IPH Submission: Belfast City Centre Northside Urban Village Regeneration Framework - June 2008

IPH welcome the opportunity to comment on the Department for Social Development, Draft Regeneration Framework for the North West Quarter Part 2 area of Belfast City Centre, the ‘Northside Urban Village’. The Framework outlines the vision for the redevelopment of an inner city area of Belfast.    It is recognized that a number of social, economic and environmental factors influence health. Urban regeneration has major implications for health as it includes not only physical redevelopment but also issues such as education, employment, environmental conditions, housing, welfare and healthcare.   Urban regeneration can also help to address health inequalities at a local level, as the areas where regeneration is undertaken are usually marked by poor economic and social conditions. The North West Quarter Part 2 area of Belfast is a historic part of the city. The identified area is one of the most socio-economically deprived areas of not only Belfast but Northern Ireland. The area is characterised by the large number of people who receive income and housing benefits, have low levels of educational qualifications, high rates of long-term illnesses and it is also an area of high long-term unemployment.

Model-based appraisal of minimum unit pricing for alcohol in Northern Ireland

In 2009, the Sheffield Alcohol Research Group (SARG) at Sheffield University developed the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model version 2.0 (SAPM) to appraise the potential impact of alcohol policies, including different levels of MUP, for the population of England. In 2013, SARG were commissioned by the DHSSPS and the Department for Social Development to adapt the Sheffield Model to NI in order to appraise the potential impact of a range of alcohol pricing policies. The present report represents the results of this work. Estimates from the Northern Ireland (NI) adaptation of the Sheffield Alcohol Policy Model - version 3 - (SAPM3) suggest: 1. Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) policies would be effective in reducing alcohol consumption, alcohol related harms (including alcohol-related deaths, hospitalisations, crimes and workplace absences) and the costs associated with those harms. 2. A ban on below-cost selling (implemented as a ban on selling alcohol for below the cost of duty plus the VAT payable on that duty) would have a negligible impact on alcohol consumption or related harms. 3. A ban on price-based promotions in the off-trade, either alone or in tandem with an MUP policy would be effective in reducing alcohol consumption, related harms and associated costs. 4. MUP and promotion ban policies would only have a small impact on moderate drinkers at all levels of income. Somewhat larger impacts would be experienced by increasing risk drinkers, with the most substantial effects being experienced by high risk drinkers. 5. MUP and promotion ban policies would have larger impacts on those in poverty, particularly high risk drinkers, than those not in poverty. However, those in poverty also experience larger relative gains in health and are estimated to marginally reduce their spending due to their reduced drinking under the majority of policies åÊ

"I hadn't a penny": A review of State Income Supports Available to Young Parents

As Minister for Children, I am pleased to publish this paper which provides an overview of the income supports available for young parents. This paper has been commissioned as part of the evaluation of the Teenage Parents Support Initiative (TPSI) funded by the Department of Health and Children.The objective of this paper is to discuss the degree to which existing provision within the Irish welfare system meets the financial support needs of teenage parents, in particular, the level to which it meets the needs of different subgroups within the overall population of teenage parents. Download document here

Address by Michea¡l Martin to the Conference - Legislating for Tobacco Free Society

Thank you Chairman I would like to extend a warm welcome to our keynote speakers, David Byrne of the European Commission, Derek Yach from the World Health Organisation, and Paul Quinn representing Congressman Marty Meehan who sends his apologies. When we include the speakers who will address later sessions, this is, undoubtedly, one of the strongest teams that have been assembled on tobacco control in Europe. The very strength of the team underlines what I see as a shift – a very necessary shift – in the way we perceive the tobacco issue. For the last twenty years, we have lived out a paradox. It isn´t a social side issue. I make no apology for the bluntness of what I´m saying, and will come back, a little later, to the radicalism I believe we need to bring – nationally – to this issue. For starters, though, I want to lay it on the line that what we´re talking about is an epidemic as deadly as any suffered by human kind throughout the centuries. Slower than some of those epidemics in its lethal action, perhaps. But an epidemic, nonetheless. According to the World Health Organisation tobacco accounted for just over 3 million annual deaths in 1990, rising to 4.023 million annual deaths in 1998. The numbers of deaths due to tobacco will rise to 8.4 million in 2020 and reach roughly 10 million annually by 2030. This is quite simply ghastly. Tobacco kills. It kills in many different ways. It kills increasing numbers of women. It does its damage directly and indirectly. For children, much of the damage comes from smoking by adults where children live, study, play and work. The very least we should be able to offer every child is breathable air. Air that doesn´t do them damage. We´re now seeing a global public health response to the tobacco epidemic. The Tobacco Free Initiative launched by the World Health Organisation was matched by significant tobacco control initiatives throughout the world. During this conference we will hear about the experiences our speakers had in driving these initiatives. This Tobacco Free Initiative poses unique challenges to our legal frameworks at both national and international levels; in particular it raises challenges about the legal context in which tobacco products are traded and asks questions about the impact of commercial speech especially on children, and the extent of the limitations that should be imposed on it. Politicians, supported by economists and lawyers as well as the medical profession, must continue to explore and develop this context to find innovative ways to wrap public health considerations around the trade in tobacco products – very tightly. We also have the right to demand a totally new paradigm from the tobacco industry. Bluntly, the tobacco industry plays the PR game at its cynical worst. The industry sells its products without regard to the harm these products cause. At the same time, to gain social acceptance, it gives donations, endowments and patronage to high profile events and people. Not good enough. This model of behaviour is no longer acceptable in a modern society. We need one where the industry integrates social responsibility and accountability into its day-to-day activities. We have waited for this change in behaviour from the tobacco industry for many decades. Unfortunately the documents disclosed during litigation in the USA and from other sources make very depressing reading; it is clear from them that any trust society placed in the tobacco industry in the past to address the health problems associated with its products was misplaced. This industry appears to lack the necessary leadership to guide it towards just and responsible action. Instead, it chooses evasion, deception and at times illegal activity to protect its profits at any price and to avoid its responsibilities to society and its customers. It has engaged in elaborate ´spin´ to generate political tolerance, scientific uncertainty and public acceptance of its products. Legislators must act now. I see no reason why the global community should continue to wait. Effective legal controls must be laid on this errant industry. We should also keep these controls under review at regular intervals and if they are failing to achieve the desired outcomes we should be prepared to amend them. In Ireland, as Minister for Health and Children, I launched a comprehensive tobacco control policy entitled “Towards a Tobacco Free Society“. OTT?Excessive?Unrealistic? On the contrary – I believe it to be imperative and inevitable. I honestly hold that, given the range of fatal diseases caused by tobacco use we have little alternative but to pursue the clear objective of creating a tobacco free society. Aiming at a tobacco free society means ensuring public and political opinion are properly informed. It requires help to be given to smokers to break the addiction. It demands that people are protected against environmental tobacco smoke and children are protected from any inducement to experiment with this product. Over the past year we have implemented a number of measures which will support these objectives; we have established an independent Office of Tobacco Control, we have introduced free nicotine replacement therapy for low-income earners, we have extended our existing prohibitions on tobacco advertising to the print media with some minor derogations for international publications. We have raised the legal age at which a person can be sold tobacco products to eighteen years. We have invested substantially more funds in health promotion activities and we have mounted sustained information campaigns. We have engaged in sponsorship arrangements, which are new and innovative for public bodies. I have provided health boards with additional resources to let them mount a sustained inspection and enforcement service. Health boards will engage new Directors of Tobacco Control responsible for coordinating each health board´s response and for liasing with the Tobacco Control Agency I set up earlier this year. Most recently, I have published a comprehensive Bill – The Public Health (Tobacco) Bill, 2001. This Bill will, among other things, end all forms of product display and in-store advertising and will require all retailers to register with the new Tobacco Control Agency. Ten packs of cigarettes will be banned and transparent and independent testing procedures of tobacco products will be introduced. Enforcement officers will be given all the necessary powers to ensure there is full compliance with the law. On smoking in public places we will extend the existing areas covered and it is proposed that I, as Minister for Health and Children, will have the powers to introduce further prohibitions in public places such as pubs and the work place. I will also provide for the establishment of a Tobacco Free Council to advise and assist on an ongoing basis. I believe the measures already introduced and those additional ones proposed in the Bill have widespread community support. In fact, you´re going to hear a detailed presentation from the MRBI which will amply illustrate the extent of this support. The great thing is that the support comes from smokers and non-smokers alike. Bottom line, Ladies and Gentlemen, is that we are at a watershed. As a society (if you´ll allow me to play with a popular phrase) we´ve realised it´s time to ´wake up and smell the cigarettes.´ Smell them. See them for what they are. And get real about destroying their hold on our people. The MRBI survey makes it clear that the single strongest weapon we have when it comes to preventing the habit among young people is price. Simple as that. Price. Up to now, the fear of inflation has been a real impediment to increasing taxes on tobacco. It sounds a serious, logical argument. Until you take it out and look at it a little more closely. Weigh it, as it were, in two hands. I believe – and I believe this with a great passion – that we must take cigarettes out of the equation we use when awarding wage increases. I am calling on IBEC and ICTU, on employers and trade unions alike, to move away from any kind of tolerance of a trade that is killing our citizens. At one point in industrial history, cigarettes were a staple of the workingman´s life. So it was legitimate to include them in the ´basket´ of goods that goes to make up the Consumer Price Index. It isn´t legitimate to include them any more. Today, I´m saying that society collectively must take the step to remove cigarettes from the basket of normality, from the list of elements which constitute necessary consumer spending. I´m saying: “We can no longer delude ourselves. We must exclude cigarettes from the considerations we address in central wage bargaining. We must price cigarettes out of the reach of the children those cigarettes will kill.” Right now, in the monthly Central Statistics Office reports on consumer spending, the figures include cigarettes. But – right down at the bottom of the page – there´s another figure. Calculated without including cigarettes. I believe that if we continue to use the first figure as our constant measure, it will be an indictment of us as legislators, as advocates for working people, as public health professionals. If, on the other hand, we move to the use of the second figure, we will be sending out a message of startling clarity to the nation. We will be saying “We don´t count an addictive, killer drug as part of normal consumer spending.” Taking cigarettes out of the basket used to determine the Consumer Price Index will take away the inflation argument. It will not be easy, in its implications for the social partners. But it is morally inescapable. We must do it. Because it will help us stop the killer that is tobacco. If we can do it, we will give so much extra strength to health educators and the new Tobacco Control Association. This new organisation of young people who already have branches in over fifteen counties, is represented here today. The young adults who make up its membership are well placed to advise children of the dangers of tobacco addiction in a way that older generations cannot. It would strengthen their hand if cigarettes move – in price terms – out of the easy reach of our children Finally, I would like to commend so many public health advocates who have shown professional and indeed personal courage in their commitment to this critical public health issue down through the years. We need you to continue to challenge and confront this grave public health problem and to repudiate the questionable science of the tobacco industry. The Research Institute for a Tobacco Free Society represents a new and dynamic form of partnership between government and civil society. It will provide an effective platform to engage and mobilise the many different professional and academic skills necessary to guide and challenge us. I wish the conference every success.

Report of the Working Group to examine the development of appropriate systems to determine nursing and midwifery staffing levels

Click here to download PDF

Steering Group Report on a National Substance Misuse Strategy February 2012

Alcohol plays a complex role in Irish society. It is associated with many aspects of Irish social and cultural life and is generally consumed for enjoyment, relaxation and sociability. The pub often plays an important role in community life and is an attraction for tourists. More broadly, alcohol plays a signifi cant role in the Irish economy by generating employment, tax income and export income.However, alcohol is no ordinary commodity. It has major public health implications and it is responsible for a considerable burden of health and social harm at individual, family and societal levels. Steering Group Report on a National Substance Misuse Strategy February 2012 Click here to download PDF 2.7mb

Good Practice Guides

This series of Good Practice Guides is designed to share important information about health inequalities and some of the evidence-based measures that can be taken to reduce the stark differences in health and wellbeing within populations. It is recognised that leadership and coordinated, effective action at a number of levels can reduce this gap. Ensuring concerted, evidence-based action on health and wellbeing inequalities demands the efforts of government, statutory organisations and the community, voluntary and private sectors. The Good Practice Guides were developed to inform and support joined-up working across these sectors. It is known that health inequalities are closely linked with degrees of social disadvantage and with the unequal distribution of power, income, goods and services. According to the World Health Organization, there are also powerful social and psychological factors and life circumstances that can serve to compound health and wellbeing inequalities. The topics included in the Good Practice Guide series reflect the wider determinants of health and the range of approaches necessary to reduce health inequalities. This first set of three guides is designed, in part, to test their usefulness. There are many other issues and areas where evidence of what works may be needed. It is envisaged that further guides will follow on other issues. All of the guides will be kept under review and amended in light of experience.

Survey of salt levels in soup in catering establishments on the island of Ireland

The aim of this survey was to provide a snap shot of the salt content of soup from a range of catering outlets on the island.

Food on a low income - Four households tell their story

The aim of this research was to investigate the everyday experiences of food on a low income among people in four household types on the island of Ireland (IOI). This research will inform safefood and other stakeholders targeting vulnerable groups. It should influence both policy and practical programmes such as community food initiatives and awareness campaigns.

Food on a Low Income: Four households tell their story

The aim of this research was to investigate the everyday experiences of food on a low income among people in four household types on the island of Ireland (IOI). This research will inform safefood and other stakeholders targeting vulnerable groups. It should influence both policy and practical programmes such as community food initiatives and awareness campaigns. Why do low-income groups suffer more from diet-related ill health than other groups? Is it because a healthy diet is too expensive? Or what other forces are there at work? safefood commissioned this qualitative research for four different low-income household types to gain a deeper understanding of the dynamics behind food poverty. The research involved a qualitative approach to enable an exploration of the ‘why’ behind the statistics of food poverty. In total, thirteen focus groups were conducted amongst four household types: two parent household with children, single males, single older people and lone parents with children, on IOI in both rural and urban settings.

Does income inequality cause health and social problems?

Key points• The literature shows general agreement about a correlation between income inequality and health/social problems. • There is less agreement about whether income inequality causes health and social problems independently of other factors, but some rigorous studies have found evidence of this. • The independent effect of income inequality on health/social problems shown in some studies looks small in statistical terms. But these studies cover whole populations, and hence a significant number of lives. • Some research suggests that inequality is particularly harmful beyond a certain threshold. Britain was below this threshold in the 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s, but rose past it in 1986–7 and has settled well above it since 1998–9. If the threshold is significant it could provide a target for policy. • Anxiety about status might explain income inequality’s effect on health and social problems. If so, inequality is harmful because it places people in a hierarchy which increases competition for status, causing stress and leading to poor health and other negative outcomes. • Not all research shows an independent effect of income inequality on health/social problems. Some highlights the role of individual income (poverty/material circumstances), culture/history, ethnicity and welfare state institutions/social policies. • The author concludes that there is a strong case for further research on income inequality and discussion of the policy implications.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

Behaviour change at population, community and individual levels: NICE Public Health Guidance 6

This guidance is aimed at those responsible for helping people to change their behaviour to improve their health. This includes policy makers and those working in local authorities and the community and voluntary sectors. It gives advice on how to plan and run relevant initiatives. The recommendations include the following advice: base interventions on a proper assessment of the target group, where they are located and the behaviour which is to be changed: careful planning is the cornerstone of success  work with other organisations and the community itself to decide on and develop initiatives build on the skills and knowledge that already exists in the community, for example, by encouraging networks of people who can support each other take account of and resolve problems that prevent people changing their behaviour (for example, the costs involved in taking part in exercise programmes or buying fresh fruit and vegetables, or lack of knowledge about how to make changes) base all interventions on evidence of what works train staff to help people change their behaviour evaluate all interventions.This resource was contributed by The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use.

A Rapid Mapping Study of Smoking Projects and Services Targeted at People Living on Low Income and/or Minority Ethnic Groups

This is a study concerned with community based services aimed at smokers living on a low income and/or black and minority ethnic groups.

Low-income Groups and Behaviour Change Interventions: A review of intervention content and effectiveness

This is the second paper in a series, Kicking Bad Habits, on how people can be encouraged to adopt healthy behaviour. Looking at interventions targeted specifically at low-income groups, this paper asks which interventions are effective in getting people to quit smoking, eat healthily and exercise. It reveals that the most frequently used techniques are providing information and encouraging people to set goals, which can be particularly effective at changing behaviour in disadvantaged groups.