Jack Rankin
MP for Windsor · Conservative · United Kingdom
“It is a disgrace that hundreds of prisoners have been released in error under this Government, but more concerning are the thousands it will have been an error to release early. The Secretary of State did not answer the previous question, so let’s try another.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank the Minister for introducing the debate. His Majesty’s most loyal Opposition will support the regulations.”
House of Commons24 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q5. The first duty of His Majesty’s Government, and indeed the Prime Minister’s first duty, is the defence of the realm. The Prime Minister is not responsible for the worsening geopolitical situation, but he is responsible for this country’s reaction to it.”
House of Commons24 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Just as we must stop unnecessarily pushing young people into courses that offer minimal face-to-face teaching, in return for huge debt and little prospect of employment at the end, we must ensure that new modular courses and training opportunities deliver the highest-quality provision possible.”
House of Commons24 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would like to press the Minister on the importance of face-to-face teaching time. If we want to tackle low-quality provision and ensure that the lifelong learning entitlement lives up to our hopes, we must ensure that learners receive the highest-quality teaching possible.”
House of Commons24 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, given that providers will occur familiarisation and administrative costs as the changes are implemented, and in the light of the wider financial pressures facing the higher education sector, what support will be available to help minimise those burdens? The Opposition support the regulations.”
House of Commons24 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
542 held · 539 searchable for Jack Rankin. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 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.
“With the correct political will, it really is as simple as that, but Labour scrapped the deterrent before it could even begin. Instead we have an incentive system that, at every step, encourages illegal economic migrants to chance their arm. For example, smuggling gangs know that they can equip migrants with unseaworthy vessels because they know they will be picked up by the British authorities before they sink. Migrants know that once they land, armies of lawyers and campaign groups will fight to keep them here while they are housed in hotels and given an allowance for the trouble. The latest data shows that a staggering 66% of those arriving on small boats are granted asylum. We have a system that works against the interests of the British people.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my right hon. Friend for his intervention; I am sure the Minister takes note of his questions. My view is that yes, the public simply deserve transparency on this issue. The men individually cannot really be blamed; they are acting, arguably, in their own best interests, but we, collectively, are the fools for putting a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow—we need to remove it. Ultimately, to stop the use of asylum hotels we need to stop the boats, and there is only one way to do that—deterrent, deterrent, deterrent. Nobody who comes to this country illegally should be able to claim asylum. France is a safe country. They should be arrested immediately and deported within days to their country of origin or a safe third country.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is my fear that the Government’s current proposals in this area, including extra caseworkers, are a surface-level solution to a deeper underlying problem. I ask the Minister to address the concerns outlined in my speech, including by providing the latest update on the closure of hotels, particularly the Manor hotel in Datchet, her plans for bringing in deterrence, and an update on the impact of approving hundreds of thousands of claims on the welfare state up and down the land.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We will have to wait for the summer, when small boat crossings are at their highest, to truly measure any progress. Whilst I am sure we would all welcome the closure of asylum hotels in our constituencies, I am concerned that the Government are simply transferring this problem to other parts of the state, and that also hides the issue from the public and fails to tackle the root cause. At my most recent surgery, a constituent told me that her son was being served notice by her private landlord because the local authority was able to offer landlords much more for private rented accommodation to house illegal economic migrants who have just been processed. They are simply being passed into the welfare system and a taxpayer is being displaced, with the housing benefit being provided to a foreign citizen. That is a truly stark warning.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I agree wholeheartedly, and that is why I have broadened my remarks. To talk about cutting the backlog is not of interest to me, if that simply means processing people into the welfare system. That is getting a number down artificially. We need to stop people entering the top of the funnel, as it just becomes a problem elsewhere. In 2010, the approval rate for asylum cases was 26%—so we have seen an unprecedented rise in the acceptance of these cases. I will also note that in 2010, hotels right across this country, including in my constituency, were used to house tourists rather than asylum shoppers. I appreciate that the Minister has provided a March target for closing nine hotels, but with 23,000 individuals crossing on small boats since the Government were elected—up 29% on the previous year—where will those new arrivals go?”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“She seemed to suggest that the Rwanda deterrent distracted from the day job, which she seems to think is processing all these people. I do not think that is the problem. We want to stop the people coming. The reason why the Rwanda deterrent failed is because there was never enough political will behind the Conservative Government for them to do everything that was necessary to make the deterrent work, notwithstanding the provisions on human rights and the international accords that the Minister mentioned. I thank her for her pledge to continue to close the nine hotels by March, and for her apology. I welcome her comment that she will keep us all informed on which specific hotels are to close. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the matter of re-opening hotels for asylum seeker accommodation.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank everybody who has contributed to this crucial debate. I certainly agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson); my hon. Friends the Members for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking), for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) and for Mid Leicestershire (Mr Bedford); and the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe). I thank the hon. Members for South East Cornwall (Anna Gelderd) and for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray) for taking part, even though I did not necessarily agree with their contributions. The Minister is right to say that the Conservative party failed in this policy area and that she has a mess to clean up, but she is wrong about the reason for that mess.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. It seems to me, both from the text of the clause and from his introductory remarks, that the Minister aims to do two things. He aims to bring regulations on packaging to apply more widely to vaping and nicotine products, and to consolidate the law so that tobacco and nicotine products are all dealt with in one place. My hon. Friend the shadow Minister asked the Minister to commit, with these powers, not to undermine the regulation on cigarettes thus far. Unlike the shadow Minister, I have no concern that the Minister might water down any such remarks. I trust the Labour manifesto in that regard.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I know that we do not get on to the issue of flavours until clause 92, so I will keep my comments brief on this, but it does seem to me to be legitimate to advertise flavours, perhaps in a delimited way. The shadow Minister talked about candy floss flavours, which should not be allowed, but it seems to me that people could legitimately advertise to adults various factual flavours that show vaping as something we can progress on smoking cessation with. I would also oppose the cancer-type warnings that we see on cigarette packs in relation to vaping. I do not believe the evidence is quite there yet. The research on vaping is in its infancy, so it is too early to say whether that is appropriate.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“After all, vaping is the fastest growing—I think this is uncontentious—smoking cessation method, and I think that here there is scope for quite wide-ranging powers. I also urge the Minister to accept this point. I do not know how he considers this, but in my view there are responsible vape businesses and I think he should work with them to understand how they think they could change things so that people are directly using vaping as a smoking cessation tool and it is not appealing to people who would be new smokers. It is my understanding, from some of my research ahead of coming on to this Committee, that a Cochrane review said that vaping is twice as effective as any other stop-smoking tool. I do not think the Minister should be seeking to under- mine that.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That view would be shared right across the House. In the Minister’s introductory remarks, he called vaping an effective quit aid. Yes, we do not recommend it to children, but we do want to maintain that. My concern about these quite sweeping regulations is this. I take the Minister’s point that delegated legislation will have to come forward in the future and will buff out how exactly the Minister plans to take this matter forward, but to me, moving towards, for example, plain packaging is likely to undermine the effectiveness of vaping as a cessation tool, which would undermine the objective that the Bill is trying to arrive at: in my understanding, a smoke-free generation by 2030. I ask the Minister to give us some assurances that he will treat vaping and nicotine products in quite a different way from tobacco products.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Indeed. In fairness, I also share both the Minister’s and the shadow Minister’s concern. It is very clear that the incremental changes to tobacco retail packaging are one of the public health interventions that have diminished cigarette use, which is desirable. However, I also ask the Minister to make assurances that, despite the consolidation of the law, he will treat vaping and nicotine products in quite a different way. I echo some of the thoughts that my hon. Friend the Member for Farnham and Bordon expressed. It seems to me that, certainly when it comes to vaping, we should have proportionate and targeted regulation of vaping and nicotine products. In particular, we should be cracking down on anything that is particularly or unduly appealing to those who are under age, whether that is toys, cartoons or sweet-type imagery.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It should be given great weight, but generally speaking, there should be a permissive rather than a prohibitive bent in public policy—something the shadow Minister and I might disagree on. This point, which my hon. Friend the Member for Farnham and Bordon also made, is a bit more academic. In the last few years, there has been an increasing view among the public that vaping is just as bad as smoking; up to 40% of the British public now believe that. Even though there might be some contention around the true levels of harm—I do not think the science is quite settled; vaping is not harm-free, but it is certainly a lot less harmful than cigarettes—we have to ensure that, in our messaging as politicians, we do not put vaping in the same box as tobacco, because we could stamp down on the best smoking cessation tool there is.”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Earlier in the debate, we voted on a clause about splitting up cigarettes—I was just trying to find which clause it was—so I think we are already proposing to make it illegal to sell single cigarettes. Does the hon. Lady not think that, given that we voted for that clause to stand part, these amendments are unnecessary?”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I made my substantive points in the previous sitting, so I just want to summarise my position and conclude. Clauses 15, 62 and 80 concern the free distribution and discount of products. I support the Government wholeheartedly on tobacco products, but I tried to make the point that I believed there was a legitimate and responsible avenue for vaping and nicotine products to offer such discounts, particularly in the example that I gave, where a responsible vaping company was in partnership with the NHS to help to achieve the aim of the Bill of a smoke-free generation. I cannot support clauses 15, 62 and 80 in their current form and intend to vote against their standing part of the Bill.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have the existing framework of the Licensing Act 2003, which covers the sale of alcohol; that is the kind of approach we should take to minimise excessive regulation and make it easy for people to comply. The licensing fee should be set at a rate that is at least cost-neutral to local authorities—I think everyone across the Committee realises how stretched those local authorities are—and it should cover both administrative and enforcement costs. I hope the Minister will comment on that point. On the proximity of licensed premises to certain other locations, I encourage the Minister to try to mirror the alcohol regulations in order to provide a measure of consistency, so that legitimate premises with experience of selling age-related products can do so in the least bureaucratically complicated way.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In my remarks to date, I have tried to support responsible vaping businesses, which I think are legitimate, and to champion vaping as a smoking cessation tool. These clauses are not in contradiction of that principle. We should support better efforts to regulate the vape market and in particular to stop youth access. Introducing the licensing concept for vapes is consistent with the Government’s intent and the principles that I wish to support. I wish to make some suggestions as to how the licensing regime should best be set up, and I hope that the Minister will talk about his intent in advancing the regulations. The UK responsible vape sector has talked sensibly about licensing.”
House of Commons16 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q12. Today marks 467 days in captivity for Avinatan Or, just one of the more than 100 hostages that Hamas still cruelly hold. Avinatan is my age and has his whole life ahead of him. I felt the raw pain of his family when his mum Ditza, a British citizen, shared her story with me as part of the “twin with a hostage” campaign. Will the Prime Minister assure me that he is doing everything in his power to ensure that all the hostages are returned, so that Avinatan can be at home where he belongs with Ditza and his girlfriend Noa?”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not intend to go over the scope of the clause in great detail, because I think the principles largely flow form the principles of clause 1, but I will pick up on the cigarette paper point that my hon. Friend, the shadow Minister made, and talk about clause 2(3): “It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section in respect of cigarette papers to prove that they had no reason to suspect that the other person intended to use the papers for smoking.” I commend the shadow Minister’s researchers, because I can feel her thoroughness—I know a lot more about cigarette papers than I did an hour ago, and much more about cigarette papers than I thought there could possibly be to know, so she has answered some of my question.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I accept that other reasons exist, but is the shopkeeper supposed to ask? The Bill says “no reason to suspect”; I would expect shopkeepers to have every reason to suspect that people who buy cigarette papers smoke cigarettes. It seems a little woolly. What would the Minister expect the shopkeeper to do in those instances? Is he supposed to ask? If the person says, “I am using this for a woodwind instrument,” is that sufficient? If I were a person who wished to get around the law, I could pretty easily work out that that would get me around the clause.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 2(3) should be struck from the Bill, because it does not seem that there is a legitimate use for cigarette papers that would not be picked up in another way, shape or form if that subsection were removed. I understand from the guidance I received as a new Member on my first day here that I have to three days to table an amendment before discussion, but I would suggest the removal of subsection (3). Perhaps the Government will consider whether the provision should remain fully in the next iteration of the clause later in this process. I also want to speak to the term “no reason to suspect”, because I am not clear where the burden of proof sits. If someone goes into a newsagent to order cigarette papers, the overwhelming likelihood is that they will use them to smoke cigarettes.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I believe that is the case, and it is something I did not know before today. My questions were along the lines of: is this not just paper, and, if so, why is it excluded in some sense? I was racking my brain for legitimate reasons, and, in her speech, the shadow Minister gave some legitimate reasons, whether that is the woodwind instruments, or the model making mentioned by the Member for Chatham and Aylesford. It seems to me that—even though I disagree with the principle of the Bill—those extra properties would not be necessary for those legitimate uses in this instance. As my hon. Friend the shadow Minister said, the market should be able to make a difference.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My question is about nicotine products, which I was hoping the Minister could come to, perhaps when he winds up. Nicotine products are defined separately from tobacco products in this legislation, so it would still be acceptable for things such as nicotine patches to be sold through vending machines. That does not sound unsensible, because it does not seem to me that people trying to evade this law would be attracted to nicotine products in the same way they might be to other tobacco cessation devices. Perhaps the Minister can comment on how he proposes to treat them when he winds up.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The nub of clause 3 is age verification. The reason the Minister and the Government do not want tobacco vending machines in operation is not that they do not want convenience for the customer, but rather that they want to make sure that people are of a suitable age under the law. Without somebody to check, that is a problem. In my youth, I used to play snooker in what was the Minister’s constituency. There was a little area of the club, with a little gate, where the gambling machines were, and there was a tobacco vending machine in there. The only thing preventing us from going in there was honesty. Whereas it stopped me as a teenager, I do not suppose that it would have stopped adults in the same way—if you wanted to restrict adults from being a smoker in the future, that would not serve as a deterrent.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Certainly in my experience, the only reason people sell unpackaged cigarettes is to make them cheaper for schoolchildren, so I find it strange that subsection (2) states that the fine is level 3 on the standard scale. If I understand what my hon. Friend said in the last sitting about the standard scale, level 3 is lower than the level 4 fine for sale. A sale could have been in error, but unpackaging cigarettes to sell to schoolchildren seems deliberately malicious, so I am surprised that it is not treated more severely. Perhaps my hon. Friend can comment on that.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend has previously sought to amend the Bill in various places to add the qualifier “save for the first offence”. It seems to me that, particularly in the first instance, this could be a genuine oversight and that it would be appropriate for a council officer or someone from trading standards to simply bring it to the attention of store management and ask them to rectify it over a period of time. Does she think this clause should be tweaked in such a way, on the same principle on which that she has sought to amend other clauses?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We might help our shopkeepers if we made the list a bit more practical, so that the shopkeeper could turn around to say, “Sorry, guvnor, but this is the law,” whereas with the Bill saying “tobacco products”, the verbal altercation might include, “These are not cigarettes, though.” Perhaps we should move away from legalistic language to help staff, especially younger members of staff. That is particularly necessary, given what seems to be a general coarsening in our society, I am afraid to say.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have spoken about being opposed to the principle of the Bill and finding it somewhat unworkable, but putting that to one side, I think that if we are to proceed with it, we have a particular obligation to make things as easy as possible for shopkeepers. I am sure that everyone agrees. The language used, or proposed to be used, in the age of sale notice in subsection (2) is quite legalistic, being presented as: “It is illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009”. That is a statement of fact. It mirrors what we see today, but it is very legal. I think it would benefit from being a bit more practical. For example—I think my hon. Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham made this point—it is illegal to sell herbal smoking products, cigarette papers and not just cigarettes, but cigars.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“At first sight, the clause can appear to follow on naturally from the rest of the Bill, and in some sense it does, but I think it is important. We heard from shopkeepers in the evidence session last week, from the British Retail Consortium, and in the representations to us made in writing that it can be difficult for younger shopkeepers to hold the line on this, and they might be at the wrong end of unacceptable verbal abuse. In my view, the Bill will increase that risk. With younger people often manning retail stands, in the future we might have 18 or 19-year-olds having to refuse to sell tobacco products to people a decade or so older than them. That will be increasingly challenging, even compared with the existing situation.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am going to take at face value that it says the same thing in Welsh, although I do not speak Welsh. It would be nice to clarify whether it is either/or whether it is both together. That is of interest.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is exactly the kind of situation I am thinking of. The language could be a bit more practical, less legal and it might aid that shopkeeper to point to an external source for validation. I have two further points. One is a point of ignorance for me as a new Member, for which I apologise. I do not know what subsection (5) means when it says that “Regulations under subsection (4) are subject to the negative resolution procedure.” I hope someone can help me with that. Clause 6 is being taken together with clause 5, because clause 5 applies to England and clause 6 applies to Wales. To me, they appear to be exactly the same, apart from the age of sale notice described in clause 6(2) and the fact that clause 6 obviously also includes the Welsh version.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The shadow Minister is a doctor, so she is learned in this area, and she makes the case that snus is harmful in the same way as tobacco. What does she know of the relative harm? I am concerned that, in taking quite a studs-up and puritanical approach, we are taking away things that might not be as bad as cigarettes that could allow people to effectively tier down. Does she have any thoughts on that?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am sorry if this is my ignorance as a new legislator, but clauses 7, 8 and 9 applied to England and Wales. However, clauses 56, 57 and 58 apply the same measures to Scotland, and then we have the same for Northern Ireland. In previous clauses, we have also seen that replicated for Wales. Does that mean that clauses 7, 8 and 9 apply to both England and Wales, and how come that devolution is treated differently? Perhaps my hon. Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham knows the answer to that, or maybe the Minister could clarify.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are talking specifically about under-18s. I disagree with some of the later regulations on vaping, but when it comes to under-18s being given vaping products, I am aligned with the Government. Does my hon. Friend agree that if companies are giving away free products to Members of Parliament and staffers who are over the age of 18—some of them may be smokers—they are actually supporting the Government’s aim of getting to a smoke-free generation, which is very different from what we see in clause 10? I agree with the Government’s aim.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I support my hon. Friend wholeheartedly on restricting flavours aimed at children, which I think is the Minister’s intention, but does she agree that vape flavours that are being advertised more generally, so long as they are straightforward and descriptive, can help people to shake smoking and can be firmly aimed at adults? The Government should not restrict the flavours so generally that the smoking cessation tool is weakened.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Perhaps I explained myself ineloquently —or maybe my hon. Friend was being mischievous in her characterisation. I agree with her wholeheartedly, but I would say that raspberry is a perfectly legitimate flavour for an upstanding vape seller to sell to an adult smoker as a cessation device. I would not want to go too hard on that so that we do not cut off that legitimate smoking cessation route.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I disagree with the Government on some of the clauses dealing with vaping, but I will come to those later, when it is more appropriate. I agree with what the Government are trying to do in clauses 10, 11 and 12 to toughen things up for under-18s. To that end, I encourage them to support new clause 10, tabled by the shadow Minister, which tries to make purchasing more difficult for under-18s online. We talked earlier about the principle of vending machines, which is addressed in clause 12 and by trying to ensure age verification when there is no one else present. It seems to me that new clause 10 is entirely in line with that, so I hope the Minister might consider supporting it.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I commend the Minister on making the evidence-based point about the difference between a smoke-free generation and a nicotine-free generation. Does he agree—I think he does, given the comments he has just made—that there are some somewhat sweeping powers here, which could be used to come back and ask for more legislation against vaping companies? Does he agree that that potential lack of certainty for legitimate vaping businesses might impede investment in this space, which is actually contributing to the benefit of a smoke-free generation?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister may seek to correct me, but I am not aware that any of the products described by the shadow Minister, such as nicotine patches and gum, is used recreationally or is attractive to children.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I supported clauses 10 and 11 because I agree with the Government that under no circumstances should children be taking up vaping. I was heartened by the Minister’s comments on the principle of clause 10, the general point about evidence and balance when it came to vaping, and treating vaping differently from cigarettes and tobacco products. However, I cannot quite go along with the Government on clause 12, because there they have the balance slightly wrong. I accept that vape vending machines should be prohibited, for the same reason that tobacco and cigarette vending machines were prohibited: vending machines cannot provide for age verification. That balance is well struck. However, I do not support the related measure for nicotine product vending machines.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not think that nicotine products are attractive to children in any way, shape or form today. My concern is that, as the Government are seeking to stop children using them by restricting them in vending machines—I do not think they should be using them—”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It might be sensible, in the interest of broader public health, to have such a vending machine. If the Government are concerned about evidence and balance, those are exactly the kinds of voices they should be listening to, and they should accept the amendment, which is very much in line with their intent.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I mean the former: nicotine patches and gum. The stated intention of the Bill, supported by the House on Second Reading, is to move to a smokefree generation, so it would seem sensible to make nicotine products pretty widely accessible, in so far as they do not attract children. We should largely welcome a vending machine selling nicotine patches or gum if the intention is to move to a smokefree generation. I do not think the Government have the evidence and the balance quite right on that point, so I cannot support clause 12 as it is currently written. I would make a similar case in support of the amendment in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for South Northamptonshire. She has read to us evidence from a relevant professional, who has a legitimate concern.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not think I can talk to that point, but I thank the hon. Gentleman for making it. We have to find a balance. The Government can use their majority in the House to cast aside my hon. Friend’s amendment, but it seems to me that it is in line with the principle of the Bill, so it is a sensible thing to do.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I had not heard that remark, but I thank my hon. Friend for putting it on the record. To add to that theme, I would make the point that these things are multifaceted. The point that my hon. Friend the Member for South Northamptonshire, who is the successor to Dame Andrea, was making is that people have quite a lot to be getting on with, so they do not need this added stress.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Perhaps it is an added thing that doctors in mental healthcare can try to address, but my hon. Friend the Member for South Northamptonshire read out a letter from someone at the coalface, who takes the opposite approach from that of the shadow Minister.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention and I agree with everything she has just said. I will just finish my remarks to my hon. Friend the shadow Minister. She talked about this measure being a further opportunity; I would suggest that the easy availability of nicotine products in certain instances would be an aid on that journey. We should be working pragmatically on amendments such as this in Committee, to ensure that the evidence is considered and that the right balance is struck. I will support the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for South Northamptonshire. Because the nicotine product vending machine measure is part of clause 12, I will vote against clause 12 stand part.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is making an eloquent case that we should not be advertising vapes, or their pricing and products, to children. What she is not doing is making a case for banning the display of products or prices of vapes to adults. Does she think it is incongruous to treat tobacco products and vaping products in the same way in this clause?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I suggest to my hon. Friend that advertising a vape with Mickey Mouse is obviously aimed at a child, but it would be very much aimed at an adult, and not attractive to a child at all, to advertise a vape with, “This is what smoking 40 cigarettes a day costs you over a year. This is what our product costs. This is what you would save.” That would very much be in line with the aims of a smoke-free generation.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“VPZ did not benefit directly, because it did not think it should be doing so from a public source, but it passed that saving on, and I suppose that counts as a discount on a product. I might contend to the Minister that that is exactly the kind of thing we want responsible, legitimate vaping companies to do. I understand that he wants, through this mechanism, to strictly limit advertising to, and targeting of, children and new vapers, but—”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗