Debate contribution: Tobacco and Vapes Bill: Legislative Consent Motion
Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .
- MLA
- Mr Mike Nesbitt
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 10 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Tobacco and Vapes Bill: Legislative Consent Motion
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4790315
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move
Among the many and varied challenges that I accept as Minister of Health, addressing health inequalities is perhaps the most difficult, as nobody has shifted the dial on healthy life expectancy since devolution in 1998-99. I repeat: that challenge is an Executive-wide one. The international standard that we are working to indicates that clinical health initiatives contribute 20% of the solution; socio-economic initiatives contribute 40%; environmental initiatives contribute 10%; and the remaining 30% are down to individual behaviours, such as alcohol consumption, drug use and smoking. It is in that context that I seek the support of the House for the legislative consent motion (LCM). Last year, the House voted to support Northern Ireland's inclusion in the previous Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which, unfortunately, fell on the dissolution of Parliament. The new Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which was introduced last November, is broadly the same as the previous Bill. It will create a smoke-free generation, making it an offence for anybody born on or after 1 January 2009 to be sold tobacco products. Going further than the previous Bill, it seeks to address the deliberate marketing of nicotine vapes and non-nicotine vapes to children. Consequently, the Bill will ban the sale of vapes and other nicotine products to under-18s, including from vending machines. It will ban advertising and sponsorship as well as free distribution. The tobacco retailers' register will be extended to include retailers who sell vapes or other nicotine products. The Bill will also provide a power to introduce a licensing scheme. Each of the four nations will have powers to extend smoke-free places and to designate them vape- and heated tobacco-free. Why do we need those measures? It is because smoking kills. It is the number-one cause of preventable illness and premature death. Each year, 2,200 people in Northern Ireland die from smoking-related conditions. It increases the risk of over 50 serious health conditions. As I said, smoking is also a major cause of health inequality. Smoking rates in the areas in which deprivation is highest are three times those in the least deprived areas. The Bill's generational approach to eliminating tobacco use offers a groundbreaking way in which to address that public health threat. Smoking also impacts on non-smokers who are exposed to second-hand smoke and on families who have to deal with the illness or death of loved ones. Smoking affects us all. Members will be all too aware of the financial pressures facing our health service. In 2019-2020, Northern Ireland hospitals spent £218 million treating smoking-attributable conditions, and there were 38,617 smoking-attributable hospital admissions. There are growing concerns about the harms of vaping. Recent data shows that, among year 12 pupils, vape use doubled from 11·7% in 2019 to 23·6% in 2022. The Institute of Public Health found evidence of a gateway effect between e-cigarette and subsequent tobacco use, so robust measures are needed to address the appeal of the products to children. In respect of costs arising, the smoking measures are not entirely new, so we are not starting from scratch. While the exact costs will need further analysis, in the long term, some expenditure is justified, given the huge personal and economic costs of smoking. Some may be concerned that there are different legislative frameworks on either side of the border. However, the fact remains that we have a common goal of reducing smoking prevalence and tobacco harm. The case for consent remains as when the Assembly gave consent to the previous Bill. This UK-wide Bill offers the best opportunity to introduce the measures in this mandate and allow us to keep pace with the other UK nations. The Bill offers a huge opportunity to save lives and enable people to stay well for longer. The response to the public consultation showed overwhelming public support for the measures. The Executive Office and Health Committees were briefed, and they agreed that we should be included in the UK-wide legislation. It is the right thing to do, and we would face considerable public criticism if we were to reject this once-in-a-generation opportunity. I am grateful to Professor Sir Michael McBride for his support for the Bill; indeed, the Bill is supported by all four UK Chief Medical Officers (CMOs). I ask Members to support the motion in order to best serve our families, our friends and future generations.
The Bill is an opportunity to save lives. I urge Members to take that opportunity.
742 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: 0.02 (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 (0.86).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.86 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 0.77 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.14 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.05 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.04 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:55 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.