Tobacco and Vapes Bill: how should the UK regulate vaping?

Proposta del gruppo Concorder Civic Lab
1 Moderatore
Marino avatar

Testo della proposta

Ecco la questione che vogliamo affrontare insieme: clicca su ogni paragrafo per aggiungere il tuo contributo votabile

What this decision is about

The Tobacco and Vapes Bill is moving through Parliament and would reshape how the UK regulates tobacco, vapes and other nicotine products. The Bill’s long title includes a “smoke-free generation” measure (prohibiting tobacco sales to people born on or after 1 January 2009), plus new powers on retail licensing/registration, advertising and promotion controls, and rules for smoke-free, vape-free and heated tobacco-free places.

At the same time, the Government is consulting on where new smoke-free, heated tobacco-free and vape-free rules should apply in England — especially in outdoor places used by children or medically vulnerable people. In parallel, HMRC has set out the design for a new Vaping Products Duty (VPD) due to start on 1 October 2026, using a flat rate rather than a previously consulted tiered-rate approach.

Why people disagree

Supporters say the Tobacco and Vapes Bill can reduce youth uptake and protect people from secondhand smoke and vapour in key settings. Critics in Parliament have warned that many practical effects will be set later through secondary legislation (for example on vape descriptors, flavours, advertising restrictions and vape-free zones). They argue rules should be evidence-based, avoid unnecessary burdens on small retailers and hospitality, and avoid making smoking cessation harder for former smokers who rely on vaping products. They also raise the risk of unintended consequences such as growth in the illicit tobacco market.

What this proposal asks you to vote on

  • Bill approach: Should the UK proceed with the Bill’s framework as drafted, or tighten how key vaping rules are decided?
  • Smoke/vape-free places: Which outdoor places in England should be included (and what should stay exempt)?
  • Vaping Products Duty design: Should the duty remain a flat rate, or return to a tiered structure by nicotine strength?

What you can do

Vote, comment with evidence, and suggest improvements that keep the Tobacco and Vapes Bill effective, workable for retailers and services, and aligned with public health goals.

Opzioni di voto

Vota le diverse opzioni proposte per trovare insieme la soluzione migliore.

0
0
0

Proceed with the Bill’s framework as drafted

What this means

Advance the Tobacco and Vapes Bill with its UK-wide framework: the cohort-based tobacco sales prohibition (born on/after 1 Jan 2009), retail licensing/registration powers, controls on advertising/promotion, and powers to set smoke-free, vape-free and heated tobacco-free places.

What would still be decided later

Key details for vaping rules (such as descriptors, flavours, advertising restrictions and vape-free zones) would be shaped through later regulations.

0 Ancora nessun voto
👍2 pro👎2 contro
Marino avatar
Pro icon
Creates a statutory “smoke-free generation” mechanism by prohibiting tobacco sales to people born on or after 1 January 2009 (UK Parliament Bill page, last updated 10 Mar 2026).
Marino avatar
Pro icon
Consultation rationale links new smoke/vape-free proposals to protecting children and medically vulnerable people from secondhand smoke and vapour (DHSC consultation, 13 Feb 2026).
Marino avatar
Cons icon
Peers warn a “very significant portion” of real-world impact will be set via secondary legislation, including vape descriptors/flavours/advertising restrictions and vape-free zones (Hansard, House of Lords, 9 Mar 2026).
Marino avatar
Cons icon
Concerns raised about unnecessary burdens on small retailers and hospitality, and about rules that could make smoking cessation harder for former smokers relying on vapes and descriptors (Hansard, 9 Mar 2026).
0
0
0

Amend the Bill to narrow delegated powers on vaping rules

What this means

Keep the Bill’s overall aims, but revise it so that key parameters for vaping regulation are more clearly set in primary legislation (for example, guardrails on descriptors/flavours/advertising and how vape-free zones are designated), rather than relying heavily on future ministerial regulations.

Why this option exists

This responds to parliamentary concerns about how much policy substance will be decided later through regulations.

0 Ancora nessun voto
👍1 pro👎1 contro
Marino avatar
Pro icon
Directly addresses the concern that many practical effects (vape descriptors, flavours, advertising restrictions, vape-free zones) are currently left to Ministers via secondary legislation (Hansard, 9 Mar 2026).
Marino avatar
Cons icon
Government justification for delegated power is to “collect the evidence” and then shape regulations; tightening what can be done by regulation may reduce flexibility to adjust as evidence develops (Hansard, 9 Mar 2026).
0
0
0

Keep the Bill’s direction, but hard-wire stronger review and evidence tests

What this means

Proceed with the Bill’s framework, while strengthening the requirement that future regulations (on descriptors, flavours, advertising, vape-free zones) are explicitly evidence-based and subject to robust review after a defined period.

Why this option exists

Peers emphasised evidence, proportionality, and the importance of a meaningful review to detect unintended consequences.

0 Ancora nessun voto
👍1 pro👎1 contro
Marino avatar
Pro icon
Aligns with calls that regulations be grounded in evidence, avoid unnecessary burdens, and consider impacts on people using vapes as a pathway away from smoking (Hansard, 9 Mar 2026).
Marino avatar
Cons icon
Peers highlight that “the risk of unintended consequences is real,” including potential effects on illicit tobacco markets; even with review, harms may occur before corrective action (Hansard, 9 Mar 2026).

Public children’s playgrounds

Include public playgrounds in the proposed smoke-free (and related vape-free/heated tobacco-free) outdoor settings, as set out in the England consultation.

0 Ancora nessun voto

Outdoor areas of health and care settings

Apply restrictions to outdoor areas connected to health and care settings, reflecting the consultation’s focus on medically vulnerable people.

0 Ancora nessun voto

Outdoor areas of education settings

Apply restrictions to outdoor areas of education settings, consistent with the consultation proposal aimed at reducing exposure around children and young people.

0 Ancora nessun voto

Keep outdoor hospitality settings exempt

Support the consultation’s position that it is not considering extending the indoor ban to outdoor hospitality settings (and also not to wide-open spaces like beaches), citing the need to balance protection and financial impact on businesses.

0 Ancora nessun voto

Flat rate duty (£2.20 per 10ml)

Keep the announced flat rate of £2.20 per 10 millilitres of vaping liquid, regardless of nicotine content, as set out by HMRC.

0 Ancora nessun voto
👍1 pro👎1 contro
Marino avatar
Pro icon
HMRC states the flat rate is intended to simplify calculations, reporting and compliance, and reduce classification disputes (HMRC note, 26 Nov 2025).
Marino avatar
Cons icon
HMRC notes heavy vapers would face the highest burden because the measure increases prices, and warns some may respond by moving to tobacco products (HMRC note, 26 Nov 2025).

Return to a tiered-rate duty by nicotine strength

Revert to the previously consulted tiered rates structure, instead of the flat rate, acknowledging HMRC’s note that the tiered approach was replaced after consultation feedback.

0 Ancora nessun voto
👍1 pro👎1 contro
Marino avatar
Pro icon
HMRC confirms a tiered structure was part of earlier design considerations during consultation before being replaced; this option re-opens that design choice for debate (HMRC note, 26 Nov 2025).
Marino avatar
Cons icon
HMRC indicates the tiered structure was replaced following consultation feedback to make the duty simpler to administer (HMRC note, 26 Nov 2025).

Fonti

Commenti