Mary Kelly Foy
MP for City of Durham · Labour · United Kingdom
“The rate of smoking in pregnancy is at a record low of just 4.2%, saving babies’ lives and supporting families to have the best start in life. Record levels of funding are going to stop-smoking services.”
House of Commons15 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The regulation of vaping products is necessary to reduce their youth appeal, and the Government are right to be pulling multiple levers to achieve that aim, including a crackdown on rogue sellers through new planning powers for councils, the incoming licensing and registration scheme, and the vaping products duty, which came into effect a…”
House of Commons15 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The inequality is stark: if current trends continue, people with a degree will reach smoking rates of less than 1%, while people with no qualifications are not expected to reach that same milestone until 29 years later. That gap should concern us all, because it shows that progress is not being felt equally across society.”
House of Commons15 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I am so pleased to speak in this debate and to have secured it alongside my APPG co-chair, the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman). As co-chairs of the APPG on smoking and health, we will always champion cross-party support for ending the epidemic in the UK.”
House of Commons15 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Harrow East alluded to, hearing someone say that they would buy cigarettes before buying food for their children, and that they only ever managed to take their children on holiday once they quit, shows how cessation can give not only freedom from addiction, but financial freedom too.”
House of Commons15 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This Labour Government should be bold and set a date by which we will pledge to see smoking rates below 1% in all groups across society. We can introduce a levy on industry profits to fund programmes to support smokers and still have cash to spare.”
House of Commons15 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,031 held · 596 searchable for Mary Kelly Foy. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“The Crime and Policing Bill offers us the opportunity to right the wrongs of the past, to restore fairness and to ensure that we have laws that respect the rights of all people, regardless of their heritage or way of life. This Bill could be the means by which we address the discrimination faced by Gypsies and Travellers. We need bold action to ensure that their traditions are protected. All people and all communities have the right to fair treatment. If we really want to stand for justice and human dignity, that must apply to all, so as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma, I urge the Government to undo the harm of the previous legislation. Let us stand for equality under the law and protection for all who live in the United Kingdom.”
House of Commons10 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I must stress that the impact of these measures is not theoretical; it is real and it is being lived. It is affecting families, children and entire communities. Human rights bodies have raised their concerns. The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, in its formal recommendation, has called for the repeal of the provisions in question and, importantly, the High Court, in its ruling in 2024, found that certain provisions in the Act were incompatible with the European convention on human rights. This Parliament has a duty to address these human rights violations and to correct the injustices done.”
House of Commons10 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Act introduced a new criminal offence related to trespass, and granted sweeping powers to ban those communities from areas for up to 12 months, as well as powers to fine, arrest, imprison and seize the homes of Gypsies and Travellers. Under these provisions, sanctions can be enforced based on damage, disruption or distress, often rooted in subjective perceptions of harm. This means that entire communities could face eviction or banishment from areas, with little regard for the cultural context or the lack of alternative places to settle. These measures are a grave injustice and an affront to the rights and dignity of those who follow centuries-old ways of life. It is concerning that, in the supposed pursuit of law and order, the previous Government overlooked fundamental human rights protections.”
House of Commons10 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This Bill presents an opportunity to confront the challenges facing our communities, protect the most vulnerable and ensure that justice serves everyone. I welcome the Government’s commitment to tackling violence against women and girls, to tackling antisocial behaviour and to halving knife crime. This is a positive step forward, strengthening protections for the public and addressing some of the damaging policies of the previous Government. I must therefore turn my attention to the impact of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. In its rush to extend police powers, this legislation has had a devastating effect on Gypsy and Traveller communities.”
House of Commons10 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Last December, the Royal College of Nursing Northern Ireland revealed that there is a severe shortage of nursing staff in the north—there are almost 2,000 vacancies in the sector—as well as concerns about retention. What steps is the Northern Ireland Office taking to support the Executive in providing safe levels of staffing in Northern Ireland, including by tackling staffing pressures, low pay and unacceptable working conditions?”
House of Commons26 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The report from the Grenfell Tower inquiry is utterly scathing about the role of central Government and their obsession with deregulation. The drive to scrap so-called red tape was a key failing, which led to such a terrible incident and the avoidable loss of life. Will the Deputy Prime Minister confirm to the House that that approach has been ditched in relation to policies concerning fire safety, building safety and the construction sector?”
House of Commons26 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This would be subject to consultation, but the model proposed by Action on Smoking and Health would cap the wholesale price of tobacco, similarly to how we cap the prices of essential utilities and hence limit profits. The big four tobacco companies account for 95% of UK sales and make excessive profits selling a highly addictive product that kills two in three long-term users when used as intended by the manufacturer. Tobacco manufacturers make an estimated £900 million in profit per year in the UK, with an average net operating profit margin of about 50%. For context, the average profit margin for UK manufacturing is 10%. There is widespread public support for this measure: 79% of adults in Great Britain would support a levy on the tobacco industry, with only 5% opposed.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A “polluter pays” levy on tobacco manufacturers could raise around £700 million a year, with that money coming from tobacco companies’ profits, not raised from consumers. A levy of this kind would provide sustainable funding for tobacco control and could be given to organisations such as Fresh, the tobacco control programme in the north-east, which does such vital work in ensuring that no one gets left behind as we move to a smoke-free future. In fact, all the Government’s programmes on tobacco, including mass media campaigns, incentives for pregnant women and support for smokers with mental health problems, could be funded many times over, with cash to spare that could go to other public health initiatives.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. I will not be pushing this new clause to a vote; nevertheless, I think it is a policy that the Minister should take into consideration. New clause 2 would require the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to consult on a “polluter pays” levy. The Minister will know that I and members of the all-party parliamentary group on smoking and health have campaigned for this for some time. It was also recommended in the Khan review in 2022 and, more recently, by the Institute for Public Policy Research’s commission on health and prosperity. Action on Smoking and Health estimates that smoking costs England more than £43 billion a year. That is more than £27 billion in productivity costs, nearly £14 billion in social care costs and more than £1.8 billion in NHS costs—and much more.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The difference is that the tax would not come from the consumers. This would be a tax on the big four tobacco companies, rather than raising taxes from consumers. We know that consumers of these products are already likely to come from deprived backgrounds. In addition to raising revenue, the measure would allow us to impose much tighter controls on the prices of tobacco products. That would disincentivise the tobacco industry from creating so much profit from their products. Although the Chancellor can use taxes for whatever purpose, this measure would be a tax on those companies whose product, as we know, kills one in two of the people who use it. Just raising taxes in the way that the hon. Lady describes would be an extra burden on the consumers who we are trying to help quit tobacco.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The new clause would be a game changer. One of the questions was whether the measure might later be applied to other areas—I presume that the hon. Member means taxing the big alcohol and gambling companies—but tobacco is a uniquely lethal and addictive product, so in this case the intervention is justified. She makes a good and compelling point, but I think the Government’s overall health strategy is to shift from sickness to prevention, which will require looking at all habits and supporting people to live healthier lives in healthy environments.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The new clause asks for a consultation, so a lot of issues would need to be worked through with the Chancellor. However, the tobacco companies make exorbitant profits from a product that kills the folk to they sell it to, so I am sure that the shadow Minister would agree that that means we should use some of their profits to pay for the damage being done.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(3) In this section, ‘relevant cigarette filter’ means a filter which contains plastic and which is intended for use in a cigarette, whether as part of a ready made cigarette or to be used with hand rolling tobacco or other substances to be smoked in a cigarette.”— (Dr Caroline Johnson.) This new clause requires the Secretary of State to make regulations which would prohibit the supply of cigarette filters which contain plastic or cigarettes containing cigarette filters which contain plastic. The regulations would be made under section 140 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Brought up, and read the First time .”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 4 Ban on supply of cigarette filters “(1) The Secretary of State must make regulations under section 140 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 having the effect of prohibiting the supply of relevant cigarette filters or cigarettes containing relevant cigarette filters, whether by way of sale or not, in the course of a business. (2) The notice required under section 140(6)(b) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the regulations mentioned in subsection (1) must be published no later than the end of the period of 6 months beginning with the day on which this Act is passed.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I wonder whether the Minister will allow me to indulge in a history lesson of my own, as that seems to have been the order of the day for most of the Committee’s sitting days. While I am overjoyed that the Bill is one step closer to becoming law, I must make the Committee aware of a previous smoking ban introduced in the 16th century by Pope Urban VII. During his short period as pope—it lasted 13 days—he went like the clappers to bring in a smoking ban, before he snuffed it. That ban was taken further by Pope Urban VIII, who banned snuff and threatened to excommunicate anyone smoking it, chewing it or sniffing it in or anywhere near a church. I only wish that the hon. Member for Windsor was in his place to realise that the Bill is positively liberal compared to the papal bulls of those popes.”
House of Commons30 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I totally agree that we need a consultation—that is the beauty of gauging the public interest—but the issue around smoking in public places, and particularly play yards, is about not just second-hand smoke, but de-normalising exposure to smoking. The less that our children see adults smoking, the less chance they will have of thinking it is normal and becoming addicted. We need a comprehensive package to bring in the future smoke-free policy. We have evidence to show that the public, in the main, are in favour of a smoke-free generation, and I am sure that they would police the ban around playgrounds when there are children there. If people are not meant to smoke there, the issue will be policed—possibly by the public.”
House of Commons28 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 5, in clause 91, page 51, line 26, at the end insert— “and markings containing health warnings”. This amendment enables regulations to be made requiring health warnings to be marked on individual cigarettes and cigarette papers.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For many, even that may not be true; children are four times more likely to take up smoking if their parents smoke. If we truly want to stop the start, we need to make sure that people know how harmful these products are, even if they are offered just one of them. It is great that the Department is currently consulting on pack inserts, but that does not quite capture those who may purchase or are offered single cigarettes.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Research commissioned by Health Canada into the appeal and attractiveness of cigarettes showed that cigarettes with health warnings were seen as less appealing than those without. That is true the other way too; cigarettes without health warnings were perceived as less harmful. We all know about the harms of smoking, and we have heard it again and again in these sessions, but the more that we can convey that message to consumers, and particularly young people, the better. Overall, participants in the research felt that labelling individual cigarettes made packages complete and impactful. That was particularly true among youths who do not smoke, smoked occasionally or wished to quit. We know how addictive cigarettes are. It is often said in these debates that the only choice is the first cigarette.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not press these provisions to a vote but they are worth raising now, and perhaps for consideration at a later stage of the Bill, further down the line. The amendment and new clause would require tobacco manufacturers and importers to put health warnings on individual cigarettes and cigarette papers. The Government are consulting on pack inserts which, of course, is welcome. However, those warnings do not catch those who buy individual cigarettes or those who are offered one out of someone else’s pack. Warnings on individual cigarettes—dissuasive cigarettes—were recommended by the all-party parliamentary group on smoking and health in 2021, and by the Khan review in 2022. These warnings already exist in Canada, introduced in August 2023, and will be implemented in Australia from July this year.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No, I do not. As I said, the Department is consulting on pack inserts, but that may not capture the people who have or are offered one cigarette. We all know that it takes only one cigarette to become addicted. Does the Minister have a timeframe that the Department is working to for the introduction of pack inserts? Will the Department monitor the effectiveness of that and continue to look at evidence from other countries, such as Canada, where dissuasive cigarettes do have an impact, and potentially use the powers in the Bill to introduce dissuasive individual cigarettes at a later stage?”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In my speech, I referenced evidence from Canada—the Health Canada survey. If the hon. Gentleman would like some more information on that, he could get in touch with ASH, which has the results. There was evidence to suggest that having health warnings had an impact, particularly on young people.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not pressing the new clause to a vote, although I suggested that the Minister or Department could look into the issue once the Bill has received Royal Assent. But just for information, Canada is the first country in the world to require mandatory health warnings on cigarettes. That legislation came into force in 2023. To address the hon. Gentleman’s point, there was a minimum lead-in time for king-size cigarettes of nine months for manufacturers and 12 months for retailers, and longer lead-in times for other products. Australia followed suit by passing legislation in December 2023; its regulations will come into force by July this year.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 91 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 92 Contents and flavour Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In lay terms, there is a legal underpinning for Challenge 25, which is voluntary in the rest of the UK. The Bill amends the Scottish system so that from 2033, it will be a legal requirement to verify the age of anyone trying to purchase tobacco who looks like they were born on or after 1 January 2009. My new clause would simply extend that beyond Scotland to ensure consistency for retailers, customers and enforcement agencies.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I wish to speak to new clause 3, which is in my name. I do not intend to press it to a vote, and I will be very brief because there has been a lot of discussion—about three and a half hours—on this part of the Bill already, and I hope it will answer some of those points. I am introducing it because I think it would enhance the Bill’s consistency with the Government’s four-nations approach. New clause 3 would apply to all the nations of the United Kingdom mandatory age verification for purchasing tobacco, vapes and non-medicinal nicotine products, in line with the provisions set out for Scotland in the Bill. Scotland has had mandatory age verification for anyone who looks under 20 as a legal requirement for purchasing tobacco and vapes since 2017.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In response to the Minister’s point about it possibly being a burden on businesses, a survey of independent UK tobacco retailers by Action on Smoking and Health in 2024 found that more than seven out of 10 retailers—71%—in England and Wales supported this.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The new clause will make the policy consistent across the nations and simplify the process. If I can carry on, I will expand on those points. The new clause will extend the policy further than Scotland and simplify the process for retailers, customers and enforcement agencies. There has already been a lot of discussion about the implementation of a smoke-free generation, and about trying to make it simple and easy to understand. We heard in oral evidence concerns about the difficulty, when the policy has been in place for some decades, in telling the difference between two individuals in their forties who fall on either side of the policy. While that is likely to be a marginal issue in practice, the new clause will further help to resolve it. Mandatory age verification currently exists in Scotland and is supported by retailers here.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I agree. We heard concerns on Tuesday in evidence about the aggression towards retailers, and the impact that the Bill might have on that. I would argue that providing consistency about identification is a potential mitigation of those risks. It takes away the guesswork.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The measure is supported by retailers and by seven out of 10 members of the public, as well as by the Local Government Association and trading standards, which both believe it would help with enforcing the legislation and aid prosecution. I have tabled the new clause to simplify things. This has already happened in Scotland, and it would make the Bill consistent with the Government's four-nation approach. Given the issues that we have been discussing today, having mandatory ID would make things so much easier and simpler. Just to be clear, I will not be pushing it to a vote.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I cannot point to any evidence in statistics, but retailers welcome it. I think 90% of retailers in Scotland are in favour of it. In England, 83% of small retailers agree with it, and I am sure that is because it takes away those cloudy grey areas. It means that once someone shows their ID, that is the end of it. On the point about this being a slippery slope towards mandatory ID cards, young people now are used to carrying ID. In fact, the Bill provides a list of different forms of ID that people can provide, including passports and driving licences. I believe the Government are talking about introducing digital ID checks for the purchase of alcohol. If this were applied to tobacco, individuals would not need to carry a physical ID with them.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I pointed out, surveys of retailers in Scotland show that 83% of them do not think it is a burden. As things are, there are fewer tobacco sales year on year, and as we progress, the sale of tobacco will phase out anyway; it will not be a thing of the future for businesses. In the meantime, they have pointed out that this measure aids them.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman talks about civil liberties, agency and this great country. One purpose of the Bill is to tackle inequalities in our country—stark inequalities between the rich and the poor. We know that tobacco is mainly prevalent in deprived areas, and that it kills one out of two of its users. What agency does a young person have, in terms of their health and life expectancy, once the tobacco industry has them hooked? That is not agency. Tobacco is a product that kills people, and the tobacco industry will continue to find loopholes to replace the people who have died because of its product. If the hon. Gentleman believes in this great country, he should believe that tackling inequalities and making a smoke-free future for our young people are paramount.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We will ensure that local authorities and the public health functions of the country have the resources needed to reach a point where we are smoke free.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Andrew Gwynne: That is really important, and I want all Members to understand that a key aspect of reaching our smoke-free ambition is to drive down the prevalence of current smokers. That means a real investment in smoking cessation, a close eye on what is happening on the ground, and using the flexibilities in the Bill, should they be needed, to ensure that we reach that smoke-free ambition. We announced £70 million of stop smoking funding this week, which has been weighted towards the areas with highest deprivation and smoking prevalence, so that we can try to drive down those inequalities. Obviously, future years funding is subject to the usual processes of the spending review, but let me make it clear that it is a priority of this Government to invest in stop-smoking services.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q We have heard overwhelmingly from the witnesses how important the Bill will be for tackling inequalities and bringing about a smoke-free future. I am confident that the Bill will pass. In terms of supporting the 6 million current smokers that we have in the UK, do the Government still have plans to make good on their pledge to produce a road map and strategy for reaching targets, especially in places such as the north-east and other deprived area? That way, we can keep an eye on those smokers who do want to quit and what the smoking prevalence ranges are in those areas. A few of the witnesses and submissions have called for that, saying how it would help them.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for raising this very important issue. I was diagnosed with, treated for and cured of breast cancer this year, in a very timely way. I was very grateful to be told that it was one of the best cancers to have, because there is so much research into it and treatment for it. It is unimaginable that someone could be treated for a different type of breast cancer for which the research and treatment are not available. I am sure my hon. Friend will agree that this situation needs to be addressed immediately, because we cannot have these inequalities. Lobular cancer should be on a par with other breast cancers in terms of treatment.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My daughter Maria lived her life with severe disabilities and health conditions. Since her birth, we were told many times that she might have only six months to live. She lived for 27 years. Crucially, Maria was non-verbal. I am filled with dread and fear about what might happen to people like Maria who are non-verbal and do not have that capacity, if they are not loved and cared for and do not have somebody speaking out for them.”
House of Commons29 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am proud to vote for a Bill that will improve people’s lives and extinguish the injustice that smoking causes to individuals and society. Smoking is never about choice, and it is pathetic that some Members have argued that this is an issue of freedom; it is absolutely nothing of the sort. Tobacco companies target children and young people. Smoking is an addiction, and the only free choice is that first cigarette. When someone is in hospital, struggling to breathe because of smoking-induced lung cancer, where is their freedom? Today, we have the opportunity to give people the freedom to live healthy lives, free from disease and the inequalities that smoking causes.”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I should add that public health initiatives to tackle smoking are remarkably good value for money and that failing to fund efforts to tackle smoking is a false economy. Initiatives such as Fresh—the north-east’s tobacco control programme—have led the way in tackling smoking in our region. Fresh and others could provide best practice for the Department. The Minister will know that the UK Government are party to the World Health Organisation framework convention on tobacco control. Article 5.3 seeks to protect policymaking from industry influence, but we have already seen that influence even at this stage of the Bill. Will the Minister confirm that the Government will live up to their obligations under the FCTC and commit to protecting the Bill from industry influence throughout its parliamentary process and the following regulations?”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Nearly 40% of those who have a severe mental health problem smoke, and smoking accounts for two thirds of the reduction in life expectancy among that group. I want to touch on the “polluter pays” levy. The Darzi review found that our health service is in real trouble. The Secretary of State is right that to rebalance supply and demand in our healthcare system, we need a major shift from sickness to prevention. The Khan review and the all-party parliamentary group on smoking and health have advocated for a “polluter pays” levy, which could raise £700 million a year to create a smokefree fund. That would ensure that the tobacco companies—not the public—pay for the harm that they inflict. Will the Minister consider that approach to fund the work needed to reduce smoking across society and to protect the NHS?”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the north-east, the cost is over £2 billion, with healthcare costs at over £93 million. Nationally, smoking is still the greatest cause of preventable death, still the leading cause of premature death and disability, and still responsible for half the difference in healthy life expectancy between the rich and poor. That is why I have asked time and again in this Chamber for action. It is a tragedy when we consider the further health implications. According to Cancer Research UK, the most deprived communities will not be smokefree until 2050. I urge the Government to restate their intention to publish a road map to a smokefree country and outline how support will be targeted at those who most need to quit. Smoking is also directly and indirectly linked to poor mental health.”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will never cease to amaze me that there are people in this place who are happy to be lobbied by the tobacco companies—including, I am guessing, the shadow Secretary of State—some of whom we have heard from already, knowing full well the damage caused to individuals, families and communities, as well as to our health services. That includes communities such as mine in the north-east of England, where smoking is still the key driver of health inequalities and has been the cause of 26% of all deaths in the last 50 years and the cause of 125,000 deaths since 2020. In my constituency of City of Durham, smoking costs us over £95 million a year, and more than £3 million is spent on healthcare. In County Durham, smoking costs us over £500 million a year, and over £21 million is spent on healthcare.”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My first of many questions to the Minister is this: will he confirm that a detailed policy paper will be forthcoming, setting out the policy objectives on vaping and how the new regulations will deliver against the objectives? The Labour manifesto made a bold commitment on halving the gap in healthy life expectancy between the richest and poorest regions in England. Tobacco control is the best way to close the gap. We cannot say it enough: the range of diseases that smoking causes is extraordinary, from stillbirths and asthma in children to heart disease, stroke, dementia in old age, poor mental health and many cancers.”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) on bringing the Smoking and Vapes Bill forward, but it was regrettable that the previous Government did not fast-track it in the wash-up before the general election. Nevertheless, I am grateful to the Labour Government for bringing this Bill forward. It is stronger than the previous legislation, and it responds to many of the issues that I and others raised in Committee with the previous Bill. The comprehensive regulation of all vaping and nicotine products is important for addressing the concerns that vaping has become too widespread among young people. I strongly support regulations to reduce the appeal of such products, but we must ensure that the regulations are enforceable, robust and fit for purpose.”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I declare an interest as the co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on smoking and health. Just over a year ago, I welcomed the previous Government’s Tobacco and Vapes Bill. As the House may know, I have called for a smokefree generation for many years. I was not best pleased when the Conservatives voted down my amendments to the Health and Social Care Bill in 2021. Those amendments called for a ban on flavours and packaging targeted at children, which the shadow Secretary of State has just brought to the House’s attention. If they had not been voted down, we would already have regulations to protect children from smoking and vaping. I join the Secretary of State in congratulating the former Prime Minister, the right hon.”
House of Commons26 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Therefore, Madam Deputy Speaker, may I seek your guidance on how we can encourage the Home Office to make a statement and to consider an investigation into the incident?”
House of Commons25 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. On Saturday there were several incidents of Greater Manchester police violently restricting young Romany Gypsy and Irish Traveller children who had come into Manchester city centre to do Christmas shopping. Video footage depicted a group of Romany Gypsy and Irish Traveller children being dangerously forced on to a train out of the city to stations unknown, with one child being pushed to the point of nearly falling on to the track. Footage also shows a young man being forcibly restrained on the ground and arrested. The actions of GMP raise serious questions about its operational approach and decision-making processes. This has caused huge distress for the many young people involved, for their families and for those across the Romany Gypsy and Irish Traveller communities.”
House of Commons25 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for giving way. A similar thing has happened in my constituency. Does he agree that the way councils are acting is inhumane? They are uprooting people’s lives and relocating them to unfamiliar places, often into properties with not even the basic amenities. Does he agree that that needs to stop?”
House of Commons25 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In fact, the inequality between women living in the north of England and those in the rest of the country has grown over the past decade. It has harmed women’s quality of life and work and harmed their communities and families. Today, I am going to debate the key findings of the research and highlight the report’s recommendations. The report does not make for easy reading. Even though the Minister, like me, will be all too aware of the impact of austerity on our communities, many of the findings will, I am sure, come as a shock, as they did for me. I will not be able to cover everything, but I hope the debate will begin a dialogue between the Department and the contributors to this important research.”
House of Commons5 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗