Debate contribution: Vaping: Dangers to Children
Debate contribution by Mr Justin McNulty on .
- MLA
- Mr Justin McNulty
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 22 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Vaping: Dangers to Children
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4608564
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Having been invented a little over 20 years ago, vaping has, incredibly and sadly, become ubiquitous in our society. While vaping was initially launched with the sales pitch that it would help smokers who wished to escape their cigarette addiction by moving to a so-called safer interim alternative, it is now clear that vaping and the vaping industry have an agenda, and that includes attracting and addicting new users. Many of the new users have never tried cigarettes, and many of them, regrettably and scarily, include our children. The proliferation of vape shops in our high streets, with their colourful signs that offer sweet and fruity nicotine highs, lure many of our young people to take up this highly addictive habit that causes damage to their lungs, adversely impacts their educational outcomes and increases the likelihood of creating a new generation who will move on to lethal cigarettes. On top of that, vaping is not cool. Young people of all ages do not suit vaping, and it is a scourge on our society. School leaders across the North have highlighted the fact that vaping is a plague in our schools and said that the problem is at crisis point. We desperately need action. I welcome the motion, which recognises the harm caused by vaping, the scale of the problem and its impact in our schools. Why are vapes marketed as a confectionary product when they are a nicotine product? A 2022 Public Health Agency survey reported that 21·3% of 11- to 16-year-olds in the North have tried vaping. Fidelma Carter from the Northern Ireland Chest, Heart and Stroke charity said that 17% of young vapers do it regularly, which is a shocking figure. Without action, further risks will be created. As young people navigate their studies and the often challenging reality of peer dynamics, relationships and digital addiction, they now also have to contend with a novel 21st-century drug that lacks any long-term testing. At the same time, our teachers, who deal with a multitude of diverse and challenging tasks in, at times, poor and under-resourced schools, now have to meet the added demand of policing a sizeable minority of vape-addicted children. I say that again: teachers now have to meet the demand of policing vape-addicted children. Whilst the true long-term damage of vaping cannot yet be known, we already know enough to know that more must be done. The story of Belfast 12-year-old Sarah Griffin, who, last year, suffered a collapsed lung and ended up in an induced coma for four days, should alone prompt us to do more to curb the scourge of vaping, but so too should the less-reported stories of addicted teenagers who are unable to focus without the crutch of their vape, racked by anxiety, headaches and withdrawal. Today, we look back at the history of cigarettes: the mass advertising, the glamourisation and the societal omnipresence of a drug that we now know to cause premature death to the majority of users through use as intended. We do not want to look back in another 30 years and see the same thing with vaping, regretting that we did not do more. Whilst it seems credible that vaping is significantly less dangerous than smoking traditional forms of tobacco, it is not without its health risks, and we should never allow it to be used by our children. Our teachers and school leaders have many challenges to contend with already, and we must urgently reckon with the modern iniquity of vaping. It is incumbent on the Minister of Education to take the crisis seriously and work with his Department to draft a plan to educate our young people on the risks of vaping and allocate the time and resources that our schools need to address the problem. However, tackling the crisis is not the responsibility of only the Education Minister, and policing the problem should not be the sole responsibility of our teachers. I suggest that the Department of Health, the Department for the Economy and the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs look into how they can play a role in supporting and collaborating on the drafting of any future policies that may help to prevent our children and young people succumbing to this highly addictive drug. Littering, and the damage that it does to our environment, is another big aspect of vaping that has to be dealt with. The AERA Minister should address that.
740 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.04 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.61 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.34 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:28 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.