NORTHERN IRELAND ASSEMBLY

COMMITTEE FOR HEALTH, SOCIAL SERVICES AND PUBLIC SAFETY

OFFICIAL REPORT

(Hansard)

Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill:

Clause 15

Smoking: Exemption for Performers

Witnesses:
Mr John Botteley (Theatrical Management Association)
Mr Nick Livingston (Arts Council of Northern Ireland)
Mr Robert Kirkwood (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety)
Dr Brian Gaffney )
Mr Gerry McElwee )Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition
Mr Seán Martin )

The Chairperson (Mrs I Robinson):

We now come to the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. I refer members to the folder circulated at the Committee meeting of 21 June 2007, which contains the papers relating to the Bill. Members are reminded to bring the folder to each meeting of the Committee Stage of the Bill.

I refer members to the following correspondence on the smoking issue: from the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health; from Northern Ireland Cancer Registry; a letter from the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation; and, finally, a letter dated 28 June 2007 from the Northern Ireland Chief Environmental Health Officers Group. Copies of the letters are in members’ packs. An information pack from the Health Promotion Agency has also been tabled for members’ information.

During the Committee Stage of the Bill, officials from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, Mr John Farrell and Mr Robert Kirkwood, will be present to provide clarification or to answer questions. Today’s evidence session will consider the provision in the Bill to allow performers to smoke if the artistic merit of a performance requires it. During the Second Stage of the Bill, the Minister signalled his intention to withdraw that exemption to the smoking ban at the Consideration Stage of the Bill.

At present, however, clause 15 remains part of the Bill.

The two sets of witnesses in attendance today wish to put the cases for and against the exemption. The sessions will be short, with each organisation allocated about half an hour. The first set of witnesses is from the Theatrical Management Association (TMA) and the Arts Council of Northern Ireland. The Health Committee welcomes Mr John Botteley, who is the Theatre Director at the Grand Opera House and a member of the TMA; and Mr Nick Livingston from the Arts Council of Northern Ireland. Witnesses, you can decide whether one or both of you will give the presentation, for which you will have 10 minutes. After that, there will be about 20 minutes of questions.

Mr John Botteley (Theatrical Management Association):

Thank you, Chairperson. I will begin the presentation; Mr Livingston will speak on behalf of the Arts Council. I am a member of the council of the Theatrical Management Association.

The TMA represents a large proportion of the theatres and theatrical production companies in the UK. In Northern Ireland, the Grand Opera House and the Lyric Theatre in Belfast; McNaughton Productions Ltd in County Antrim; the Market Place and Arts Centre in Armagh; the Millennium Forum in Derry; and the Riverside Theatre in Coleraine are all members of the TMA. It also represents the National Operatic and Dramatic Association (NODA), which has 22 affiliate groups in Northern Ireland and which represents 4,000 amateur participants.

Mr Nick Livingston (Arts Council of Northern Ireland):

In February 2007, the Arts Council responded to the consultation on smoke-free premises and vehicles and to proposed regulations to be made under powers in the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. The Arts Council welcomed the proposed exemption for actors who participate in a performance when the artistic integrity of the piece determines that smoking should be part of a performance.

The council supports the position taken by Equity and the Society of London Theatre. The exemption should be applied not only in England, but also in Northern Ireland when sections of the work to be performed require it. The Arts Council wants to persuade the Government of its view and notes that the regulations apply only to performers and not to the place of performance or premises, and only when justified by the plot. Exemptions are in place in England and in the Irish Republic, where actors have the option to use herbal cigarettes.

The Arts Council is not opposed to the introduction of the smoking ban in workplaces and enclosed spaces, nor does it dispute the evidence that has been provided to the Committee by the Chief Medical Officer that smoking claims the lives of about 2,300 people each year in Northern Ireland — a truly shocking statistic. The Arts Council does, however, consider the exemption to be about more than merely trying to achieve a lifelike effect on stage when an author has written a stage direction that a character should smoke in a scene.

Smoking during scenes of certain plays, such as the modern classic ‘Saturday Night and Sunday Morning’, assists the author to establish the character. The character’s smoking is part of the play and the characterisation and contributes to the quality of the experience that the audience enjoys. Smoking is, therefore, an integral part of that play. Can we imagine, for example, Winston Churchill without his trademark cigar or Joanna Lumley as her character Patsy in ‘Absolutely Fabulous’ without her cigarettes? It is difficult to imagine how that effect would be achieved convincingly in any other way.

The Arts Council is not opposed to the greater freedom of the general public to enjoy smoke-free areas. The general smoking ban is not the issue; the issues is the unique circumstances of theatre, film and television, where smoking is required to establish character, period, historical accuracy or setting when there is no alternative. Interpreting smoking as using "any lit substance" would also rule out the use of herbal cigarettes. Scenes would, therefore, lose the power to convince. Smoking happens in real life, and if the stage is to reflect real life in all its diversity, theatre practitioners must be able to use the tools of their craft to make effective use of props and to sustain the power of the scene.

If a blanket ban on smoking in all public places were imposed, smoking would be one of the few human behaviours that could not be portrayed on stage, film or television, and that would be extraordinary. We accept, for example, that an actor can take a drink on stage; however, he is not consuming alcohol but a substitute, such as apple juice, Ribena or burnt sugar. Real blood is not shed on stage in a production that contains violent scenes; a substitute is used. Therefore smoking would become one of the few human behaviours that could not be simulated on stage.

In his evidence to the Committee on 14 June, the Chief Medical Officer referred to the dangerous effect that an exemption would have on actors and performers; but that is difficult, if not impossible, to establish. The risk to theatregoers from short-term exposure to smoke in brief scenes is incalculably small.

Is there any real evidence that attending a theatrical performance at which a few plumes of smoke drift forward from the stage amounts to passive smoking? Is there a material health risk to the audience? Is there any known evidence of risk from smoking herbal cigarettes? Theatres are huge spaces, and smoke quickly dissipates into the fly tower and backstage. The inconvenience and disruption to the public who are sitting in the auditorium is small.

We are concerned about the intrusion on artists’ liberty. Furthermore, an issue of artistic quality arises. Northern Ireland is renowned throughout the world for the quality of its contemporary theatre, with playwrights such as Graham Reid and Brian Friel having brought great distinction to Northern Ireland. The public has a right to know that what it witnesses on stage is being represented as the author wrote it. Were we to compromise that, our reputation as a centre of theatrical excellence and distinction might be short-lived. To ban smoking on stage would be a cruel judgement on those who care about and work in theatre, and whose endeavours have succeeded in creating artistic integrity of a calibre that is valued and acknowledged internationally.

The TMA believes that a blanket ban on smoking in public places will reduce the choice available to audiences in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland depends on touring product from the rest of the United Kingdom, and it is difficult to see how scenes could be adapted or rewritten to accommodate our audiences. Our argument that herbal cigarettes — for which there are no known health risks — proposes a reasonable alternative. Theatres are wide-open spaces in which the smoke quickly dissipates, causing little inconvenience to the public.

Mr Botteley:

The public areas in the Grand Opera House have been virtually smoke-free for the past 10 years. Since it reopened in October last year, the theatre — front of house and backstage — has had a total smoking ban in place, with the exception of a couple of occasions when actors smoked on stage.

I support the legislation. An artist friend of mine died of lung cancer as a result of exposure to smoky venues. The entertainer Roy Castle, whom the Chairperson mentioned, died of a smoking-related disease, which he attributed to working in arts venues. Therefore I am aware of the situation.

The TMA does not want to return to those times. However, we do seek an exemption for the very occasional occurrence when smoking is important to a production. Theatre portrays society warts and all; it portrays fiction, fact and fantasy. We are concerned that, without the exemption, we would have to censor productions, without there being any resultant health benefit.

Theatre portrays the best and the worst of people. The longest-running play in the history of theatre, ‘The Mousetrap’, by Agatha Christie, is still performing in London after 55 years. Its central theme is murder, but, of course, no actual murder takes place. In the theatre, we use artifice. At Second Stage, the Minister cited ‘Julius Caesar’. He is right to say that no real blood is shed in productions; however, as an alternative, actors can use what resembles real blood in order to convince audiences.

The problem is that although there are realistic alternatives to blood and shootings, we cannot find a realistic alternative to smoking. The Grand Opera House production of ‘Chicago’, which was staged last week, featured a dance sequence that is a stylised portrayal of 1920s America — a time when many men smoked. In order to comply with the new legislation, all the dancers in that scene had unlit cigarettes. It looked completely unconvincing and, frankly, ludicrous.

There is an argument that smoking on stage encourages others to smoke. However, a recent production of ‘Trainspotting’ at the Grand Opera House was described by one customer as the best argument against drug taking that he had ever seen. Smoking was integral to the plot, and had a smoking ban been in place, that play could not have been staged in Northern Ireland.

In addition, the law can restrict what is seen on television or on film. On the first day of the ban in England, Dot Cotton of ‘EastEnders’ was portrayed lighting up as usual in the Queen Vic pub, only to be told to put out her cigarette. That is an example of how drama can reflect what happens in people’s lives. It is interesting to note that that scene could not have been filmed in Northern Ireland.

In the portrayal of historical characters, smoking partly defines who those characters are — Mr Livingstone referred to Winston Churchill. In ‘The Rat Pack – Live from Las Vegas’, Dean Martin always has a characteristic cigarette in one hand and a glass of bourbon in the other. The Grand Opera House had two sell-out weeks of that production in January 2007; had the smoking ban been in place, that show could not have been produced in Northern Ireland because the characterisation could not have been made without the bourbon and the cigarette.

It can be argued that alcohol is just as damaging to health as smoking. As Mr Livingstone said, alcohol can be simulated on stage whereas smoking cannot. The fact that the legislation differs in various jurisdictions poses a serious problem for productions staged in the Grand Opera House. An actor can smoke a cigarette on stage in England or a herbal alternative in the South of Ireland, but they cannot do so in Northern Ireland. Most of the productions staged in the Grand Opera House come from England or the South of Ireland; we would either have to change those well-rehearsed productions — which is inconceivable —or do without them.

A couple of weeks ago, I attended a West End production of ‘The Hound of the Baskervilles’, which I was considering bringing to Northern Ireland. The production features Sherlock Holmes lighting his pipe. That is an important part of the show, but the ban means that I cannot bring that production to Northern Ireland. Surely some herbal tobacco smoke from Sherlock Holmes’s pipe would not affect anyone’s health.

In conclusion, the Theatrical Management Association and the National Operatic and Dramatic Association ask for an exemption from the ban on smoking on stage where it is essential to the plot or to historical accuracy, and in associated rehearsals. At the very least, as a compromise we ask that the law allow the use of non-tobacco products. In that way, tobacco smoke could be simulated in the same way that murder is simulated without the use of real blood. We believe that there is no risk to health in allowing the very occasional portrayal of smoking in the wide-open space of a theatre stage or, for that matter, a film studio.

The Chairperson:

Thank you very much, Mr Livingstone and Mr Botteley. I shall now open up the discussion so that members can ask questions. I visited Disney-MGM Studios in America with my grandchildren where we enjoyed seeing simulations of battles scenes from the ‘Star Wars’ trilogy and the magnificent props from the film studios. I find it difficult to accept that no one in the theatrical world, which you are representing today, can find a realistic alternative to smoking on stage.

Mr Botteley, you said that the legislation in the Republic of Ireland allowed some flexibility in these matters. What did you mean by that?

Mr Botteley:

Actors can smoke herbal cigarettes on theatre stages in the Republic of Ireland. The legislative definition of smoking in the South refers to tobacco; herbal cigarettes can, therefore, be smoked on stage in that jurisdiction. It is my understanding that no health risks are associated with the smoking of herbal cigarettes or the passive smoking of such products.

That is the alternative that we seek. I agree that Disney-MGM Studios use alternatives. However, Dean Martin’s having a cigarette in his hand is central to the way in which his character is defined, but a burning cigarette is not permitted in Northern Ireland. It is permitted in England, and in the Republic herbal cigarettes can be smoked on stage.

The Chairperson:

What happens when touring productions go to Wales and Scotland?

Mr Livingston:

No exemption was granted in Wales and Scotland, so those productions would be in the same position as in Northern Ireland. The difference is that Northern Ireland has an established reputation for excellence in the theatre, and it would be unfortunate if that reputation were diminished because of the general ban on smoking. Touring productions may not come to Northern Ireland because rehearsals would be expensive; scenes would have to be prepared differently and different stage directions given.

Mr Botteley:

Wales and Scotland have the same limited choice that we in Northern Ireland argue against. Certain productions would not be seen because producers would not want to re-rehearse a scene for one visit to Northern Ireland. Productions in Scotland and Wales are similarly limited.

The Chairperson:

You did not address the issue of the use of convincing props.

Mr Botteley:

It is against the law to use a lit cigarette, and no convincing alternative has been found. In certain scenes, it is important that actors bring a burning cigarette to their lips. In ‘Chicago’, unlit cigarettes were used, and they looked ridiculous. In the Lyric Theatre’s production of ‘Dancing at Lughnasa’, Brian Friel had to rewrite a scene because of the smoking ban, which is fine, provided the author is available to do that. That play is about a young girl in the 1920s and 1930s, whose rebelliousness and emancipation are characterised by the fact that she smokes. That is a powerful image. When I saw the play last week, the actor had to open a packet of Woodbines, take out a cigarette, put it to her lips and then put it back on the table without smoking the cigarette. Most of the audience were preoccupied by her not smoking the cigarette because of the smoking ban rather than engaging with the plot of the play.

Rev Dr Robert Coulter:

You said that you believed that herbal cigarettes would not be harmful to audiences because of the wide-open space in a theatre. What scientific evidence do you have for that?

Mr Botteley:

I cannot cite any scientific evidence to support that. The area above the stage in the Grand Opera House is twice the size of the stage, and the auditorium is massive. However, there is no scientific evidence that our proposed substitute — herbal cigarettes — damages health. I cannot believe that one cigarette in a huge space — 50 to 60 times the size of the Senate Chamber — would cause any health-related disease. The smoke would go up into the ether, and it would be difficult for anyone to inhale it.

Rev Dr Robert Coulter:

Can I take it that that part of your evidence is purely an assumption?

Mr Botteley:

Yes, it is an assumption.

Mrs Hanna:

I fondly support the arts, including the Grand Opera House, the Lyric Theatre and other venues; however, I do not believe that the absence of a lit cigarette will affect acting ability. You have referred to the excellent standards of acting in Northern Ireland. Do you not think that good actors can simulate smoking with an unlit cigarette? I have seen ‘Dancing at Lughnasa’ at the Abbey Theatre and at other venues, and I would not have been distracted if the cigarette had not been lit.

Mr Botteley:

I understand where you are coming from. The problem is that there is no ban in England; therefore plays, as rehearsed there, will not be able to come here. If there were a blanket ban throughout the United Kingdom, however much we disliked it, we would have to cope. With few exceptions, the productions that come to the Opera House are generated in the West End or in other parts of England, where no such ban exists. It is a question of providing theatre-going choice for the people of Northern Ireland.

The ‘Hound of the Baskervilles’ and ‘Trainspotting’, which are great productions and award-winning shows, cannot come to Northern Ireland because their management would not change their structures to suit one venue. If actors could smoke herbal cigarettes on stage, such productions would come to Northern Ireland.

Mrs Hanna:

I cannot understand why that should be. The only difference is that our legislation would require cigarettes to remain unlit. I am not an actor, but I could pretend to smoke a cigarette on stage — I could pretend to puff and inhale; I do not believe that it would make much of a difference. Is the problem that actors would not be allowed to come on stage here unless they performed plays in exactly the same way as in England or is it because they would not wish to do so?

Mr Botteley:

Last week, unlit cigarettes were used in a production of ‘Chicago’ at the Opera House — they were completely unconvincing. Although that is a personal view, it is shared by the Theatrical Management Association, which represents every theatre director in the UK.

Mr Livingston:

When the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety made his remarks to this Committee on 17 June, I was surprised by the unprecedented outcry from actors in Northern Ireland. Articles and blogs on the Internet appeared almost immediately, and there was an in-depth article in ‘The Stage’. There is a general feeling that to implement this ban would be to chip away at an important artistic liberty. It seems extraordinary that the stage, which can so accurately portray every other aspect of our lives, will be silenced in this area. From the perspective of theatre technicians and actors, it seems incomprehensible.

Mrs O’Neill:

What do the groups that are lobbying against artists being allowed to smoke on stage feel about herbal cigarettes? Have you been in contact with such groups?

Mr Botteley:

I have not been in contact with any such groups. I am aware that, as with everything, there is a suitable alternative, and the only realistic alternative to smoking tobacco is smoking herbal cigarettes.

Ms S Ramsey:

I thank the guys for their presentation. It was said that some actors perceive the proposed introduction of this ban as chipping away at their profession. I disagree. Things change every day — we live in a changing world. I do not wish to be flippant, but, not so long ago, it was thought OK to send children up chimneys. People realised that that was wrong and changed their attitudes.

Roy Castle was mentioned in the presentation, and hope was expressed that if smoking were allowed to continue in auditoriums, no harm would come to audiences in those wide-open spaces. For health and safety reasons, a duty of care exists for staff and workers. The concerns apply not only to audiences but to those who work in those environments every day.

Is there any evidence that plays have not been taken to Scotland and Wales? Dean Martin and ‘The Rat Pack’ were mentioned. Has that show not been staged in Scotland or Wales?

Mr Botteley:

The ban has been in force for too short a time. I arrange the programme for the Opera House 18 months in advance, as do my colleagues, so it is too early to gather evidence. I spoke to a colleague who runs the Festival Theatre in Edinburgh, and the problem has yet to arise there — it is too early to say whether the ban will affect shows in Scotland.

I made a direct programming decision not to bring ‘The Hound of the Baskervilles’ to Northern Ireland because smoking a pipe is integral to the plot. Therefore, I made that direct decision.

To answer the question about sending kids up chimneys; the difference is that the theatre portrays history, whereas life moves on. In all other circumstance, the ban is utterly justified. However, we still need to portray historical events. For example, ‘Mary Poppins’, which is currently playing in the West End, portrays chimney sweeps going up chimneys. That is a portrayal; it does not actually happen — that is the difference.

Ms S Ramsey:

I am well aware of that. However, Mr Botteley has said that there is evidence that we will lose out on the theatre productions that could be shown here. The Chairperson asked about the situation in Scotland and Wales because the same legislation operates in those regions also. Can it be said — 18 months in advance — that there is no way that ‘The Rat Pack: Live from Las Vegas’ will be shown in Scotland or Wales because of the smoking ban?

Mr Botteley:

I cannot speak for what will happen in Scotland and Wales; I can only mention the discussion I would need to have with the producer about bringing the show here. The fact is that it would be a lesser production if Dean Martin were not shown in the way in which he is characterised in the current form of the show. I can confirm that ‘The Hound of the Baskervilles’ will not be coming to Northern Ireland.

Mr Livingston:

Essentially, substitute stage directions would have to be written. Reflecting on the points that have been made, the view of most actors is that they respect the author’s integrity and would wish to see his intentions carried out. They would want to present a piece so that Northern Ireland audiences could see it in the manner in which the author originally intended.

We will arrive quite quickly at a situation where it will not be possible to approach authors and ask them to write new stage directions for plays because in some cases they will be dead. In those circumstances, that part of the repertoire would be seen less frequently, and that would deny choice to audiences in Northern Ireland.

Mr Botteley:

The other issue is that ‘The Rat Pack: Live from Las Vegas’ is an accurate reconstruction of an concert that actually took place. It has been recreated as accurately as possible from film footage and, therefore, the smoking that featured in the concert must be portrayed in the show. I am not saying that it would be impossible to change that, but it would be against the artistic integrity of the piece to do so. I have not spoken to the producer, but if he said that he did not want to change that aspect, the only option would be not to show it here.

Mr Buchanan:

I apologise for my late arrival.

I, too, am a great lover of the arts. However, I find it difficult to believe that those involved in the arts and the theatre cannot come up with something that is akin to a cigarette. If tobacco or cigarettes were allowed to be used during theatrical performances, would that not create the potential for licensed premises across Northern Ireland to be afforded the same right?

Cigarette smoke causes many deaths, and we need to provide a healthier society for young people, many of who see performers as role models. Would it not defeat the purpose of introducing a smoking ban across Northern Ireland if we were to allow performers to smoke cigarettes during performances such as those described by Mr Botteley? Exempting theatres would defeat the purpose of the ban and provide a bad example to young people in society.

The detrimental effect that the smoking ban will have on theatres across the Province and on the various plays and performances that will not be staged has been mentioned. How much will theatres lose financially because they are unable to present such plays during the first 12 months of the ban?

Mr Botteley:

The member has asked several questions. First, herbal cigarettes would be a suitable substitute for tobacco; however, they are also covered by the legislation. Secondly, as regards the effects that smoking on stage might have on young people, theatre drama shows life as it is, not as we would like it to be. I do not believe that an Agatha Christie play showing a murder on stage will encourage people to commit murder. Smoking on stage will not encourage anyone to smoke. People smoke; therefore drama should be able to show that.

The example of Dot Cotton in ‘EastEnders’ was very clear. The message in that instance was the opposite of the encouragement that Mr Buchanan suggested. Dot lit a cigarette in a pub and was told that, for a very good reason, she could not do that. That was a very positive anti-smoking message.

‘Trainspotting’ is a very powerful play about people with drug addictions. However, its message is exactly the opposite; it is about not taking drugs. It would not have been possible to stage that play if the actors had not been able to light up, because it was about the fact that lighting up — in this case, rolling joints and injecting heroin — was bad. The piece demonstrated that that was bad, and if the actors could not portray the drugs being taken, they could not demonstrate the message.

There would be no loss of revenue to theatres. The ban will have no financial impact, but it will have an impact on art. That is why we are here.

The Chairperson:

Does that answer all your questions, Tom?

Mr Buchanan:

Yes.

Mr McCallister:

Tom asked most of the questions that I was interested in. I agree with Tom and Carmel: it is incredible that, given the ingenuity of theatre producers, there is no better alternative than herbal cigarettes. I worry about the effects of smoking on young people, and I worry about the message that would be given if smoking on stage were to be permitted. As Tom also said, that might open the legislation to challenges from pubs. If pub takings were being affected by the smoking ban, then why should representatives of the licensed trade not ask for exemptions also? I feel strongly that the Committee must take a stand on this matter.

I am involved in amateur dramatics, so I — [Interruption.]

Ms S Ramsey:

It is called the Assembly.

The Chairperson:

Order.

Mr McCallister:

I am interested in the arts and in theatrical productions. However, the fact that Northern Ireland’s legislation is in line with that in Scotland and Wales leaves our English colleagues as the odd ones out. The sooner they join us, the sooner the problem will be solved.

Mr Livingston:

We do not dispute the need for smoke-free workplace regulations in Northern Ireland. However, theatre is a special case. Points that might be made, for example, by the licensed trade, are not necessarily those that we would embrace. Our point is that, if a stage direction — which is a very specific instruction by an author — requires actors to smoke, we are going to be faced with a dilemma. Should we ignore the author’s direction, and the characterisation it implies, and would we lose the value of the social or historical setting of the piece? Would the scenes portrayed on stage still be convincing? Would the lack of smoking erode the quality of the experience that the public currently enjoys? Fundamentally, would it affect the choice of plays that will be offered to the public on Northern Ireland’s stages?

Mr McCallister:

Actors do not have to get drunk to portray drunkenness convincingly. Therefore, they do not have to smoke to make a role convincing.

Mr Livingston:

We covered the point about alcohol. Alcohol is not consumed on stage because a substitute can be used. We are suggesting that a substitute for tobacco be considered.

The Chairperson:

Carmel, do you want to ask a supplementary question?

Mrs Hanna:

As someone who encourages and supports the arts, I hope that actors will not lose out on jobs because of artistic integrity.

We all feel strongly that the ban should apply to all workplaces, including the theatre. However, I hope that actors will still visit here regularly and will not stay away simply because they cannot light up on stage.

Mr Botteley:

Let me make one supplementary point. It does not take a great deal of intelligence to realise that we are batting on a fairly sticky wicket here but, pending more research on herbal cigarettes, would it be possible for us to put warning signs outside theatres or reach another compromise?

Although many of my colleagues feel that there should be no compromise on artistic integrity, the people of Northern Ireland will lose out by being given an inferior choice in comparison with that which is available in England. I am a theatre director, not a scientific expert. If herbal cigarettes do not constitute a risk to health, as I am assured is the case, could an exemption be given for smoking those instead of tobacco? Such an exemption would seem to satisfy all the genuine objections that members raised while providing the alternative for which they have rightly asked. We are not set on having an exemption for cigarettes; we are just asking that the ban should be realistic in the context of the piece.

The Chairperson:

We take that point on board.

Ms S Ramsey:

I want to make two quick points. First, as Carmel Hanna pointed out, if the Bill were to be introduced, as worded, it could offer individual actors opportunities for smoking that they would not otherwise have. Secondly, if a compromise were to be included in the Bill — which I would not support — who would be responsible for policing such legislation?

Mr Botteley:

As the person responsible for the Grand Opera House, I would be facing a substantial fine were the law to be broken. Members can be absolutely sure that I would police it.

Ms S Ramsey:

I am conscious of the fact — and I am just trying to think this through — that if Belfast City Council’s smoke wardens entered the Grand Opera House and smelled smoke there, performers could claim to be smoking as part of a rehearsal. That suggestion needs to be thought out more.

Mr Botteley:

We would have no objection to policing the legislation or to welcoming wardens from Belfast City Council as we do as regards all the other licensing legislation to which we are subject.

The Chairperson:

Unfortunately, smoking was made glamorous by film stars and stage actors. The whole thing probably emanated from American movies and from the advertising of cigarette brands such as Camel and Marlboro. Tobacco advertising was then banned. In Northern Ireland, we have a big problem of very young teenage girls taking up smoking as a habit. If we were to slacken the legislation by providing exemptions, where would we stop? We would simply be opening a can of worms.

I hope that the Committee has given you a fair hearing but, as you may have gauged, many of us feel that the interests and welfare of the people of Northern Ireland are best served by protecting them from secondary inhalation and from being in smoky environments. Having said that, I sincerely thank you both, Mr Botteley and Mr Livingston, for attending.

Obviously, the Committee will need to address issues such as what constitutes herbal cigarettes and other minutiae when it considers the Bill line by line. Thank you for attending. No doubt we will hear from you again.

Mr Botteley:

I thank the Committee for listening.

The Chairperson:

Mr Kirkwood, does the Republic of Ireland legislation contain an exemption that allows thespians to smoke herbal cigarettes on stage?

Mr Robert Kirkwood (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety):

Yes. During the drafting of the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, a conscious decision was taken to adopt a definition of "smoking" that was similar to that applied in England, Wales and Scotland. The definition in article 2(2)(b) of the Smoking (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 states:

"smoking includes being in possession of lit tobacco or of anything lit which contains tobacco, or being in possession of any other lit substance in a form in which it could be smoked."

That definition was chosen largely because it was designed to aid enforcement in cases in which those caught in breach of the ban would claim that their cigarette did not contain tobacco.

It was considered that amending the legislation in order to permit the smoking of herbal cigarettes on stage would make enforcement more difficult. Any amendment to the Bill allowing for the smoking of herbal cigarettes would mean further defining what herbal cigarettes are. For example, would cannabis qualify?

The Chairperson:

As well as acting, the performers would all be merry. Thank you very much.

I welcome the representatives of the Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition: Dr Brian Gaffney, chief executive of the Health Promotion Agency for Northern Ireland; Mr Gerry McElwee, head of cancer prevention at the Ulster Cancer Foundation; and Seán Martin from the Chief Environmental Health Officers Group.

Dr Brian Gaffney (Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition):

I thank the Chairperson and the Committee for allowing the Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition to state its case for opposing the proposed exemption.

I am here in my capacity as chairperson of the Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition, which is a coalition of partners from the public sector, statutory bodies, the community and voluntary sectors, and the private sector. Established in the run-up to the introduction of the Smoking (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, the Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition acted as advocates of the legislation and lobbied for its passage. The coalition remains together in order to provide a voice for partners across Northern Irish society in the implementation of smoke-free legislation. We are also trying to improve public health by preventing smoking in general. Accompanying me today are colleagues who each represent their particular sectors on the coalition.

The coalition obviously opposes the proposed exemption. The reasons why the legislation was originally passed must be recalled. We regard "performers", as clause 15 of the Bill refers to them, as another workforce, who must be protected from the effects of passive smoking. Why is one person’s smoking harmful to others? Tobacco smoke contains about 4,000 chemicals, 60 of which are known or suspected to cause cancer.

It is well known that people who do not smoke, and who are exposed to second-hand smoke, have a higher risk of suffering from lung cancer, heart disease and strokes, than those who are not exposed. It can also induce asthma attacks, cause pregnancy complications, and put children at risk.

A recent review of international research on the immediate health impact of smoke-free workplace legislation found rapid and dramatic improvements. Therefore, as a result of this legislation, we are seeking to achieve rapid and dramatic improvements for every workforce — including the acting profession.

The director general of the World Health Organization (WHO) summed up the evidence by saying:

"The evidence is clear, there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke".

That is true whether it involves a few puffs in a theatre, or a large amount of smoke in the theatre because tobacco smoke is a class A carcinogen — that has been accepted.

The proposed exemption is not limited to performances in theatre productions and other mainstream dramatic arts. It is a loose definition and covers any performance in any venue. It could include a performance in a public house, a hall or even a school. It would be ludicrous for smoking to be allowed at a school play, perhaps performed by an outside theatre company, just because of the belief that it is important to artistic integrity. What does "artistic integrity" mean? It has not been defined. We are opposed to the exemption because of the lack of a safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke, and because there are other implications in allowing people to smoke tobacco on stage or to use a substitute.

The influence of the tobacco industry in film and television is well documented. The ‘British Medical Journal’ has clearly highlighted that influence amongst teenagers. The five-year tobacco action plan for Northern Ireland, which we all work to — including, to my knowledge, the Arts Council of Northern Ireland, as a statutory body that is seeking to reduce inequalities in health — emphasises the fact that young people, who are affected by those performances, should be protected from tobacco smoke, and should be prevented from smoking.

To include the exemption would weaken legislation that has already been shown to be well supported across industry. It is important to remember that all workforces in Northern Ireland have had to make changes. Why should the performing workforce not have to do so too? The rate of compliance, as members will hear from my colleague, has been 99% or more. There is no doubt that this piece of legislation is well supported.

Some of the points that were raised previously surprised me. Recently, in Edinburgh, Mel Smith gave a successful depiction of Winston Churchill and was able to do so without smoking. Evidence presented on the basis of one’s opinion, or on the basis of one person attending a production, should not be treated seriously.

We are also concerned about the lack of definition of the word "herbal". I am not sure what that means. By introducing herbal cigarettes, we could be exposing people to damaging substances. I certainly do not know whether or not smoking herbal cigarettes in the presence of someone who has asthma could induce an asthmatic attack. Therefore, we do not support any move to allow the use of herbal cigarettes.

When people go the theatre or go to a performance, their choice is to go to the theatre — not to have their health damaged. We ask the Committee to take that into consideration.

As a Sherlock Holmes fan, I am surprised and disappointed that one person can make an arbitrary decision to refuse to allow the Northern Ireland public to see a play that we have seen reviewed in London on the basis that it cannot be performed because of a lack of lighting up a pipe. I do not recall that ever affecting my appreciation of Sherlock Holmes.

Mr Seán Martin (Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition):

Environmental Health Officers have been charged with enforcing the new legislation. All sectors of industry have embraced it, and we have had practically no difficulties whatsoever. The law is currently being enforced with regard to theatre productions. Permitting an exemption would be a backward, not a forward step, and we would like to move forward.

In less than a year, smoking will also be banned in mental-health units in Northern Ireland. It would be a step in the wrong direction to grant an exemption that would permit actors to smoke as part of a theatrical production. The legislation gives the Minister powers to add to smoke-free premises, and we feel that that is the way forward, rather than going backwards and permitting smoking to be part of stage productions.

I reiterate Dr Gaffney’s point that the word "performers" and not "actors" is being used in the legislation. It means that the exemption would not apply solely to theatres. The ridiculous situation could arise in which, even though smoking is banned in pubs, a theatrical production could be staged in a pub, and it could then be argued that actors should be allowed to smoke there for the sake of artistic integrity. That could lead to double standards being applied. At the moment, we are clear on the law, and people accept it. They supported the legislation before it was introduced, and they have shown that they support it wholeheartedly now. We have had few problems with enforcing the legislation.

Mr Gerry McElwee (Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition):

I reiterate the point that second-hand smoke is a killer. Tobacco smoke is a lethal cocktail of 4,000 chemicals including ammonia, arsenic and cyanide. We have heard from Dr Gaffney that there is an increased risk of stroke — up to 80% for non-smokers — not to mention lung cancer and heart disease.

The legislation was introduced after a long battle to protect the health of our population. The legislation is popular, and, hopefully, our research will soon prove that it is beneficial in improving the health of the population and, particularly, that of our workforce.

It is worth remembering that the legislation was introduced following many consultations. There were 71,000 responses from the public consultation in 2005, and 92% of the public informed us that they wanted comprehensive legislation. It would be strange if we were to go back on such popular and effective legislation only two months after its introduction. If our colleagues from the theatre discovered asbestos in a theatre tonight, I assume that they would close it and there would be no performance. However, we do not need to close the theatre to keep out cigarettes — all that we need to do is maintain the current legislation. The question is whether we wish to introduce carcinogens into the workplace and public places — to do so would defy all logic.

The Theatrical Management Association spoke about portraying real life accurately. However, if a play were being staged about the shipyard in the 1940s and 1950s, would real asbestos have to be introduced — I think not.

The association also spoke about herbal cigarettes. However, as Dr Gaffney said, the association did not provide a definition for such a cigarette. As far as I can see, they could be described as cigarettes minus nicotine and, therefore, could give us 3,999 chemicals but not 4,000. The association also stated that it has been assured that herbal cigarettes pose no health risk, but I do not know how it could have been given such an assurance. It defies logic. The Smokefree Northern Ireland Coalition believes that when substances such as herbal cigarettes are burned, similar cocktails of lethal chemicals are produced. There is no safe level, and we should not be exposing ourselves to them.

Smoking in the movies was mentioned. In the 1950s, three times as many people smoked as do now, yet several recent studies have found that there is now more smoking in Hollywood movies than there was in the 1950s. Perhaps it is due to product placement from big industry, but it could also be due to lazy scriptwriters who cannot think of another way to portray tension, rebellion — or whatever other emotion — other than by putting a cigarette into the scene.

I do not believe that there is a case for going back on our legislation. We have heard arguments about actors being unable to portray reality. I do not want to place any more tobacco products on the public stage. However, I will demonstrate an exception. Without needing to do much research, a colleague of mine went to a joke shop and bought this cigarette that I have brought with me. I assure the Committee that talcum powder and not a burning substance is coming out of it. We believe that the Theatrical Management Association has scored an own goal by stating that everything else — cleaning chimneys, producing blood, taking heroin and shooting bullets — can be portrayed on stage except smoking.

It is called acting, and it is time that that option was considered. In any scripts that need to be rewritten, the actor should simply be directed to hold, but not light, a cigarette.

The Chairperson:

Thank you. I liked your props, which were most convincing. Indeed, I was going to ask whether you would mind stubbing out your cigarette.

Before I open the floor to members’ questions, can I ask why the exemption was successfully included in the legislation in England? I assume that the Health Development Agency made similarly rigorous demands to yours that the Government should not go down that route.

Dr Gaffney:

I must emphasise that there was no smoke-free coalition in England. In looking back on how the legislation on smoking was introduced, I refer to New York, which was one of the first cities to introduce a ban. The New York Coalition for a Smoke Free City guided us on our approach. It emphasised the need for a lobby, or advocate body, comprising as many of the public, statutory, community/voluntary and private sectors as possible, to send a consistent message. By following that advice, we succeeded in a way that those in England did not. We were able to push through what we consider to be successful, well-supported legislation, with which there is a high level of compliance.

Mr McCallister:

Is there any rock-solid evidence that would make you accept the use of herbal cigarettes?

Dr Gaffney:

No one really knows what herbal cigarettes contain. There is no consensus on that and no definition. Therefore to ensure that a dangerous substance was not being introduced into public areas, rigorous trials would have to be carried out to define what is meant by a "herbal" cigarette.

Even allowing herbal cigarettes would create role models who smoke for those young people who see actors doing it on stage. It would also allow owners of other businesses, such as licensed premises, to argue that if smoking on stage does not harm anyone’s health, it should be permitted in their pubs.

How to police the smoking of herbal cigarettes would cause confusion. An exemption to allow smoking on stage would introduce a negative element into what the Chief Medical Officer referred to as probably the most important piece of public-health legislation for many decades. When the ban was introduced in England, Sir Liam Donaldson described it as "a footprint" in public health. Rather than seeking to weaken the legislation, the ban should be supported and additional measures sought to prevent further smoking.

The Chairperson:

Are you happy with that answer, Mr McCallister?

Mr McCallister:

I am more than happy.

Rev Dr Robert Coulter:

I thank the witnesses from the coalition for coming today. I am impressed by your arguments, particularly the powerful and valid one about school plays. Is it an insult to the intelligence of the people in the audience that, although they have no problem with accepting actors in a play portraying drug taking, they cannot make a similar leap of imagination on the portrayal of smoking without it actually happening? If the exemption is agreed, how would it be policed? How would we know that the cigarettes being smoked did not contain tobacco?

Dr Gaffney:

I have nothing but admiration for professional actors. However, almost every other workforce in Northern Ireland has had to amend its behaviour to comply with legislation that protects its safety. Any building that contains asbestos, which is another class-A carcinogen, must have it removed.

We have legislation on smoking because tobacco smoke is a class-A carcinogen, and the workforce must comply. I expect professional actors to come up with a creative solution by amending or interpreting stage directions to make clear what they are trying to portray. I cannot tell them how to do that, but I am sure that they can come up with an answer.

Mr Martin:

The definition of smoking is good and all-encompassing and is written in a way with which the Smokefree Coalition is happy, because it prevents expenditure on analysing products to determine what they are.

The difficulty that we would face if herbal cigarettes were introduced as an option for performers is that smoking is defined in the legislation as using "any lit substance", including tobacco and herbal cigarettes. That is primarily to make enforcement easier.

If an actor were seen smoking a lit substance, we would not have to take a sample or approach the smoker because there is no funding to send a sample for analysis — he or she would be considered to be smoking. From the perspective of the agency that is charged with enforcement, allowing the use of herbal cigarettes would be a retrograde step.

Rev Dr Robert Coulter:

In those circumstances would policing the legislation be impossible?

Mr Martin:

It would be expensive and difficult for the enforcement agencies. It would also be a backward step, because the legislation makes enforcement easy: everyone understands that smoking cannot be done in public spaces and workplaces.

Rev Dr Robert Coulter:

Would it insult the intelligence of the audience to expect it to accept a portrayal of drugs, but not of cigarettes?

Mr Gaffney:

Any reports that I have heard about current plays have been very positive. I have not heard of anyone saying that they did not enjoy a production because the cigarettes were not lit. I would find it hard to believe if they did.

Mr McCallister:

How would you portray Winston Churchill now? [Laughter.]

The Chairperson:

There we shall end. Cut.

I watch ‘Bones’, which is so realistic that I sometimes hide behind the cushion. If that programme can have such realistic props, surely a convincing cigarette or pipe can also be created.

I thank you, Brian, Seán and Gerry, for your presentation.