The Minister for Justice, Mr O'Donoghue, dashed vintners' hopes that there would be a rethink on a legislative provision requiring judges to close premises when licence-holders were convicted of selling alcohol to under-age persons.
Rejecting a proposed amendment to the Intoxicating Liquor Bill which would have given judges discretionary powers on closure the Minister emphasised that strong sanctions must be available for use against those who engaged in criminal and irresponsible activities.
The Bill obliges judges to close premises for up to seven days for a first offence or for a maximum 30 days for subsequent offences. Advocating that the power be made discretionary, Mr Joe Costello (Labour) said he had always espoused the principle that mandatory penalties made for bad law.
Mr Eddie Bohan (FF), who is a publican, said the trade was very concerned about the penalty being provided. He believed that over 99 per cent of publicans would not tolerate the sale of alcohol to minors. However, it was unfair to impose a draconian punishment on any publican who unknowingly broke the law.
Mr John Cregan (FF) expressed concern that pub staff could find themselves out of work if premises were closed. Dr Mary Henry (Ind) said the Minister was right to refuse to deviate from the path he had undertaken. Bar-owners in the US had found that identification difficulties could be overcome by employing more staff.
Mr Ernie Caffrey (FG) described the closure sanction as extreme. A publican whose premises was closed for seven days could lose half his or her trade, he said.