On October 8, the United Kingdom government opened a consultation, seeking expert input on measures intended to help the country achieve “smoke-free” status by 2030. Among policies under the microscope are some concerning the critical ability of local stores to offer harm reduction products.
The Labour Party government’s Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which is going through Parliament after a long and controversial journey, aims to phase out smoking for the next generation. Its provisions include requiring licenses for all retailers selling tobacco and nicotine products, and enabling restrictions on vape flavors, packaging and nicotine product advertising. It would also ban tobacco sales to anyone born since January 1, 2009.
“The bill will help us achieve our ambition for a smoke-free UK and protect future generations from the harms of nicotine,” states the government. “However, there are some topics that we need further evidence on, and this call for evidence will help inform policy development on potential future regulations.”
Academics, industry representatives, councils and “other experts and stakeholders with relevant knowledge and experience” are now invited to complete an online survey by December 3.
“We want expert views on how we can develop the strongest possible regulations to protect our children,” said Health Minister Stephen Kinnock, “… while ensuring adult smokers can still use vapes to quit smoking.”
Though the UK government acknowledges the harm reduction role of vapes, a number of policy developments in recent years—including a disposable vapes ban implemented in June, as well as elements of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill—have prioritized concerns about youth use over harm reduction access. Such developments represent a change in direction for what was arguably the world’s most vape-friendly country.
“This doesn’t sound like a pro-harm reduction mindset to me.”
The new consultation seeks to gather evidence on “substances and ingredients used to create flavors” and “levels of nicotine that should be permitted in nicotine-containing products,” among other issues.
These are not questions that imply prioritization of harm reduction needs, and advocates are wary.
“The question is whether the government is interested in evidence that contradicts its intentions or cuts across ministers’ predictable but simplistic talking points on vaping, nicotine and youth,” British tobacco harm reduction expert Clive Bates, of Counterfactual Consulting, told Filter.
Bates pointed to how the call for evidence states: “This is part of a co-ordinated and comprehensive approach across the 4 nations to further tackle the harms associated with the use of tobacco, vapes and nicotine products.”
“This doesn’t sound like a pro-harm reduction mindset to me,” he said.
The government’s proposal to require special licenses for businesses selling tobacco or nicotine products is another subject of the call for evidence. This plan, according to Kinnock, “will better protect children by rooting out the rogue retailers blighting our high streets and help adults know which shops are selling legitimate products.”
Stores found to be in violation could face on-the-spot penalties of $2,500, or larger, unlimited fines.
“Our concerns would be around a scheme that disproportionally impacts responsible retailers— through cost and administrative burdens, or through restricting operation just because of their location.”
Chris Noice, communications director for the Association of Convenience Stores, has mixed feelings about this, though he welcomes how the government’s call for evidence suggests that “they’re considering pretty much every aspect of the scheme.”
On the one hand, he told Filter, the licensing scheme has the “potential” to be a “positive intervention,” if it’s targeted at irresponsible traders selling unvetted and possibly risky nicotine products.
On the other hand, “Our concerns would be around a scheme that disproportionally impacts responsible retailers—either through significant cost and administrative burdens, or through a scheme that restricts retailers from operation just because of their location or proximity to other businesses,” Noice said. “Because of the wide-ranging nature of the call for evidence though, it’s too early to determine what the scheme is going to look like.”
Retailers fear that the Tobacco and Vapes Bill will affect shopkeepers’ livelihoods and undermine how they help people quit smoking by advising on safer nicotine products. If the impact is that fewer convenience stores sell these products, making them less visible, this will be detrimental to public health as well as retailers, they argue. One campaign encourages store owners to send a letter expressing such concerns to Secretary of State for Business and Trade Peter Kyle.
Also at play is another new government scheme that could see local councils limit vape shops in their area.
The “Pride in Place” program will allow communities to determine which shops can operate in their neighborhood. A government paper said communities will be given the “power to block unwanted shops: empowering councils in England to say no to new betting shops, vape stores and fake barbers.”
In other words, vape shops could be targeted by NIMBYism.
“Classifying vapes alongside betting shops as ‘undesirable’ businesses completely ignores their proven health benefits.”
“From a public health point of view, vape shops are really important in helping people make their journey out of smoking,” Bates said. “They not only offer a wide range of products that meet most needs, but they also provide a service, expertise and encouragement.”
“People need to see vape shops as providing a cure for cancer or heart disease and feel proud of them,” he said.
When most people who smoke in the UK incorrectly think vaping is as harmful as smoking or worse, there’s a clear risk that ill-informed beliefs could block vapes from the high street, curtailing easy access to safer substitutes for cigarettes.
“Classifying vapes alongside betting shops as ‘undesirable’ businesses completely ignores their proven health benefits of harm reduction,” Mark Oates, director of the independent UK vapers’ rights organization We Vape, told Filter.
“Vaping is the most effective tool we have to help people quit smoking,” he said, “and these shops are often part of the solution, not the problem.”
Photograph (cropped) by John Baker via Geograph/Creative Commons 2.0
