MPs back smoking ban for those born after 2009

Article
Archive

MPs have backed a plan to ban anyone born after 2009 from buying cigarettes, effectively ensuring it will become law.

The measures, championed by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, survived despite opposition from several leading Tory figures - including two ex-PMs.

Health Secretary Victoria Atkins told MPs "there is no liberty in addiction" as she defended the plans.

The Tobacco and Vapes Bill passed by 383 votes to 67.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Ms Atkins said the plan would create a "smoke free generation".

However, several Tory MPs, including former prime minister Liz Truss, voted against the bill, arguing it would limit personal freedom.

Last week, ex-prime minster Boris Johnson called the smoking ban "absolutely nuts" during a speech at a Conservative conference in Ottawa, Canada.

"When the party of Winston Churchill wants to ban cigars, donnez-moi un break as they say in Quebec, it's just mad," he said.

Conservative MPs were given a free vote on the bill, meaning they were not ordered to vote with the government. But full support by Labour's front bench ensured the measures passed.

There are still several more steps needed before it becomes law, such as votes in the House of Lords, but it is possible that the bill could now become law before the general election, expected in the second half of 2024.

Labour's shadow health and social secretary Wes Streeting accused Mr Sunak of "putting the bill at risk" by granting a free vote "because he is too weak to stand up to the Liz Truss-wing of his party".

"If we are privileged enough to form the next government, Labour will implement this ban, so young people today are even less likely to smoke than they are to vote Conservative," he added.

In total 57 Tory MPs voted against the bill, including Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch and Conservative Party Deputy Chair Jonathan Gullis.

Foreign Office minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan also signalled her opposition but ultimately abstained on the vote.

Lee Anderson, an ex-deputy chair of the Conservative Party who defected to Reform UK last month, also voted against the bill.

Mr Sunak used his conference speech in October of last year to unveil his plans to ban people born after 1 January 2009 from buying tobacco products.
'Free society'

The debate on Tuesday was MPs first chance to debate the legislation implementing the ban.

Ms Truss was one of the first to speak against the bill, telling the House of Commons it risked infantilising people.

"It is very important that until people have decision-making capability while they are growing up that we protect them but I think the whole idea that we can protect adults from themselves is hugely problematic."

Her concern was echoed by some of her fellow Conservative MPs.

Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick, tipped as a potential contender to run for the Tory leadership, also came out against the policy.

On social media he said he was against the bill because he "believes in personal freedom".

"I also believe in the principle of equality under the law. A phased ban of smoking would be an affront to that," he added.

Former minister Sir Jake Berry said he was more concerned about "the addiction of the government to telling people what to do" than he was about people addicted to nicotine.

"I want to live in a free society where I am free to make both good and bad decisions."

Ms Atkins said she understood their concerns about "banning things" but defended the bill arguing: "Nicotine robs people of their freedom to choose."

"The vast majority of smokers start when they are young, and three quarters say that if they could turn back the clock they would not have started."

Earlier in the day, England's chief medical officer Sir Chris Whitty said once people become addicted to smoking "their choice is taken away".

"When I was a junior doctor doing surgery I remember the tragedy of seeing people, whose legs had had to be cut off because of the smoking that had damaged their arteries, outside the hospital weeping as they lit up because they were trapped by addiction - that is not choice."

The bill also aims to make vapes less appealing to children, with new restrictions on flavours and packaging.

Trading standards officers would also get new powers to issue on-the-spot £100 fines to shops selling tobacco or vapes to children, with all the money raised going towards further enforcement.

Figures show that one in five children has tried vaping despite it being illegal for under-18s, while the number of children using vapes has tripled in the past three years.
 
I don't really give a fuck since I Don't smoke and think it's gross but how come smoking is subject to bans/heavy restrictions but high fructose corn syrup and various food additives which have been conclusively linked to cancer, birth defects, organ damage and other horrible shit are fine to aggressively market and sell?
Do you mind pointing where I could get more information on high fructose corn syrup and food additives being harmful to human body? I would love to read up on the topic since this is the first time I heard of it. My knowledge about this topic is extremely limited and I want to fix that.

Also, Bongs about to enter the Prohibition Era like the US did if this law get into full effect. Fags are bad for your health just like alcohol, but this is classic government overreach. It is literally a "Feels Good" law in the same vain as "Think of the Children!" laws.

First they came for the fags, and I did not speak out because I don't smoke and I'm not a faggot.
Then they came for the booze, and I did not speak out because I don't drink.
Then they came for the diesel vehicles, and I did not speak out because I don't drive.
Then the faggots came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.
 
Like most things britbong, this is totally ridiculous. All you have to do is look at prohibition over here in amerilardland to understand why this will have tons of unintended consequences that would have been easy to foresee if you simply looked at recent history. But I don't think that's the goal here. I think they actually want to stoke outrage and create the inevitable black market for cigs because they can grift off it, and it gives the bobbies a break from policing mean words on screens and not actually doing anything about real social issues like deporting undesirables or prosecuting rapists and pedophiles. That would be racist and/or inequitable, you see.

I smoked for years, and I still enjoy the occasional cig, but I mainly vape now, and I'm working on quitting that too. The idea that you should ban a substance for the "greater good" has a long and sorid history. Flatly, it never works. People will find a way to get what they want, come hell or high water.
 
Vaping seems like it would undoubtedly be worse due to the manufacturing process of it. At least to me it seems that way.
No not really.

Without getting into the serious weeds of some wild shit the tldr is:

Nicotine = nicotine
Menthol = menthol

Paper, plant matter, shit tons of additives in actual combustion is almost certainly *worse* than vegetable glycerine, propylene glycol, and some flavorings* that doesn't combust.

Combustion itself creates all sorts of shit you dont want, and the crap they throw in cigs is especially bad.

Most scare mongering is trying to convince you vaping isn't safe but it assumes your alternative is nothing (which no shit. Any risk is more than none. But thats not the relevant question) Vs tons of adults who would just go right back to cigarettes. Theres also lobby and tax money bs.

* for a big side of theres tons of chemistry down there and the caveat would be "chose reasonably/wisely".

Sadly the fda is more about killing small businesses than it is creating reasonable safety legislation. This is part of what's driving the disposables made overseas shit which imo is far worse/sketchier than the prior situation of buy devices and fill them up.
 
Why now when smoking is the least trendy it has been in the past 100 years? Are they trying to make smoking seem cool again? 'Cause that's what they're doing.
 
Última edición:
Why now when smoking is the least trendy it has been in the past 100 years? Are they trying to make smoking seem cool again? 'Cause that's what they're doing.
I assume it's one of those things they use to test how much they can legislate "public safety" before pushback about government overreach from the public itself.
 
How are things this retarded again? I feel like we are just repeating a cycle every 100 years.

World War? Check.
Prohibition? Check.
Impending depression? Check.

These reruns are getting so shitty.

I prefer the old Rerun!
 
The "CONSERVATIVE" government of the UK everyone.
Gee, I wonder why their voters are abandoning them in catastrophic numbers?!

Oh yeah, and this is proof the dirt is not magic. No blood Brit would have championed this... Fucking hindis.
 
Nicotine stimulates the parasympathetic nervous system by binding to nicotine receptors. In short, yes, it will calm you.
Also according to medical studies...I may have drunkenly read nicotine has neuroprotective properties which is funny because it is a poison(just ask insects and that one guy who was poisoned with tobacco tea)...but...I enjoy it.
 
Also according to medical studies...I may have drunkenly read nicotine has neuroprotective properties which is funny because it is a poison(just ask insects and that one guy who was poisoned with tobacco tea)...but...I enjoy it.
Literally every substance consumed in excess is a poison, including water.

The ugly truth is the human body will wear and tear just like every other object, and state-mandating what people can and cannot do to contribute to that wear is ridiculous.

I don't consume nicotine, but every article I read like this makes me want to try it out.
 
Also according to medical studies...I may have drunkenly read nicotine has neuroprotective properties which is funny because it is a poison(just ask insects and that one guy who was poisoned with tobacco tea)...but...I enjoy it.
Probably. Acetylcholine is one of the most important neurotransmitters not only for the autonomous nervous system, but for your central nervous system and muscle as well. Any places where there's acetylcholine, there's probably nicotinic receptors (as well as muscarinic receptors).

Also, tobacco =/= nicotine.
 
Also, tobacco =/= nicotine.
Ah, so that's why every ban on smoking includes vaping... because tobacco =/= nicotine.
It's almost as if there's some other reason for these bans, such as pharma not liking competition that doesn't go through their gateways.
 
Ah, so that's why every ban on smoking includes vaping... because tobacco =/= nicotine.
It's almost as if there's some other reason for these bans, such as pharma not liking competition that doesn't go through their gateways.
Nicotine by itself is not carcinogenic or not particularly so. The tobacco contains most of the carcinogenic compounds, and in particular contains nitrosamines which are known to cause cancer, which nicotine can be since it has an amine group.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo