Sarah Bool
MP for South Northamptonshire · Conservative · United Kingdom
“The defence of the realm is absolutely essential, and we all know how vital it is that we get to spending 3% of GDP on defence by 2030, but some of the Defence Secretary’s comments earlier were incredibly shocking.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Chancellor started his remarks yesterday by praising the previous Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Leeds West and Pudsey (Rachel Reeves). He said: “She brought fiscal discipline to this country.” He also said: “She took the decisions required to boost investment”. —[ Official Report , 28 October 2026; Vol. 792, c.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If this is breathing space, he needs to be very careful of a misrepresentation—the Budget was a faulty inhaler at best. I am particularly concerned by some of the devolution measures in the Budget.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Transport is a really pressing issue in rural areas such as South Northamptonshire, and the closure of the Ability bus service earlier this year has left many of my residents isolated. We need to do so much more, so could we have a debate in Government time on securing greater support for community transport?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Budget was given a title that mentions “Fresh Hope for the Future” but this is not about hope for the future; this is about the Government delivering. Hope, as they say, is a little like a rocking chair: it gives us something to do, but it gets us absolutely nowhere. Actions speak much louder than words.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I was formerly a commercial property lawyer, so I want to bring up a practical point about enforcement. The ambition behind the regulations—to make sure that everybody, including tenants, has the information that they need—is positive, but the practical reality is that if they cannot be enforced properly, it will cause problems and delays…”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
512 held · 508 searchable for Sarah Bool. 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.
“That may be the evidence that you have received in this instance, but I am giving the real-life proof. When I spoke to the headteacher about this, she said that the increase in national insurance on teacher costs, which are about 80% of outgoings, in combination with all the other things, has had a huge impact and the school will have to shut. It will be closing its doors at the end of July, which is a travesty.”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Many families, on not being successful in applying for an EHC plan, or indeed enduring huge waiting times for the local authority to put one in place, opt to send their children to a private school. We should not punish families who choose to do what is in the best interests of their children. Amendment 10 would delay the introduction of this tax hike for a further year to allow schools to plan their finances accordingly. That is just plain common sense. It would mean fewer schools like Carrdus having to make the unenviable choice to close their doors.”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker; I would not dare say that about you. If the Government are intent on punishing my constituents’ aspiration for the future of their children, the least they could do is grant the concessions that the Conservatives are asking for in all our amendments, and specifically those in amendments 7 and 10. Amendment 7 would exempt private schools that wholly or partially provide education for children with special educational needs and disabilities who have not yet obtained an education, health and care plan, or whose needs are established but not so severe as to require one. SEND support in schools helps pupils with a level of need below that of an EHC plan. Restricting relief only to those settings that provide for the most severe needs is out of step with the rest of our education system.”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I totally concur with my hon. Friend, who made the point powerfully. The impact goes beyond the 120 individual students to their parents’ arrangements and how they work. The headteacher of the school has a husband who was also a teacher, and they face a huge impact in respect of what they will do with their children and whether they can manage to make new school place arrangements. This policy is terribly misguided. We really need to think about what we are doing. It is a travesty that we will lose a school.”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No, I will keep going if the hon. Member does not mind. I do not want to see any other schools close or any other children suffer as a result of this plan. I hope that colleagues across the House will join Conservative Members in supporting our amendments.”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman mentioned that private schools could absorb the cost. The headteacher of my Carrdus school told me that they could not absorb the cost. The school has tried everything possible to stay open, but it cannot. One just cannot make this claim that these schools can absorb the cost; they cannot.”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to look specifically at clause 1(3), which relates to identity documents. In the previous sitting, the Minister said that he would have powers to change the list of identity documents; I think he was referring to clause 46. But at the moment the definition of identity documents is very tight; only the six listed are permitted. My hon. Friend the shadow Minister mentioned veterans cards, and this would be an ample opportunity to include those, as was the intention, because the definition is very strict—people will be able to use only the listed documents. A further question that has been raised is that the list rules out digital forms of identification, as those listed are physical. I want to understand how retailers can best enforce the measures in practice.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Hence I am asking whether we should consider the issue at this point, rather than relying on the regulations mentioned in clause 46.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I was talking from a legal perspective. Clause 1(3) is about what “identity document” means, which obviously means that those listed are the six that people are allowed to use. I take the point that later the Minister could introduce regulations to allow for veterans cards, but legally a retailer’s defence would have to be that they were shown what appeared to be an identity document, which means: “(a) a passport, (b) a UK driving licence, (c) a driving licence issued by any of the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, (d) a European Union photocard driving licence, or (e) an identity card issued by the Proof of Age Standards Scheme”. The clause is very specific. Whatever the intention, the retailer would not technically be able to use having been shown a veterans card as a defence.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I agree with everything my hon. Friend says. My first question was, “Well, what else they would be using cigarette papers for?” The second question—which maybe the Minister can answer—is about the level of proof. This comes up not only in clause 2(3), but elsewhere in clause 2. I know that the Minister will say, in relation to clause 2(3), that this is in line with legislation as it currently stands, but if we are tightening up on the whole, perhaps this is an area that we should consider tightening up further?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It seems pedantic but, knowing the way the legal system can go when people want to find defences, we do have to stress test the wording we use, so we need to examine the concept of a person having management and control.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What about cases in which a landlord who is a licensor has a licensee? The concept is slightly different: it is not as official as a lease, but someone has the right to use the premises but not exclusive use or possession of the premises. We could potentially argue about who actually has the management and control of the property in that instance. It would be interesting to know whether in future landlords could be in trouble if they do not include in the lease a provision that bans the location and siting of a vending machine in the property. I do not think that would be where landlords currently stand, but that is perhaps worth considering.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 3(1) says: “A person commits an offence if the person has the management or control of premises on which a tobacco vending machine is available for use.” My first point goes to the point my hon. Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham made about the concept of that person, because that leads to some questions and confusion about where the liability sits. When it comes to the person who has management or control of the premises, we might expect there to be a landlord and a tenant, in which case perhaps the tenant has control legally under the terms of their lease. But if the landlord has a managing agent—the hint is in the name—could they be caught within the scope of the Bill if they have not done enough to prevent the machine from being on the property?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend makes an incredibly valid point. It is something we are duty-bound to explore and test, to make sure we can avoid any problems with the roll-out and implementation of this.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Why are we limiting this to cigarettes? Forgive me, I am not an expert—I have never bought herbal smoking products—but if we are applying the same rules and we just want an outright ban, perhaps we should apply it generally, in case there are rule changes, to the sale of not only unpackaged cigarettes but unpackaged herbal smoking products. That would add further to the emphasis on changing the term from “a tobacco retailer” to “a person”, as my hon. Friend suggested.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am concerned about whether we are accidentally and inadvertently creating a loophole here. If we are not going to ban someone from breaking down a cigarette packet and selling it, that is the way they will go about doing it. We should be going for consistency and tightness on this. I appreciate that that is the law as it stands, which is why we have applied it, but have we had the foresight to ensure that we do not create a loophole? It seems quite possible that we have.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Appropriate and mandatory signage is essential for good practice and the sale of age restricted items, SGF is concerned that multiple messages throughout the store relating to various product ranges and items could potentially create confusion and lead to challenging interactions between customers and staff.” To protect our retailers, we must ensure that we enforce these regulations correctly. When making the regulations, the Secretary of State should take into account the voice of the retailers.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to follow up on the points made on clause 5(3) and clause 6(3) in particular. Both specify that “The notice must be displayed in a prominent position”. I agree with many of the points my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor made about what that means in practice. In the information pack that we have been given, there is a quote from the Scottish Grocers’ Federation, which I want to read for the record. It explicitly states: “In most convenience stores, space is at a premium and the suggested wording set out in UK Government proposals will require a significant surface area in order to be legible and accessible to all customers. The complexity of a moving ban will require very clear public messaging.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I apologise to my hon. Friend. I might have misunderstood, so may I clarify the intended purpose here? If snus is illegal under earlier regulations, what is this further provision? Is it to ensure that nicotine pouches are also caught? The UK has already banned the sale of all oral tobacco products, including snus, under the Tobacco for Oral Use (Safety) Regulations 1992, which implemented European Union directive 92/41. I am hoping for some clarity about that, but perhaps it will come from the Minister.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Recent announcements from the Home Office have confirmed that businesses will be able to legally accept the use of digital proof of age for alcohol products. I would like to see that approach extended to these products, to make the life of retailers easier as far as identification goes. It would be good to have further consistency and an extension of the definition of identity documents to allow for digital forms.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I echo what my hon. Friend is saying, particularly in relation to online sales. I think we are all very aware that one aspect is being in the shop and physically trying to buy a product with ID; I take it from the ingenuity of our younger generation that they will always find ways around that, especially online, so we should perhaps give some further thought to how we can ensure that the companies are operating effectively—that there is robustness without over-regulation and that we have the methods to ensure that people are not following another loophole.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Apparently, children vape to deal with stress and anxiety—they are almost self-medicating, which is appalling. It is right that we protect our children by introducing this offence.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to speak in support of new clause 10, on banning those who are under 18 from vaping. Many know about the health risks of smoking. They see it as a bad habit and disgusting, as the children of my hon. Friend the Member for Farnham and Bordon noted, but vapes are seen as being new age and social. Parents are in danger of encouraging vaping by buying something that they think is safer than smoking or drugs. We must be very careful about that, so this ban will be important in restricting sales. Children fear being excluded, so, through peer pressure, they are forced into vaping. We need to stamp out this practice. Children are often confused about vaping. The problem is that they get an accidental addition to nicotine and struggle to pay attention in school, which has a negative impact not just on them but on their classmates.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Absolutely. Unlike my hon. Friend, I am not a medical professional, but I wholeheartedly agree that it is a self-perpetuating cycle, and we need to stop it as soon as possible to protect children.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 96, in clause 12, page 6, line 8, at end insert— “(1A) The offence set out in subsection (1) does not apply to vending machines that are located within specialised mental health units that provide care for mental health patients.””
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister himself has just said that vaping can be good to help someone quit, but if they do not have access to a vape they may face difficulties such as cravings, anxiety, trouble concentrating and all the other elements that go with it, including potentially going back to smoking tobacco in its pure form. Taking away the option from those in mental health units will only make their recovery harder, longer and more expensive for the NHS. I heartedly commend to all members of the Committee that we all consider this amendment thoroughly, to ensure that we are not doing additional harm by taking an aggressive approach in this regard.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He also asked that we consider the financial implications, as well as health and wellbeing of service users, by implementing the exemption. We can all empathise with those who are admitted to mental health units. They may have difficult and complex conditions that they need to work through, and coping with a potential addiction may be too much for them. There may be a logic to listen to the voices of the experts—especially if we end up having smoke-free places around hospitals and how that will work out—asking us to allow a mechanism to help someone with smoking cessation.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He indicated that his trust had installed vending machines back in May 2024 “to ensure that vapes are available to staff and patients at all times.” He stated: “Since installation of the vending machines in our Trust we have had over 2400 individual vends. Each vend represents a staff or service user making a positive decision to improve their health. 2400 individual vends in just 6 months represents a saving to the Trust of around £12,000.” He argued: “Removing the machines will reduce patients’ independence in buying their own devices while in hospital and will have a financial implication to our Trust, as wards would be expected to fund more vapes.” He was also concerned that “a lack of vape provision on our Trust premises may result in patients returning to smoking”, which I am sure we all agree we do not wish to be the result.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the units of my trust the prevalence of smoking is consistently between 70-77%.” He goes on to say: “To ensure we allow service users who are hospitalized a safer way to manage their nicotine addiction...my Trust would require Vending machines. These would allow service users to purchase a closed pod system device, which is a lot less harmful than tobacco smoking. On admission they would be offered either free NRT products or to purchase a vape as described above.” He is asking that we make an exemption. The exemption was also supported in another submission from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS foundation trust. Ben Kingsbury, the tobacco dependency lead in that trust, wrote to express his concerns over the ban on the sale of vapes from vending machines.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This amendment states: “The offence set out in subsection (1) does not apply to vending machines that are located within specialised mental health units that provide care for mental health patients.” I tabled this amendment on the basis of the evidence provided to us. I put on record that the Committee received a letter by Peter Terry, a “Smoke Free lead in a large Mental Health Trust in the North West of England”. In his letter, he says, “As you may be aware the success of hospitals and Trusts becoming smokefree environments (especially Mental Health units) is particularly challenging. Mental Health service users due to their conditions have little or no motivation to stop smoking.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When we are dealing with addiction, we all appreciate how difficult it is, and I want to ensure that a process is in place that means that we deal with both the mental health issues patients are dealing with and the addiction in a suitable and balanced fashion.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I appreciate that; those were the words of the NHS trusts themselves when they talked about positive decisions. We cannot always be sure exactly why someone made that decision, but we have to hope in the first instance that that move away from smoking would turn into vaping and, ultimately, into a smoke-free generation. I am minded to tighten the wording of my amendment on Report to ensure that the vending machines are in those mental health units for the purpose of facilitating smoke-free policies and smoking cessation, because I do not necessarily want nurses and those working in those units to be exposed to any unnecessary products.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The intention behind the amendment was purely to encourage us to listen to the evidence from trusts themselves, to try to come up with a practical solution to enable this transition and allow us to get to a smokefree generation.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will say a little about the intention behind the amendment. We have obviously stressed throughout this debate how addictive nicotine is, but I want to ensure that if we are trying to deal with mental health issues, we are not creating an extra burden. The intention was not to encourage people to smoke, vape or take up other bad habits, but to make sure that we offer the best possible healthcare in the round, which means giving support. Nicotine is addictive and so stresses are associated with it. Perhaps there are alternatives to give patients, but if they are not suitable for a particular patient or they do not work as well for them as nicotine, they will effectively be going cold turkey, which has its own issues.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T9. Does the Secretary of State believe it is fair that undocumented illegal migrants get priority access to the NHS over British taxpayers?”
House of Commons13 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Speaking specifically about amendments 17 and 18 and the age restriction of 25, I understand the arguments that have been made: Government policies often offer entitlement to one age, but not to another. For example, people have cited the state pension, which you will not get at 55, but you will after you hit 66. I would argue that those are one-off burdens of proof, because once you are 66, you will automatically—”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have to think about how this will work in due course, even if in 10 years’ time. That is something I wanted to put on the record.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Also, we very much have to bear in mind the issue of the abuse of staff and, as British retailers have mentioned, the increased financial and administrative burden, in particular for smaller shops, which is often where vapes and tobacco are sold. That will have a big impact on their businesses. Indirectly, a potential effect is the introduction of legal inequalities and giving sanction to age discrimination by creating a create a class of under-aged adults. Furthermore, a point I would like to stress is that, as a lawyer, one of my main concerns is enforceability. I do not disagree with the principle of the next generation being smoke-free—I think that is admirable and important—but I want to ensure that we pass a piece of legislation that will work in practice.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Once one has turned 66, that person does not have to confirm their age each and every couple of days or necessarily carry ID to claim their state pension—it is noted on the record, and that is that. Here, potentially, however, if we have an outright ban from 1 January 2009, whenever someone tries to buy a cigarette, after 2034 retailers will have to ask on every single occasion how old they are, for fear of a fine. I agree that we already have the age 25 verification, but it is safe to assume that people reach an age when they do not have to prove it. I find it incredibly flattering when I do get IDed, but we all reach a point when we do not need it. In the Bill, however, we do. It might seem to be a quick check—one simply looks at the date of 1 January 2009—but we can foresee that being troublesome for retailers.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To build on that point, it is also important that we have clarity from a legal and enforcement perspective. The person who commits an offence is liable on summary conviction to a fine “not exceeding” a certain level. I take the point about what trading standards may do in practice, but if the practice changes and they decide to always go for the upper level, there is nothing in the law that allows for a cautionary approach and another level. The amendment provides a benchmark and a safety catch, so that there is slightly different treatment. It would ensure that those who the Bill intends to punish are punished. From an enforcement perspective, it is a sensible amendment.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Obviously, if someone is liable for a conviction or a fine, the defence is that they took all reasonable steps to avoid the commission. Given that in this instance we are talking about perhaps a fleeting look at a passport or something, will companies or shops now actually have to take scans or register that they have seen it?”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To take a step back, I am still not satisfied that I understand, in practice, what the defence for someone to prove that they were shown ID means in practice? Perhaps that will form part of the guidance. If one is to suggest that CCTV is required, is that in the GDPR? In some circumstances, it would be quite difficult to prove. Given the seriousness of the offence and the repercussions, I just want some reassurance.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Drawing on the point that my hon. Friend is making, one issue with the drafting of subsection (7) of new clause 3 is that businesses will need to have this age verification policy, but the national authority may—and it is only a “may”—publish guidance, so there is not clarity. Some form of template would be needed to make the provision effective. The intention is obviously to have a full policy in place, but the guidance could be just a piece of paper with three bullet points, and that would not meet the intention. Also, do we really need two fines in place when there is already a fine, as the Minister said, for selling? I do not think there needs to be a fine for not having a piece of paper with a policy.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Most crucially, it also states that member states, which include Northern Ireland for these purposes, “may not...prohibit or restrict the placing on the market of tobacco or related products which comply with this Directive.” So a generational smoking ban may be incompatible with TPD2. Similar plans for generational bans in Denmark and the Republic of Ireland were ditched in 2022 and 2024, respectively, because of TPD2. I ask the Minister whether the Department of Health and Social Care has any plans for this issue, and whether the Attorney General has formed a view that can be shared with us. I think we have learned over the years that it is imperative that we do not jeopardise our Northern Irish friends.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to take a step back and look again at clause 1 itself. Enforceability has to be considered as an important element of achieving the smoke-free generation. As I keep stating, as a former lawyer, I want to be absolutely sure before I can give further support. I seek assurances from the Minister on the implementation of the policy with regard to Northern Ireland, if it is truly to be a smoke-free nation. One of the provisions of EU law in the Windsor framework is the EU’s second tobacco products directive—TPD2—which applies to Northern Ireland. It lays down various requirements that must be satisfied for tobacco products and vapes to be marketed in the EU—for example, on ingredients, emission levels and packaging.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On that point, the concept of having an age verification policy so that all retailers know what to do in these situations is not necessarily a bad thing in itself, but the difficulty perhaps lies in making it an offence not to have one, because it will be in-built as part of that process.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I therefore ask the Minister to give me some reassurances on Northern Ireland and TPD2, because that is fundamental to the roll-out of this smoke-free generation. I also have a question on what we will do about imports of cigarettes to ensure that we do not have the illicit trade we were talking of.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to put on record that I concur with much of what my hon. Friend the Member for Farnham and Bordon said, particularly about vapes. My hesitation so far has always related to my concern about tobacco in clause 1. I can reassure the Minister that I firmly believe in the United Kingdom. We have one of the finest legal systems in the world, and it is that basis that I have concerns: the greatest frustration in practice is that, while the principles are well intentioned, the drafting does not follow suit, which leads to litigation and sometimes to unintended consequences. I firmly believe that health is wealth. As a type 1 diabetic, I do not want anyone else to experience any form of chronic suffering. I do not smoke and I never will, but I want to have strong law, which is what we are here to achieve.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On that point, according to Cancer Research, about nine in 10 people start smoking before the age of 21. Surely, if we increase that to 25, by default we are preventing more people from starting by that point. Going back to enforcement, I think that 25 is more of an age by which we have caught the youth and stopped them from starting.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Just to play devil’s advocate, there will be some who will say that they have a cigar from time to time, and that will be caught by this legislation. Cigars are not used in the same way as cigarettes, and they are not seen to be as highly addictive. People do not chain smoke cigars. Is it fair in that instance to remove their liberty to smoke a cigar? I am just pointing that out as a non-smoker.”
House of Commons9 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗