Debate contribution: Tobacco and Vapes Bill: Legislative Consent Motion
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 10 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Tobacco and Vapes Bill: Legislative Consent Motion
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4790333
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I endorse all the remarks that have been made. We discussed the issue in Committee. It is pretty much a no-brainer. Smoking kills, and it kills lots and lots of people. It is not killing as many people now as it used to. Why? Because not as many people smoke. If we do everything that we can to provide the necessary leadership and guidance, it will, hopefully, help future generations to completely eradicate smoking one day so that nobody does it. That will help. Like the Chair of the Health Committee, I was a smoker. I have been off cigarettes for over 20 years at this stage, although my current cold makes it sound as though I am back on them again. It is really difficult to give up smoking. I started smoking because, where I lived as a young person, we could get access to a vending machine. We were able to sneak in and pool our money to purchase a packet of cigarettes. The inclusion of elements that deal with removing vending machines as points of sale is really important. If the product has to be sold, it must be sold to people of an appropriate age and in an appropriate way. There is also the issue of health inequalities. We know that smoking is more prevalent in areas of deprivation, and we know that the sheer cost of cigarettes nowadays means that it is putting a substantial drain on some families' income. Trying to eradicate smoking for future generations might take away a massive cost from some households. As matters continue, it will be incredibly difficult to police it — to have two people who are maybe just one year apart, and one can smoke and the other cannot. There may be some ways that cigarettes will be passed around. Of course, everyone knows that, in every town across the North, there are places that sell cigarettes at knock-off prices. If that continues to be the case in the future, it will provide that additional access. I hope that something can be done to try to clamp down on the access so that those who can get cigarettes do not avail themselves of that opportunity. I welcome the fact that the legislation is being debated here today.
380 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: 0.03 (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 (0.89).
- 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 | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 | 0.72 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.17 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.09 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| 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.