A study by Frank Houghton (Technological University of the Shannon) and John Lombard (University of Limerick) has found that while compliance with tobacco legislation was generally high, relatively few instances of non-compliance resulted in convictions, and the penalties imposed were typically far below the maximum available under law.
Across the study period (2014 – 2023), around 80% of inspections found businesses to be compliant with tobacco-control legislation. However, despite an average of 2,384 instances of non-compliance each year, only 1.12% of non-compliant cases resulted in a conviction.
The study also found that, where convictions were secured, penalties were generally modest. Some 93% of fines and 86% of costs awarded following prosecution were €1,500 or less.
Temporary bans on selling tobacco products were also typically short. More than half (57%) lasted one day or less, while only 7% were imposed for 30 days or more.
Smoking remains a public health challenge
Houghton and Lombard note that, despite decades of tobacco-control measures and smoking-prevention initiatives, smoking continues to affect health and well-being.
Ireland has implemented a wide range of tobacco-control measures, including high tobacco taxation, the smoking ban, plain packaging requirements, restrictions on point-of-sale displays, and a minimum legal purchasing age of 18 years (although new legislation will increase this to 21).
Houghton and Lombard argue these provisions are not sufficient if they are not effectively enforced.
A decade of inspections
The study analysed enforcement data published annually by the HSE’s National Environmental Health Service (NEHS).
Between 2014 and 2023, an average of 12,794 inspections of premises selling tobacco products were carried out each year.
Inspection activity fell sharply during the COVID-19 pandemic as HSE staff were required to respond to pandemic-related demands.
In 2019, 14,997 inspections were conducted. This fell to 7,494 in 2020 and remained below pre-pandemic levels afterwards, with 8,969 inspections recorded in 2023.
Despite fluctuations in inspection activity, compliance rates remained relatively stable throughout most of the study period.
Excluding the pandemic years, compliance generally hovered around 80%, with no clear indication of improvement over time.
The study also highlighted the contrast between the number of non-compliance findings inspections and the number of convictions secured.
Convictions accounted for just over 1% of all identified instances of non-compliance across the decade.
Conviction rate
The study also examined convictions under different sections of the legislation.
The largest numbers of convictions were recorded under provisions relating to smoking in workplaces and the compliance of smoking shelters (113 convictions) and underage or test purchases (106 convictions).
By comparison, convictions under some other sections of the legislation were relatively rare.
Eight related to signage requirements and there were two convictions for interfering with an Environmental Health Officer carrying out their duties.
Convictions for failures relating to registration on the Tobacco Retail Register and vending machines were also low, at 18 and 20 respectively.
Future research
Reflecting on their findings, Houghton and Lombard note that compliance levels remained relatively constant throughout the study period.
They argue that enforcement levels warrant closer attention and suggest several areas for further examination.
Among their recommendations are the introduction of fixed-charge notices for certain offences, a greater focus on the implementation and enforcement of existing legislation, and further analysis of patterns within the available data.
The authors also highlight the need for qualitative research to better understand what happens between the identification of a breach and the decision to issue a summons. They describe this decision-making process as a “black box”.
The study concludes by highlighting the value of further research on public health enforcement in Ireland, including whether similar questions could be explored in relation to other legislation, such as the Public Health (Alcohol) Act 2018.
This blog is based on an article by Lucy Dillon in the current edition of Drugnet available here.
