Madam, - On the subject of the advertising of alcohol, Sinéad Shannon writes that "voluntary codes do not work" (Opinion & Analysis, October 8th). She supports this conclusion by reference to a study undertaken by the Department of Heath and Children "a few years ago".
I would point out that the codes to which Ms Shannon refers were introduced only in 2003, so the findings of the Department study, which predate their introduction, can hardly support her argument.
Ms Shannon also comments that the proposed legislation on this issue "could have restricted where advertisements were placed, limited the content of advertisements and - most importantly - banned drinks industry sponsorship of youth leisure activities." Ironically, the voluntary codes which the industry has introduced, in consultation with the Department, do each of these things and in particular address the exposure of young people to alcohol advertising.
Other correspondents have drawn an analogy between the smoking ban and an alcohol advertising ban. There is a fundamental difference, however, which is that evidence now shows that smoking is harmful. Moderate consumption of alcohol is not. You might as well use the smoking ban argument to call for an end to advertisements for cars because of the numbers killed on our roads each year. Where would this approach stop?
Most importantly, however, the voluntary codes are working. For example, in 2004, 12 per cent of advertisements submitted to the CCCI (the independent body responsible for approving the content of alcohol advertising) were rejected by that body and amendments requested. And as a result the number of complaints made about alcohol advertising has reduced dramatically.
Indeed, I understand that the Broadcasting Complaints Commission of Ireland has received no complaints in respect of the advertising of alcohol this year.- Yours, etc,
RICHARD DUNNE, Chairman, Drinks Industry Group of Ireland, Dublin 4.\
Madam, - I cannot believe that a Government which so skilfully uses advertising in its election campaigns, and clearly puts a high value on photo-opportunities, is not aware of the implications of a self-regulating advertising policy for the drinks industry.
Nor can it be unaware of the destruction alcohol is causing in young people's lives.
In April the Health Promotion Unit of the Department of Health published a report on this subject (The College Lifestyle and Attitudinal National Report). This report found that 61 per cent of male students and 44 per cent of female students binge-drank at least once a week.
It also found that these students were three times more likely to have unprotected sex, get into fights, have money problems and use alcohol (or drugs) to cope with depression and anxiety.
On April 26th an Irish Times Editorial headed "Alcohol abuse", referring to the need to protect young people, concluded: "part of that Government programme should involve a ban on alcohol advertising".
I believe that Government policy in this matter is totally market-led and that consequently it behoves each of us to call "Enough". I appeal to the Irish Medical Organisation, the teachers' unions, and to parents who may have lost a child in alcohol-related circumstances to speak out now. - Yours, etc,
PATSY CALLANAN. Clybaun Road, Galway.
Madam, - I wholeheartedly agree with Dr Pascal O'Dea (October 11th) and other writers to your columns calling for effective legislation governing alcohol and advertising.
As the various political parties prepare to present themselves to the electorate in two years' time, perhaps it would be in order to enquire from them if, and how, they propose to tackle this issue. - Yours, etc,
Dr ORLA HALPENNY, Roebuck Road, Dublin 14.