's progressive stance on this issue and is considering introducing European-wide measures to combat passive smoking among workers. Ireland has shown the way. Let us prove we will continue to show the way. I am pleased that this legislation was supported by all sides of this and the other House.
Frank Feighan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Lenihan, to the House. I wish to convey my congratulations to the Minister on this groundbreaking initiative which I have supported all along. On 4 March I stated my wish to join the battle against tobacco. This has been one of the most important health challenges faced by the country and the Opposition has lent whatever support it could to the campaign. As someone who although never a smoker had to give up work in a licensed premises because of passive smoking, I welcome the ban.
Senator Glynn pointed out that there have been many naysayers. How opinions have changed over the past month. Most of the naysayers were members of the Government side. Some Ministers spoke through both sides of their mouths saying one time they were for the ban but the next time that they were against it. I found it difficult to believe that on such an emotive and serious issue internal politics could be played within a Government party. It reminds me of the time, many years ago, when a young MP who was brought into the House of Commons asked where the Opposition was. He was shown the Opposition but was told not to worry about it but to worry about his own side because it might stab him from behind. This is what happened to the Minister and I pay tribute to his resolve and determination in ensuring the Bill came to fruition.
The Minister cannot thank some Cabinet Members for their loyalty because they were out to stab him in the back at all times. The Taoiseach may take some credit for the turnaround. I remind the Minister of the saying in politics — the Taoiseach will use it I am sure — "Smart fellow wanted, but not too smart". I congratulate the Minister on the introduction of the ban.
Since the introduction of tobacco more people have died from smoking related illnesses than died in both the First and Second World Wars. The overwhelming medical and scientific consensus is that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer and heart disease. It is also the consensus that between 20% and 30% of non-smokers risk lung cancer from passive smoking. A study carried out by The Economist for the Office of Tobacco Control estimated that smoking related disease and illnesses cost the economy €1 million to €5 million per day.
Apart from the health benefits, the ban makes good business sense. Every day up to 100,000 young people around the world become addicted to tobacco. If current trends continue, 250 million people will die from tobacco-related illnesses. In that context, the legislation is ground-breaking. The Fine Gael Party supports and welcomes it.
The issue of ventilation in pubs should have been addressed. A significant amount of money was spent installing ventilation in pubs to bring about cleaner air. Many publicans spent up to €100,000 on systems which are now worthless. Discussions with vintners may have allowed them to save money in that regard.
Stag parties, weddings and tourist groups may not come to Ireland as a result of the legislation. People may not wish to come south of the Border while others may go north for their weddings or other social events to facilitate smokers. The Government should examine this matter.
The smoking ban may prove to be a bonus for local authorities in the sense that publicans and restaurant owners may be interested in hiring pavements to allow customers to smoke outside. Leasing a 25 m2 area of pavement would cost in the region of €4,250 per year. The extra income for local authorities would be welcome.
I find it hard to believe that one now has to go to a hotel room, nursing home, prison or psychiatric hospital to smoke. I hope the only one I find myself in is a hotel room and I will have to pay for that.
There is also a difficulty in regard to company cars and lorries. The difference between private and company vehicles is not sufficiently clear. Will we have Hiace vans parked outside pubs in order to facilitate smokers? I fear the legislation will give rise to anomalies.
As Senator Glynn rightly said, it is up to everybody to comply. I pay tribute to those in the hospitality industry who fought a tough campaign, but who now, thankfully, have stated they will support the ban. We are a law-abiding society. The general public will enforce the ban. I do not believe there will be a need for many health officers to tell people to stub out their cigarettes.
I welcome this ground-breaking legislation, which I think many countries will follow. As an Opposition Member I will oppose legislation of which I do not approve. On this occasion, I commend the Minister.
I look forward to going out and enjoying myself in a smoke-free environment. Publicans should cut down on Jeyes Fluid. Now the smoke has gone, the smell is apparent.
Frank Feighan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is not good for the Jeyes company but it would be good for everybody else.
Camillus Glynn (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That could be a matter for the Competition Authority.
Cyprian Brady (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan. Although a confirmed smoker, I warmly welcome this measure. It is excellent legislation which will stand the test of time.
Since the debate began we have heard all sorts of rhetoric from smokers and non-smokers alike as to how the ban would not or could not work. People said it was nonsense. What happened on Monday proved that the Minister, through his courage and foresight, has turned the tables on those detractors who dismissed this measure as an effort to deflect from what is taking place in the health service.
The onus is on the Government to protect the health of its citizens. Section 47 of the 2002 Act is a prime example of how steps can be taken to do that. The previous speaker referred to the cost to the workplace of smoke-related absenteeism and illness. It was stated that the daily cost to the country was €1 million. It will take time to reverse this trend; things will not change overnight. Firmness will be required to enforce it. However, I am convinced that ultimately the legislation will prove effective in tackling a number of the problems we are experiencing in the health service at present.
People engaged in scaremongering in the early stages of the debate on the legislation. Commentators said jobs would be lost, businesses would close and people would cross the Border in their thousands just to have a cigarette. That was nonsense. I congratulate the Irish Hotels Federation and some vintners on their moderate approach to this issue. Some of the scare tactics used at the start of the debate quite rightly did not last long.
I sat down with interested parties for a reasonable discussion in which they accepted the thrust of the regulation. While they had problems with some aspects of it, this was not unexpected from a business point of view. The Minister had the foresight to make changes to the legislation which addressed most of the outstanding objections.
We now see pubs with canopies, outdoor furniture and heaters for those who want to continue smoking, which is their right. This change is generating further business. A company in Offaly could not keep up with the demand for canopies and other outdoor furnishings to facilitate smokers. Nobody referred to that during the debate before the regulation was introduced; it was not even considered.
I congratulate the Office of Tobacco Control on its approach to this matter, which is pragmatic and logical, and on its excellent brochures. A special brochure was produced for the licensed trade, which takes managers, employers and staff through their obligations and the potential problems they may encounter. Solutions are provided for these problems.
Some commentators did not credit people with any intelligence. People are not stupid. They do not need to be told that their health is at risk if they are constantly exposed to smoke in the workplace, especially if they work in nightclubs, pubs or any other public place where people gather.
The focus in the guidelines is on the health of employees. That point was lost in this debate. Although some people chose not to listen, the thrust of the legislation was to protect workers in their place of work. It was claimed the measure was anti-hotelier, anti-publican and anti-nightclub owners. The Minister kept repeating that the point of the legislation was to protect workers. Employees in pubs and clubs who were interviewed on Monday night said they could not believe the difference the measure made. The guidelines place the emphasis on protecting employers and employees as opposed to customers who may or may not cause trouble. Given that people tend to be intoxicated in pubs and nightclubs, they will not listen to anyone, whether in regard to smoking or fighting. There will be a debate in this House tomorrow on alcohol consumption by young people, which is related to this issue. The emphasis so far has been on pubs and clubs. Many employers throughout the city and country insist on their offices and places of employment being totally smoke free, which has been the case for a long time.
I congratulate the Minister, his Department and the Government in general on this measure. It took courage and a certain amount of stubbornness to continue with this legislation. Huge pressure was brought to bear on all of us. We were all approached by lobby groups. A fierce campaign was mounted. A healthy and interesting debate was held, which the Minister won. I congratulate him on this because it is to everyone's benefit. I welcome the opportunity to endorse fully the measure and, even though I am a smoker, I have no problem with it.
Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would be churlish not to commend the Minister. Speaking with my political hat and sharing a constituency with him, I am happier when his halo is a bit tarnished. It is not to my political advantage to have his halo reinstated. Nevertheless, the smoking ban was and is a good day's work. The Minister showed commendable bottle by not wavering. Others may have wavered but I do not think the Minister did, which was courageous.
I like the idea that we do things first. We are a modern, grown-up nation which no longer must wait to follow someone else's lead. We imposed the levy on plastic bags, which has been a remarkable success and about which people have been talking as they are now talking about this measure. It says to the world that this is a confident country which believes it can figure out ways to do things better, not just copy other people. We had a tendency to do this for a long time but we now do things the way we want to. While he said so tongue in cheek, the economist, Moore McDowell, pointed out that it will probably be more expensive in the long term for us to survive, because if we all live to be 90 by eliminating all environmental hazards, the cost to our children will be ferocious.
The tragedy of smoking is the amount of premature death it causes. If smoking causes people to die at 85 instead of 86 years, that would be a pity, but it would hardly be a tragedy. However, smoking causes people to die in their 40s, 50s and 60s, long before their natural life expectancy. Many people have had their lives ruined from their 50s on as a result of tobacco smoke. The money is one way of looking at it but the real issue is the impact smoking has on people's chances of living a long and healthy life.
It is time we began to look at the international tobacco industry as a particularly malign industry for selling a product which does no good to anyone. I am not being critical of individual smokers. I am married to a smoker so I must live with the reality of smoking. If tobacco were not addictive but something people consumed for pleasure, very little of it would last more than a couple of years because people would give it up. It is because it is addictive that it makes so much money. If one takes a step back and wonders about the idea of a multi-national industry that makes vast amounts of money from selling an addictive substance which can only harm people, then one gets into serious issues about ethics and ethical investments. If the Bank of Ireland is to be persuaded not to invest in the pornography industry, one could advance a very convincing case that similarly it ought not to be involved with any of the big tobacco companies. Whatever their economic record, their social contribution is malign. I have a great belief in letting consenting adults do whatever they wish as long as it does not impose burdens on the rest of us. I take exception to people fornicating in public, but what they do behind closed doors is entirely their own business. I will not give them lectures about what they should or should not do as long as it is done by free consenting adults. I am quite enthusiastic about many of these matters.
I do not believe anyone has a right to do something which poses a direct and demonstrable threat to other people, particularly when these people do not have a choice. Senator Brady put it very well. People are entitled to smoke and no one wants to stop them. I am not a prohibitionist — whenever it was tried it did not work — but I am a believer in reducing opportunities and demand and restricting supply. I accept the issue arose out of a legitimate and commendable concern for the health of people working in many areas, particularly the hospitality industry. I have no doubt the medium-term effect of this measure will be to reduce cigarette smoking because a good deal of it is associated with socialising. That one will end up sitting outside on one's own on a cold winter night if one wants to have a cigarette when visiting a pub, restaurant or night club will in the medium term reduce the degree to which people smoke and, as the habit is reduced, the possibility of people giving up smoking is increased.
How many billion euro does the EU currently spend on subsidising tobacco production? I think it is in double figures, but I am not sure. I know it costs billions. It appears irrational — I have every sympathy for the people involved in the production of tobacco — that we recognise a specific and major threat to public health posed by tobacco smoking, yet we subsidise its production. I cannot see the logic in that.
Other issues have arisen as a result of this debate. One is the fact that the hospitality industry, which at one stage appeared to be a united front, turned out to be anything but that. The restaurant association welcomed the measure from an early stage because it said the vast majority of its customers welcomed it. I am intrigued by the concept of non-enforceability which some publicans are putting forward. There is no doubt that most of the licensed trade now accepts the measure is a reality with which it must live, even though there are exceptions. In a letter to a newspaper, a writer pointed out to publicans who ask how the ban will be enforced that they can do it in the same way that they enforce the ban on people eating food on the premises that they did not buy there. No publican would tolerate a person doing that if food is served on his premises and if he can find many ways to enforce that prohibition, he can enforce another.
There will be occasional awkward moments but tobacco smoke will not result in violence being inflicted upon publicans. As in cinemas, theatres and all the other places we take for granted, in six months we will wonder how we ever tolerated the idea of smoky bars, where those of us who did not smoke ended up going home coughing with our clothes smelling of tobacco smoke.
Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am happy to address the Seanad on this subject and I thank the various Members for their complimentary remarks about the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin.
Senator Glynn wished to convey to the Minister and his officials his congratulations and I will do that. Today is a good news day for him on the subject, as was echoed by Senator Brady when he referred to the Office of Tobacco Control and the high quality publications it has issued about this subject. Senators Feighan and Ryan also complimented the Minister and Senator Ryan pointed out that the Minister had restored his halo. I was not aware that it had ever slipped.
Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have some local knowledge on the matter.
Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In the turbulent political world of Cork South Central, the Senator should be careful about his remarks because no doubt the Minister has a powerful propaganda machine in the constituency which might echo the Senator's remarks.
Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am glad to hear it. Senator Feighan referred to the nay sayers in the Government parties and Ministers speaking out of both sides of their mouth. I was not one of those Ministers and I am not clear to whom the Senator is referring but the responsibilities of office can be onerous. Before I was a Member of the Oireachtas, I had occasion to be here in the company of one of our most distinguished historians, now deceased, while certain political transactions were being made and I asked him what he thought of it. He said that the sheer sensation of the pressure was remarkable and that he now understood what was happening during the Treaty debates. When the pressure is on, it is difficult for politicians who must make decisions, but decisions were made and the Minister was loyally supported by his colleagues at all stages. Indeed, he had a vigorous debate with the membership of the party and it supported him on the matter. The decision was made and implemented. Any great national movement must have its internal debate. For a long time, Fianna Fáil was accused of not allowing internal debate but when we have it we are accused of talking out of the sides of our mouths. I will pass the kind wishes of Members on to the Minister.
Frank Feighan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State can pass them on to the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Local Government as well.
Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister has his own private suffering and grief to endure these days and we have met many citizens in the same position in recent days.
I agree with the point made by Senator Ryan about doing things first. This is a first for Ireland that Norway is now seeking to emulate. Many other states in Europe will examine this option. I hope that Northern Ireland looks at it as a matter of urgency because that would relieve the difficulties that will arise along the Border where entertainment businesses may feel at a disadvantage. While they may see themselves as being at a disadvantage, there are a many who will see this as an advantage. On the few occasions that I have visited licensed premises since the prohibition came in, I have sensed a transformation in their appearance. The money that has been invested in them becomes all the more evident with the pall of smoke banished to show the gleaming surfaces. There is now an entirely different atmosphere in the Irish public house.
It is important that we do things first. For a long time after independence, we were content to copy the legislation that emanated from our nearest neighbour after a decent interval. It is good to see that we are taking the initiative in this matter and it is an example for us in other fields.
In discussions with the public, the unreconstructed opponents of this measure constantly argue that we are interfering with the freedom of the individual and this is the nanny state. We must go back to John Stewart Mill, the exponent of liberalism who made the point that the state is not entitled to interfere with the legitimate choice of the individual other than for the protection of others from harm. If we examine the legislation adopted in this area to defeat the legal profession and fulfil the requirements of the European Union, none of it interferes with the freedom of the individual, all it does is protect others from harm. That is why the smoker is perfectly free to leave the licensed premises and smoke on the pavement outside, as can the shop or office worker. We have not gone beyond what is legitimate in classical liberal terms.
There is an alternative school of jurisprudence that has always argued that the state is entitled to intervene to promote a particular moral point of view or foster a certain ethos. We are familiar with that school of though in this State because the leading institutional form of religious expression has always taken that view. If we take that view, there is also a foundation for this legislation because the public house is central in Irish life. By prohibiting smoking in the public house, we are effecting a fundamental social change in Irish life. While we may not have infringed the norms of classical liberalism, we are undertaking a radical shift in outlook that is desirable.
From the limited sampling I have done, this is a good change and long overdue. In years to come we will wonder what all the fuss was about and the hospitality industry will realise that it makes the services and entertainment they put at the disposal of the visitor more attractive. If we can market our hospitality industry in that positive way, it will be constructive.
One economist argued that we should eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die and save the State a great deal of money. We spent much time discussing the pensionable age for public servants and have introduced the pension reserve fund. We have done a lot of thinking on the subject and we must do more thinking about basic health provision.
I thank the Opposition for the constructive way it approached this debate. The Opposition parties played their part in helping and supporting the Government, and in making legitimate political criticism from time to time, and the Minister and the Government appreciated that. It helped to build the consensus and public support that is so evident for this measure. There are lessons for all of us in that type of approach to our public affairs. I do not want to dwell on one or other subject, but in regard to this matter it was of great assistance in consolidating the public behind what was a desirable initiative. We all had to entertain arguments from individual citizens and constituents. If we are honest, we all would admit that we spoke sometimes a little out of the sides of our mouths on this issue, but we all gave public leadership on it. That is the important point. It was not only the Minister but the Opposition parties who gave public leadership on this matter and they are all to be very much credited for doing that.
Senator Glynn waxed lyrical about the difficulties of abstinence and the need for strong moral leadership. I do not feel very qualified in that area, although one of the classical virtues was moderation and many have esteemed it. It is true that cigarette smoking is highly addictive. That was referred to by all the speakers. I never had the addiction, although I must confess I smoked a few cigars in my time. Although I was never on the PD wing of Fianna Fáil, I enjoyed the odd cigar, which I have now had to give up.
Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I did not know there was any other wing.
Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A national movement has many wings.
Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Do not push me beyond the concept of a movement.
Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The adverse effects of smoking have been referred to in many of the debates on this subject and I will not rehearse them now. The 7,000 deaths in Ireland each year attributed to tobacco-related illness is a striking statistic. As Senator Ryan said, the phenomenon of older people living longer is a separate issue we must address, but the tragedy of premature death is a shocking one. It is shocking for children who often suffer the loss of a beloved parent at a very young age and it is also shocking for the relatives of the person concerned. We are all aware from our experiences of the loss and the trauma premature death can cause to the individuals affected by it. Anything that lessens that is of value quite apart from the savings of this initiative to the health service.
There is an issue of financial saving to the health service. We all know from repeated discussions on the health Estimates the high cost of hospital care in these areas is noteworthy and that cost can be saved. There is a natural way of dying as well as a natural way of living. There is no doubt there are substantial economic and personal benefits from this initiative. The State assumes the cost of health care and measures such as workplace bans on smoking are vital if that burden is to be reduced.
The Minister made this initiative one of his priorities and certainly he is to be congratulated on implementing it. It is important to note the national public information campaign entitled "Smoke-Free at Work" has been rolling out across television, radio and the print media. A series of print materials has been prepared for workplaces, employees and the general public. They are available and can be downloaded from a new smoke-free at work website. As Senator Brady pointed out, that campaign is providing guidance and information to all sections to help them in complying with the smoke-free workplaces measures.
Information is available on-line from the Office of Tobacco Control and the Health and Safety Authority websites. An understanding and a formal memorandum has been agreed and signed by these two agencies to ensure compliance with the new measure. Workplace locations traditionally visited by the Health and Safety Authority will now also have to comply with the new smoke-free measure as part of their general compliance with health and safety requirements. Monitoring compliance with the smoke-free requirements in the food and hospitality area is now carried out by officers from health boards. Health boards with vacancies in their established environmental health officer complements in the tobacco control area are in the process of filling these posts. The emphasis of the campaign is on compliance building and harnessing the widespread public support and goodwill that exists for a smoke-free environment. There will be a bit of the carrot around for a few weeks before the stick appears. The response to the campaign to date has been positive. There has been a large demand from all sectors for the materials which are designed to be practical, relevant and helpful. This important tobacco-free initiative has the support of the majority of people in Ireland, smokers and non-smokers alike. There has been a large concentration on the impact of the measure on the hospitality area and the licensed trade in particular, but the initiative is aimed at indoor workplaces generally and is not merely confined to licensed premises.
Adapting to the new measure will require adjustment especially in those workplaces which, up to now, have not benefited from the existing statutory controls on the smoking of tobacco products. I am confident there will be an adjustment as happened when cinemas, theatres, hairdressing salons, aircraft and many other settings went smoke-free.
The trade union movement has been very supportive and I am encouraged by the willingness shown by employers' organisations in the various sectors in recommending compliance with the new measure to their members. I pay particular tribute on this occasion to the trade union group that has been put together by the construction workers. Their various unions have collectively put forward a strong initiative in the area of tobacco control. A levy has been agreed to fund health initiatives of a preventative character throughout the construction industry among the employees. That is a tremendous example of the trade union movement working at its best. I was delighted to launch its initiative on Ash Wednesday.
The Minister has various measures to help smokers quit and to ensure that non-smoking becomes the norm. There is a quit line which is well established and widely used with 17,000 callers to date.
I thank the Senators for their contributions. I hope we have at last passed a milestone towards the total eradication of tobacco in this country.
6:00 am
Geraldine Feeney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Like other Senators I welcome the Minister of State. The arguments for and against the smoking ban are well and truly over. They should be forgotten and there should be no more arguments about it. We must get on with this measure now that the ban is in place. I congratulate the junior Minister, the Department and, as other speakers said, the Government on implementing this initiative because it was not easy. We are all aware of the huge lobby against the ban and that on the medical side in favour of it. The Minister was brave. It would have been easy for him to compromise or try to meet people halfway, but he did not do that. People are saying that we are leading the way when we should be saying we have led the way. We are an example to other countries.
One only had to watch television on Monday to note all the countries interested in this initiative not alone from Europe but from elsewhere across the world. Those involved in producing two Chinese television and radio programmes were over here. Everybody wanted to be in on this. Other countries are monitoring this initiative in Ireland to see how it will work. We are all behind the Minister and there is very high regard and respect for him. No matter what else he does in his term as Minister for Health and Children, in years to come he will always be remembered for what he has done in bringing in the smoking ban.
Dr. Jim Egan, a consultant respiratory physician in the Mater, described Monday as an international milestone. He was correct in saying that. All the radio programmes for the past few days have had chat lines and members of the public ringing in to talk about this measure. I was particularly taken when I heard what a young man of 51 years of age, who is a musician, a non-smoker and earns his living from playing in pubs at night, had to say. He plays in pubs five out of seven nights of the week. Two years ago he had open heart surgery and his life has been dreadfully affected by the effects of passive smoking. He was giving out on "Questions and Answers" on Monday night to those members of the audience and a person on the panel who were against the ban. He said his life has been affected by passive smoking, through no wish of his own, because he had to make his livelihood from playing and singing in pubs, and he was the victim of passive smoking. It is too late for this man but the ban will help others. At the end of his speech, the Minister of State said this ban is for future generations to benefit from, which was echoed by a man speaking on "Today with Pat Kenny" yesterday morning. When I spoke in the House last May, I stated we should use the run-in time for the legislation to educate people on the good effects of giving up smoking and I am glad to see that was done by the Government. We ran a smoke-free campaign which has been very effective.
Like many people, I was at a rugby party at the weekend at which there were five smokers, three of whom had quit the week before the ban came into place because they wanted to be ready for it. One of them told me he was taking a prescribed drug called zyban, which costs €110 for a two month supply. I am not a chemist or a pharmacist, therefore I do not know the drug's components. However, the drug lessens the craving in the body. My 21 year old son is on his second day without cigarettes and is using patches. The patches cost €30, for which I paid because I want him to give up. However, there are other people who are not as brave as to use the patches and for whom perhaps something like zyban might be good. It is safe because it is only available on prescription from one's GP.
We should examine subsidising such aids for people on low incomes or students who desperately want to quit smoking. The Minister of State may say that people with health board cards who spend up to €80 in a pharmacy will get the remainder in rebate. However, perhaps we could subsidise this further for people who are having difficulty quitting smoking.
I have been out for the past two nights, although I do not often go out two nights on the run.
Geraldine Feeney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Indeed I do not. It was lovely to eat out on both nights in public houses which serve food and everyone, including smokers, was talking about the nice clean air. I did not wake up this morning, as Senator Feighan and I have often talked about, having come out of a smelly, smoke-filled pub with sore eyes and a sore throat, a running nose and stinking clothes. I am looking forward to the reduction in my cleaning bills.
A friend of mine was in New York at the weekend. He spoke to a publican and restaurateur who told him the smoking ban there had an initial effect on their businesses but, when it settled down, the effect was very positive because the 70% or 80% of people who are non-smokers came into the bars and were delighted with the clean air. Even the smokers are quite happy with the smoking ban and they accept they have to go outside to smoke and are therefore inclined to smoke less.
As other speakers have said, in six months' time or less there will be no more talk about this ban and we will look back and ask how we ever got away with it. For years we have got away with polluting everyone's air for the sake of the few people who wanted to smoke. This legislation will go down in history as the most effective and important in this Seanad.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State. This is a fine Bill, for which the Minister for Health and Children is to be praised. In the past six months there has been animosity towards him from vintners and members of political parties who saw fit to ask the Minister what he was doing and suggest he was getting too big for his boots, and so on. Nonetheless, the Minister stuck up for himself, stiffened his back and pursued it, the result of which has been good.
Pay no attention when Senator Feeney states that she is rarely out two nights in a row.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Why would she not? She has every right to be. When a male friend of mine who is a solicitor in Athlone comes to my house, he puffs non stop. He empties his own ashtray, which is fine and well he might. However, I have recently remarked when I come into the living room the following morning that I have to open all the windows. If I have a candle on the night I will light it, which helps to diminish the smoke, although not to a sufficient extent.
The Acting Chairman is the man for the candle and chanting, is he not? He is our new age Senator.
Terry Leyden (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask the Senator to speak to the motion.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Having congratulated and thanked the Minister for his Cork tenacity and the determination he showed in the face of much opposition from many sources, one must reflect that it is great to be the first in Europe to initiate such a good measure. Sky News went to town on its reporting of the smoking ban with interviews for days before hand. It is great that we have taken a positive, pro-active health initiative such as this smoking ban. It is easy for me to talk because complying with it is not a burden for me or anyone else who never smoked.
I was out at lunch time and when I was returning through the back gate, there were several figures out puffing in the yard. As Senators know, the Superintendent is responsible for making sure we do not smoke within the precincts of the House. There were some jocose remarks in the House earlier. For example, I was asked who was in charge of keeping us good — it is the Superintendent, Mr. Paul Conway.
In a major interview in Monday's edition of the Irish Examiner, the Minister for Health and Children stated that excessive drinking would be the subject of his next crusade. I thought it was obesity but perhaps he is linking the issues together. He said he would particularly tackle binge drinking among young people. We will deal with the issue of excessive drinking in a debate in the House tomorrow. I hope that in his zeal the Minister does not follow the route of prohibition which, as we all know, did not work in the US and, in fact, lead to excessive drinking.
Smoking is bad — even one puff is bad — and to breathe via passive smoking someone else's dirty fumes is bad. However, a drink in moderation is not bad and all medical advice tells one that a glass of wine does one good. Therefore, I do not wish to see the undoubted zeal and tenacity of the Minister devoted to stamping out drinking altogether, although it is to be welcomed in respect of excessive drinking. The former would take the fun out of life and must be taken with a sense of proportion. I have already stated this to the Minister — I am not stating this behind his back or waiting for it to be conveyed to him. I asked him not to let his crusader, missionary-like zeal be translated into closing pubs altogether. I do not know how the vintners would react to that but I know he would not get away with it. I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Tim O'Malley, agrees that to stamp out drinking completely would be wrong. A drink in moderation is good for one.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Let not the zeal and crusading spirit of the Minister for Health and Children go to his head altogether.
Nevertheless, we are here to talk about the smoking ban. One cigarette is bad and will do injury to one's health. It will take many years for the beneficial health effects to be seen but the nation's health will be better because of this measure. We will be a healthier and stronger people and the money spent on treating asthma, chest complaints and lung cancer will be reduced.
Members are familiar with the fug in the Seanad ante-room every morning when some Members lit their cigarettes or pipes after the Order of Business. That has now ended. Because they may not smoke in restaurants, public houses or places of employment, many people will stop smoking altogether and we may become a nation of non-smokers.
People of all political opinions are pleased with this measure. I praise the Minister for Health and Children for the strong spirit he has shown in combating opposition to this legislation.
Ulick Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I congratulate the Minister for Health and Children on his determination in seeing this legislation through. It is welcomed by many people. The various interest groups which raised difficulties in recent months have come to realise that there is widespread public support for the banning of smoking in public places. There is particularly strong support for the banning of smoking in licensed premises, which was the most contentious element of the measure and which we discussed when the legislation was being debated.
It is now time to review the exemptions granted in the legislation. I particularly mention nursing homes, hospitals, hospices and psychiatric hospitals. I do not understand why some of those institutions have been exempted. I see an inconsistency here. I hope the Minister will review these exemptions. It is difficult to understand the rationale behind them.
Enacting legislation is one thing but implementing it is another. Senators have referred to the guidelines for owners and managers of premises where the ban is to be implemented. We must appreciate that it will be difficult, initially, for owners and managers to carry out these guidelines. While we do not want to see anyone breaking the law, there must be an initial period of leniency. Such an approach will be more conducive to implementing the ban than a hard ham fisted approach. People must be given a chance to adjust to the changes, which will be very difficult for many.
The Minister has taken on the challenge of the tobacco industry, whose products have been shown to carry a serious health risk. If he is to be consistent, the Minister must now address the scourge of drugs, their sale and their use. Some Members of these Houses are sympathetic to the acceptance of the use of soft drugs. I do not know if tobacco can be classed as a hard or soft drug. However, if we are agreed as to the negative effect of tobacco smoking on people's health we must also recognise the negative effect of the use of other drugs, whether hard or soft, on the health of individuals, on family life and on the structure of society at large.
I compliment the Garda Síochána on the tremendous work the force is doing to rid our society of drug barons. As well as drug barons, ordinary innocent people are often enticed into the drug culture and continue, through fear, to distribute drugs.
The problem of cigarette smuggling must also be addressed. The Revenue Commissioners, the Garda and the Customs and Excise service have their part to play in ensuring that the smuggling of cigarettes is eliminated. Smuggled cigarettes find their way into establishments where they are distributed, on the premises, through vending machines.
I welcome the legislation but much remains to be done to ensure it is implemented in full and in an acceptable and effective manner. The health board officials and environmental health officers have a function in enforcing the legislation. I decry the practice of sending young people into premises to purchase cigarettes in order to apprehend shopkeepers who are breaking the law. As a member of a health board I found it difficult to accept that a statutory body would use minors in this way to detect crime. I hope no similar methods will be used in enforcing this legislation.
I welcome this measure and I congratulate the Minister on his determination in introducing a major change in the social behaviour of the nation. I hope the hard hand of the law will not brought to bear and that the legislation will be implemented sensibly
Pat Moylan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Tim O'Malley to the House and I compliment the Minister of State at the same Department, Deputy Brian Lenihan on his statement. I also compliment the Minister for Health and Children on accepting this challenge and taking action on the problem of smoking.
There is a responsibility on the companies which manufacture cigarettes to come forward and help those who want to continue smoking but have difficulties in finding suitable locations to do so. They have made substantial money out of those people in the past and they should now offer convenient locations for smokers in public houses or in other public premises.
I compliment the contributions that have been made this evening. When this legislation was before the House, many people said the Minister would not take on special interest groups, in particular the publican lobby. This issue is not about any lobby group. It is about health and about affording an opportunity to people who do not wish to smoke or be in a premises where others smoke, where there is a danger to their health. The vast majority of people have that point of view. I was a member of a health board and often visited hospitals, and it was an eye-opener to see the many people in hospital, often just gasping for breath. The report on the health and environmental effects of tobacco smoke in the workplace published in 2003 was clear when it stated
second-hand tobacco smoke was the cause of cancer, heart disease and respiratory problems. Employees need to be protected from exposure at work. Current ventilation technology is ineffective at removing the risk to health. Legislative measures are required to protect workers from the adverse effects of exposure.
These four points sum up the real problems.
Much was said about ventilation, particularly by cigarette manufacturers. What money did they put forward to enable publicans and others to finance the cost of proper ventilation? While ventilation systems are in place on many premises, they are not adequate enough to enable people to work or enjoy themselves.
It is time the advertisement of cigarettes and cigarette sales was stopped. Many young girls who smoke are told that to continue smoking is good for their figure. One's health is far more important. I know many people who used to enjoy a drink but who were unable to go to a pub or had to leave early when smokers came in. People who enjoyed a game of cards simply could not go to a hall to have a game because of those who smoked. Action against smoking has been taken in bingo halls and I have been told that as it was successful, it would not be a big problem to have a smoking ban in pubs and in the workplace.
There is now an onus on the Minister to act on passive smoking where people congregate, particularly at matches in enclosed stands. One can go to a game of hurling, football, soccer or rugby and within minutes of taking one's seat, the breeze is blowing cigarette smoke in one's direction. That is not good enough for the ordinary punter who pays to go to a match. He or she has no choice but to move elsewhere, but can only do so if there is a vacant seat.
We must look at the availability of cigarettes to young people. With the changes that are taking place they may view cigarette smoking differently. It is to be hoped they may not take it up.
I commend the motion. It spells out the steps the Minister has taken. However, over the coming weeks non-smokers must understand when someone lights a cigarette without thinking. It is to be hoped a disapproving look will be sufficient in such instances. I would hate to see people being prosecuted over lighting a cigarette in the wrong place. As a non-smoker, I never objected to someone having a smoke, once they stayed a considerable distance from me. The new arrangements will have other positive effects. For example, it will no longer be necessary to clean clothes affected by smoke after a night in a pub.
As a Pioneer, I support the Minister in tackling the scourge of drink in this country. Smoking and drinking are very much related.
I support the motion and compliment the speakers who made a valuable contribution to this debate. I thank all the Ministers who were involved, as well as the members of the Government, all of whom have taken a stand against much opposition. I hope common sense will prevail over the next few months to enable this to work and that we do not have to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. With a little time, people will get into the habit of smoking only in designated areas. I again call for adequate designated areas for those who wish to smoke.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome this excellent motion. It nails the Government's flag to the mast. It is particularly good that there is no amendment from the Opposition and that there is no attempt to play politics with this. Everyone in the House, including smokers and non-smokers, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour, the Progressive Democrats, Independents and others were behind the Minister on this. It is a very important and innovative measure and I am proud it is being introduced in Ireland. It shows that we are thinking.
I was at Farmleigh the other evening where there was a wonderful dinner for the chairmen of the foreign affairs committees of the EU member states, including the incoming states. I had at my table some French, Czech and Slovak people and some of them were grumbling. The French could not believe we were doing this. They took out their cigarettes and they fingered them, but they were afraid to light them. I thought that was great. Chairmen of foreign affairs committees were terrified to light their cigarettes, which meant we had done a good day's work.
I speak as a current non-smoker; I am a reformed smoker. We should pay tribute to the Minister, Deputy Martin, because this was not the easiest thing to do in the beginning. We may forget that there was a lot of opposition to the measure. Deputies in all parties nibbled at his bum, to use that wonderful phrase which was applied to Mr. Haughey, and tried to erode the support for it. There was much lobbying, but he stood up against it, although it was not always popular. We should also remember the people involved in Action on Smoking and Health, who were seen as eccentric because of their opposition to smoking, and people such as Professor Luke Clancy and Professor Risteard Mulcahy. They sounded the warning signal about smoking and continued at it, although it might not have been popular.
However, I will not be altogether positive. As a former smoker, I know how difficult it was to give it up. I gave it up two years ago in odd circumstances. I had an aunt whom I adored and she died a few years ago at the age of 103. I give a party for her every year to keep her memory alive and we read sections from an enchantingly eccentric diary she kept and all the cousins visit. She used to torture me about giving up cigarettes. She campaigned about it all the time. I eventually told her that I would do what she did and give them up when I would be 75. She gave them up when she was 75 years old and then she made life miserable for everyone else. Why was it so difficult?
I want to be a bit critical and negative of the enormous financial interests in the tobacco companies and the way they behaved. On this splendid day of celebration now that many of our public places are smoke free, I want to state that the behaviour of the cigarette companies throughout the world, the international, American and British companies, was appalling. When I was a child, it was popular to smoke. One was a man if one smoked. We had what is now called the film noir, the silhouette of the man in the trilby hat and the fag in the mouth. Sometimes in a romantic way he would light the fag and pass it to the woman. There was a frisson throughout the cinema. It was a romantic and manly thing to do. People also thought it was healthy. I have heard of people who were prescribed cigarettes to relax them or to help with asthma. It is impossible to believe now that that was done. Once people started smoking cigarettes, it was difficult to give them up.
We know from a series of court cases in the United States that cigarette companies bought up other research and suppressed their own research which clearly demonstrated the link indicated in this motion between cigarette smoking and all types of cancer, particularly lung cancer. They knew it, but they suppressed it and bought up other research. Although they knew what smoking was doing to people's health, they continued to promote their cigarettes on the basis that it was not true. They denied the facts. More than that, they engaged in experiments not to try to produce a harmless cigarette, but to find what ingredients could be added to make them more addictive. The cigarette companies operated a criminal conspiracy against global health, which is still going on. We should remember that. Those same lousy companies are dumping their dangerous products on the Third World and anywhere they can get a market. They do not carry health warnings on the packets because they are not required to do so. It would be wrong not to put that black mark against the cigarette companies.
I did not realise that approximately 70% of people do not smoke, which is good. Perhaps that explains the high approval rate among the public for this initiative. I smiled to myself at the vintners and the other people who said their businesses would collapse and who engaged in the usual whinge. It would not do them the slightest bit of harm if they caught a bit of a cold. I remember when pubs were decent places where someone could have a quiet drink and a conversation. Now the drinks are pushed at people. In the same way as the tobacco companies push cigarettes, the drinks companies push their products.
I agree with the Government Whip who mentioned the related subject of alcohol consumption. I hope we have a debate on that. I repeat what I said on the Order of Business today now that the Minister of State is present. On my way back from speaking at a dinner of European bankers on O'Connell Street I went into one of the shops at 11.10 p.m. and they had on display six packs of beer, bottles of wine and full bottles of whiskey. Out of curiosity I asked the lad in charge if I could buy a full bottle of whiskey at 11.10 p.m. and he said I could. He was a non-national who had difficulty speaking English, therefore I doubt if he knew much about to whom liquor should be sold. That is terrible.
As regards the vintners' argument that their business will be ruined, I would not shed any tears if that happened. One has only to look at the prices in the region of €2 million being gained for pubs nowadays. It would not worry me if they caught a cold. If one listened to the gabby cabby from New York this morning on the radio, one would have heard him say that argument was nonsense because they are all doing fine. He said he knows that is the case because he takes their passengers and he said there has not been any drop off in business.
I hope something will be done about people smoking on buses because my experience is that they are still doing it. I hope there will be a clampdown on that. It is not fair to ask the driver of the bus, since there are no conductors, to control the situation, particularly in certain areas. We must consider that.
Someone referred to the fact that we have successfully got rid of smoking on aeroplanes. I am glad that is the case because I remember when smoking was allowed. The smoking section was up the front and the non-smoking section was behind it, which meant all the smoke drifted back and everyone was choked by passive smoking. It was nonsense. Airlines used to have to change the air frequently in the body of the aeroplane because of the smoke. However, they do not bother to do that anymore because it is a costly exercise. Perhaps that could be drawn to the attention of the proprietors of airlines. That is the reason people get colds and bugs from aeroplanes all the time. As you, a Chathaoirligh, are a sophisticated international traveller who represents this august House——
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
——I will outline a way to avoid that, which is extraordinary. I was told by a woman who owns a travel agency that one should put a small piece of Vaseline in each nostril. I do not know whether the bugs try to fly up one's nostril and get stuck, but it stops one from getting a cold. Airlines should continue to change the air with reasonable frequency, although it is not polluted by tobacco smoke.
Tom Morrissey (Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Fianna Fáil group for tabling this worthy motion tonight. I thank the Ministers of State, Deputies Tim O'Malley and Brian Lenihan, for being here to listen to the debate.
I congratulate the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, on his tremendous success in introducing the workplace ban on smoking. We have all known for a long time about the health effects and the costs associated with smoking and, regrettably, the large number of deaths attributed to smoking. The workplace ban on smoking will be applauded by all in time. When we look back, we will wonder why it took so long to introduce it.
I have not been a smoker since the age of nine, but I am alarmed at the number of young people, particularly young girls, who are smoking today. The Government should tackle this issue. The Minister's task was not easy, but his firm stance against all quarters, lobby groups and particularly the fifth column from within his own party is an abiding memory. The savings to the economy in terms of spending on health will be enormous in years to come. Workers will now experience a clean working environment. Those who have been subjected to passive smoking are the real winners.
Too much of the debate on the smoking ban has focused on the issue of smoking in pubs. The real issue occupying Deputy Martin's attention was his determination to provide a clean air working environment. I hope social pressure rather than recourse to the law will be the enforcer of this ban. Ireland has been to the forefront in introducing the ban and I am sure Europe will follow its lead.
There are few notable political dates in Irish political history on which Ministers have taken a course which other Ministers failed to take. The few that come to mind are the introduction of free education in 1968 by Donogh O'Malley, the banning of corporal punishment by the late John Boland in 1981, the introduction of a smog free Dublin by Deputy Harney in 1990 and the introduction of the plastic bags levy by the then Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, in 2002. The introduction of the smoking ban on 29 March 2003 will go down in history as a great day for Ireland. I thank the Minister and the Fianna Fáil Party for putting down this motion tonight.
Fergal Browne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I congratulate the Government on managing to keep this topic in the media for so many months. It certainly distracted the Opposition, as we fell over ourselves being for or against it. It also distracted members of the public, who forgot about the other huge issues in the health area. Whoever is advising the Minister for Health and Children on public relations deserves top marks. He or she deflected the public's attention and got much mileage from a single issue. That person should get a benchmark award for it.
There are important issues in the health area, one of which is the Hanly report. The Minister for Health and Children made it clear that he accepted the Hanly report. He was then undermined by the Minister for Defence, Deputy Michael Smith, in the Dáil. He was given some support by the Taoiseach, who proceeded to pull the rug from under the Minister a few weeks later in the Dáil. Meanwhile, the public does not know what is the position with the Hanly report. People are also not aware of what the position is regarding the diagnostic health centres which are part of the health strategy. That has implications for Carlow, which is the only county in the country without a general hospital. The county was hoping to be the location for one of the diagnostic health centres but we are not yet aware——
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The House has already had a debate on the Hanly report.
Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Carlow has an excellent Caredoc facility.
Fergal Browne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, and it was started by people in the county. The Government should now deal with the main issues in health which affect people daily. The smoking ban has deflected people's attention, which is not necessarily a good thing.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as the saying goes. It is still too early to fall over ourselves congratulating the Government on doing a good job. This country has a great record for introducing laws but does not have a great record for enforcing them. I am my party's spokesperson on transport. Despite the penalty points system, this year the number of road fatalities is 20 more than in the same period last year. All Members of the House had been hoping to see a further reduction. Enforcement is a key issue and it will be particularly important in implementing the smoking ban.
I am not a smoker and have no wish to become one. In fact, I am anti-smoking. However, I have some difficulties with the smoking ban. The ban on smoking in company cars is daft and unenforceable. Unless people are obliged to put a sign on their cars indicating that they are company cars, it cannot be enforced. It is also grossly unfair, particularly for sales representatives who travel throughout the country. Members will have experienced that amount of travel during the Seanad election campaign. If one is travelling from Donegal to Cork to Dublin to Galway and if one is the sole occupant of the car, one should be allowed to smoke. It is different if one is sharing the vehicle with somebody else. In that case, I can accept the point about the car being a company vehicle. However, if one is the sole occupant and user of the car, one should be allowed do as one wishes. This is a valid point which should be re-examined. It is a silly and unenforceable rule which takes from the merits of the smoking ban.
Senator Morrissey referred to young people smoking. In the past few days a number of people have wondered what effect, if any, the smoking ban will have on young people. Some were of the opinion that it would glamorise smoking even further and encourage young people to smoke. It will be interesting to see what plans the Government has to tackle that, particularly with regard to young females. The smokers among my former students are predominantly female. One rarely sees young men smoking; they appear to be more keen on keeping fit. Women, for some reason, are more likely to smoke, which is regrettable.
We should not just leave this issue as it stands. It is ironic that people who are smoking will be penalised if they go into pubs but somebody who is taking illegal drugs can go into a pub. The Minister has a role not just in imposing a smoking ban but also in dealing with the major drug problem in this country. Carlow is experiencing an increasing drug problem because of the success of the Garda in putting pressure on the Westies gang, which operated in the Minister of State's constituency of Dublin West. Unfortunately, however, the gang has spread into other areas, such as Carlow. The town is experiencing a drugs epidemic.
What are the long-term consequences of the smoking ban? Senator Morrissey said the State will make major savings. However, it could be argued that because people are not smoking and, as a consequence, will live longer, it will have huge implications in terms of pensions and people dying from degenerative diseases. In future, for example, people will be less likely to die from cancer or heart attacks and more likely to die from Alzheimers or Parkinsons disease. Has the Government any plans to invest money into research in this area in an effort to make predictions? Otherwise, we might be setting ourselves up for a big fall.
Dublin Airport is a hub for Europe. Passengers on international flights might have to land in Dublin to get a connecting flight to another European destination. They will now have to check out of the airport to smoke. Take the example of a passenger travelling from Washington to Dublin to Paris. The passenger will have to check out of Dublin Airport to have a cigarette and then check in again. Until now, such passengers could smoke in a restaurant. Some smokers will find it difficult to survive without a cigarette for more than seven or eight hours. Has the Minister considered this? It is a little ridiculous to oblige passengers to check out and in again at an airport. Perhaps certain areas within airports could be designated for smoking. It might also calm people. The danger is that if a person is tense when flying, they might drink more instead of smoking and that could lead to even greater difficulties.
Camillus Glynn (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank my colleagues for the valuable contributions they made to this debate. Wide ranging views were expressed. There was a suggestion that the Minister should tackle the alcohol problem next. As a person who enjoys a drink, I am the first to admit that something must be done about it. Much of the violence on and off our streets is drink related. Something must be done about it and I doubt that there is a better man to do the job that Deputy Martin, ably supported by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Michael McDowell, who has proven he is not behind the door when hard decisions must be made. That is the type of leadership we need.
There was also a reference to drugs. Certain parliamentarians have suggested the legalisation of soft drugs such as cannabis and marijuana. Under no circumstances would I support such a move. These are clearly gateway drugs, a stepping stone to hard drugs. Any young lad or lassie going to discos, nightclubs or whatever will tell one who is supplying drugs. Clear evidence is emerging that school children, teeny-boppers, are peddling drugs, including cannabis, and that people are looking the other way. That attitude is representative of bygone era when one told the authorities nothing. It is time people started to blow the whistle on those people. I do not care who they are, whether they are Joe Bloggs or Cathy Barry's son or daughter, if they are supplying soft or hard drugs, they must be nailed.
The question of enforcement arose. The public will enforce the ban, and rightly so. Comments were made about the vintners. In the main, they have acted responsibly and have done their best. There were instances where unrealistic expectations emerged from certain people among its membership. There is an exception to every rule and people tend to quote the exception but the rule among the vintners is that they have acted responsibly.
It was a pleasure to go into my local on the night of 29 March. There were no ashtrays on the table and everywhere was spick and span, as it usually is. There were no cigarette butts on the floor or cigarette smoke wafting through the atmosphere permeating the nostrils and the airways of the customers, which was welcome.
A Senator asked why it took so long to introduce the ban. My response to that is that it is never too late to do the right thing, and the right thing has been done here. Testament to that is that this measure has attracted much commendation not only nationally but internationally. That the measure came through the Houses with all-party support is a clear indication that the Minister, Deputy Martin, and his Ministers of State got it right.
I would not agree with the comments of Senator Browne that this is distracting the Opposition. I would not consider it a distraction to introduce a ban on a product which is responsible for taking approximately 7,000 lives each year, so I do not believe that is a valid point.
Senator Norris said it took his aunt 75 years to give up smoking. I do not know how long she was smoking before she gave it up but she went on to live to 103 years. I know many people who did not make it to 75 years, including, I regret to say, my brother who died aged 66 of lung cancer. I thank the Cathaoirleach, the Minister of State and my colleagues on all sides for their support for this motion.