The smoking ban in Ireland: smoke-free or smokescreen?

Since the inception of the smoking ban in Ireland, there has been a fair amount of public controversy in terms of its potential effects on the Irish economy, the healthcare system, tourism, and pub culture. At the level of public discourse, the ban has raised a variety of interesting issues and polarisations. These include debates on the rights of policy-makers versus individual freedoms; and on the potential economic effects of the resultant decline in alcohol sales and the impact upon tourism, versus the concerns of the public and of health officials regarding the effects of second-hand smoke. These debates illustrate how the various interest groups involved have, at moments, coincident, and at other moments divergent interests and agendas. However, the biggest political dichotomy has been between the two groups with the most power: the government on the one hand and, on the other, the capitalist class represented by the (multi)national alcohol and tobacco industries, and the petit-bourgeois class represented by publicans.

While many reacted with surprise at Ireland's becoming the first country in the world to implement a nation-wide blanket ban on smoking, because of the association of Ireland with pub culture, and therefore with smoking, there appears to have been a high rate of compliance with the anti-smoking law. This has led Minister for Health Micheal Martin to claim that the ban has been a success. Martin has had the support of the major trade unions for the ban, since it protects the rights of employees, and he was honoured by the World Health Organisation for his role in facilitating the ban. Evidence shows that people who work in pubs in Ireland are particularly at risk from the harmful effects of ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke), since recorded rates of cotinine (a by-product of nicotine) measured were high. Given the high rate of smoking in Ireland--30 per cent of the population smokes--and the centrality of pub culture to Irish social life, it is clear that ETS presents a particular risk to pub employees and other workers in the hospitality industry. However, some have perceived this as a ploy to deflect attention from the crisis state of the Irish healthcare system, and as an attempt to deflect state responsibility for Irish healthcare by locating health as an individual, rather than a collective or state responsibility (Unison, 2004).

Martin Cullin TD, the environment minister, questioned whether this ban was 'following the political correctness of America' (Irish Health, 2003), which raises questions both with regard to the ban as a symptom of the perceived 'Americanisation' of Irish culture--an issue of great debate in Ireland--and also with regard to whether this move is a 'smokescreen' for the fact that the Irish healthcare system is more likely to go in the direction of the neoliberal American model than that of more 'social democratic' models in Europe. The ban itself could potentially have positive effects on the infrastructure of public health.

However, the ideological premise that health is an individual rather than a societal responsibility illustrates the extent to which the Celtic Tiger 'boom' has not been accompanied by a strengthening of Ireland's infrastructure. This displacement of responsibility for public health onto the individual glosses over the extent to which the Irish state has failed to enforce legislation curtailing harmful pollution from industrial agriculture and industrial development in general. It also glosses over the extent to which the dismal state of Irish public transport is directly related to rising rates of fuel emissions in Ireland, and the state's refusal to impose environmental limits on industry and to redistribute corporate wealth towards public services.

Despite the fact that the ban locates health as the responsibility of the private citizen, the general public was not consulted in the debates leading up to the ban. Rather, the government and health officials led these debates alongside publicans, token independent politicians and corporate tobacco firms. An analysis of media reports on this issue reveals that the majority of debate focused specifically on commerce, health and sociability. Commercial interests have raised some concerns. For instance, the Vintner's Federation of Ireland claimed that there has been a demonstrable reduction in alcohol sales since the inception of the ban. The director of the Irish Brewers Association claimed that there were seven million fewer pints sold in April than in March as a direct result of the decline in pub-going due to the ban (Irish Examiner, 2004). While take-home alcohol sales went up during this time, the increase was not high enough to affect the alleged loss in revenue. Of particular concern is the loss of revenue to rural pubs, which showed a more rapid decline than urban pubs (allegedly a 25 per cent loss of revenue in some areas), and also the reduction in sales in Southern pubs bordering Northern Ireland, which are losing customers to pubs in the North that brazenly advertise 'Smoking Allowed Here' (Irish Examiner, 2004). This decline in alcohol revenue is consistent with opinion-poll figures showing that smokers (and a few non-smokers with smoking friends) are now finding alternatives to the pub for socialising, as a direct result of this ban.

This tendency for public debate to reflect only the interests of the state and commerce, and to ignore the views of the general public, is consistent with the distinct class and gender bias that the ban reflects. This legislation has a more pronounced effect on working classes and on women, since 30 per cent of people in semi-skilled or unskilled labour are smokers compared with only 17 per cent of professionals; and 54 per cent of smokers are female, compared with 46 per cent who are male (Breaking News, 2004). This raises questions with regard to the class and gendered politics of the 'policing' of the behaviour of less powerful populations. Although the ban is a 'blanket' ban, a few allowances are made for individuals in stressful situations: exemptions can be made for guesthouse bedrooms, prisons, gardai [police] detention areas, nursing homes, hospices, religious order residences, psychiatric hospitals, and residences for third-level education institutions. However, the populations most dramatically affected by this ban--the labouring classes and women--were not consulted.

As one would anticipate, however, there have been notable expressions of resistance through a variety of strategies, and at a variety of levels. For instance, TD John Deasy, who is the opposition party spokesperson for health, deliberately smoked three cigarettes in the Dail bar the day after the ban and, while initially getting off with a warning, he was subsequently fired (Waterford News, 2004). A Cork hackney cab driver is pursuing a lawsuit, arguing that the smoking ban infringes on his civil liberties and constitutional rights (Cork Examiner, 2004). In Sligo, so many pub-goers lit up herbal cigarettes (which are not, as yet, illegal) to mask the smell of tobacco cigarettes that publicans and the gardai claimed enforcement of the ban was 'impossible'. Journalists anticipated that this form of 'herbal' protest would spread across Ireland (Sligo News, 2004).

Despite these forms of resistance, however, there has been a surprisingly low level of contestation and a high level of compliance with the ban. Given that pub culture in Ireland is a traditional site of identity, sociability and community, Ireland's position as the first 'no smoking' nation illustrates a fairly radical break with past cultural traditions.

The apparently high levels of formal compliance also illustrate a radical break from the formerly evasive and subversive attitude to rules and regulation, and to the law in general. The inception of and reactions to the ban are arguably indicative of radical shifts in Irish cultural life; shifts which are associated in complex ways with the rapid social transformations that have accompanied Ireland's recent period of rapid economic growth, or 'accelerated modernisation' (Keohane & Kuhling, 2003).

Although Irish commentators are almost unanimously proclaiming that the Celtic Tiger is now 'dead', the ban reflects ways in which Ireland's experience of accelerated modernisation has reconfigured relationships to community, sociability and authority. For instance, research on 'crisis' [unwanted] pregnancies (Mahon, 1998), suicide (Keohane & Chambers, 2002), and traffic accidents (Keohane & Kuhling, 2003) provides examples of social problems that exemplify an emerging collision between two disparate worldviews.

Reactions to the ban are a case in point, illustrating the way Ireland is in the throes of a variety of collisions between 'old' and 'new' forms of cultural life. For instance, the ban has resulted in a radical reconfiguration of the division between pub and street life, since now smokers stand outside pubs to smoke, often for the entire evening.

Some smokers have claimed that this constitutes a colonisation of outdoor space that has opened up new possibilities for social interaction, and has resulted in a new 'smokers' solidarity'. However, the changing boundaries of pub and street life have increased safety risks for both customers and staff, by increasing the potential for harassment and violence. Instances of ban-related violence have been reported from the United States: in the case of a bouncer in Greenwich Village, New York, for instance, who was stabbed to death when he asked a man to put out his cigarette; in Ireland, women smokers have reported harassment from men on the street.

Publicans have adopted a number of strategies to ensure that the ban is enforced, such as offering outdoor seating, extra security and telephone calls to the gardai. However, these strategies are optional, and many publicans have refused to provide safe or comfortable spaces for smokers to congregate in.

Over and above safety issues, however, there is a more generalised concern with regard to how the decline of pub culture might affect Irish collective cultural identity. Pubs in Ireland have long been identified as sites of community, solidarity and sociability.

Irish sociologists illustrate how the pub is central to Irish sociality and society, and has been closely related to everyday community life (Tovey & Shore, 2003). There is a risk, though, of overlooking the way this particularly Irish notion of authenticity has itself become a commodity. For instance, Slater has shown how 'Irishness' is packaged and sold in the global pub industry through images of familiarity and sociability, and through the use of Irish holidays (St Patrick's Day), images (i.e. pints of Guinness) and rhetoric ('Best Prices, Lads!') (Slater, 2000).

Nonetheless, it is clear that this ban has already transformed the way in which the pub will function in Irish collective life. The inception of and response to the ban signifies the varying ways in which the experience of accelerated modernisation has transformed Irish cultural life. On the one hand, the smoking ban illustrates a shift towards an ethos of self-care; a new reflexivity about the body, and a shift away from the repressive 'mortification of the flesh' approach of Catholicism.

On the other hand, it shows how the new discourse of 'health' and 'wellness' is replacing Catholicism as the new mechanism of surveillance and moral regulation. Aspects of Irish cultural life that were strongly influenced by Catholic and/or communitarian values are now in conflict with the emerging liberal individualist and secular ethos. It remains to be seen whether the decline in pub-going in Ireland will contribute to a decrease in collective sociability and an increase in cultural fragmentation, or whether sociability has simply resumed in private homes and other venues. We will have to wait until the smoke clears in order to determine the long-term effects. *

Note:

* At the time of going to press (July 2004), pubs in Galway and Cork have blatantly challenged the ban, claiming that they are upholding the fights of their customers. However, ensuing publicity and the popularity of these pubs would indicate that this was a strategy to improve business.

References:

Breaking News website (2004) at <http://breaking.tcm.ie/> [accessed 28 May].

Cork Examiner (2004) 16 June.

Irish Examiner (2004) 22 June.

Irish Health website (2003) at <http://www.irishhealth.com> [accessed 12 August].

Keohane, K. & D. Chambers (2004) 'Exploring Irish suicide', in M. Corcoran & M. Peillon (eds.) Memories of the Present: Sociological Chronicles 3 (Institute for Public Administration) Dublin, October.

Keohane, K. & C. Kuhling (2003) 'Collision culture: Identity, trauma and the experience of accelerated modernisation in Ireland', in Irish Journal of Sociology, October.

Mahon, E. (1998) Women and Crisis Pregnancies in Ireland (Stationary Office) Dublin.

Slater, E. (2000) 'When the local goes global', in E. Slater & M. Peillon (eds.) Memories of the Present: A Sociological Chronicle of Ireland, 1997-1998 (Institute for Public Administration) Dublin.

Sligo News (2004) 2 April.

Tovey, H. & P. Shore (2003) A Sociology of Ireland (Gill & McMillan) Dublin.

Unison website (2004) at <http://www.unison.ie> [accessed 22 June].

Waterford News (2004) 25 June.