The UK government’s proposed Tobacco and Vapes Bill came under a scrutiny in the House of Lords on Wednesday (23 April), with some members warning it would create two classes of adult citizens with unequal legal rights based not on behaviour or consent, but on their date of birth.
During a heated second reading debate, members from across the political spectrum criticised the bill for being philosophically flawed, operationally unworkable, economically damaging, and a likely trigger for the growth of the illegal tobacco trade.
“Unjustifiable Inequity in the Law”
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Scriven led the charge, stating that the legislation would mark a historic first—legally dividing adults by age into groups with different rights.
He said, "The Government have an interest in protecting public health, but that interest must always be balanced against personal liberty and equity before the law. The Bill does not do that. It creates an unjustifiable inequity in the law.
"Even if one were to set aside these philosophical concerns, there is a more immediate issue that we must grapple with: enforcement.
"Laws that cannot be enforced are worse than being ineffective; they breed contempt for the very institutions that create them. I fear this Bill falls squarely into that category.
"Not only will retailers be expected to verify that a consumer is over 18 but that will continue for years to come. Imagine the confusion at the tills and the inevitable mistakes, disputes and frustrations. In time, a 35 year-old will be legally permitted to buy tobacco while a 34 year-old will not be.
"Who will be checking their ID, and how will they make sure that that distinction is absolutely clear?"
Lord Scriven further pointed how such a regulation will boost illegal tobacco sales.
"History gives us a clear warning that any form of prohibition rarely eliminates demand. Instead, it often pushes it underground, where criminal networks thrive. We see it with alcohol and we have seen it with drugs.
"International evidence shows us what happens when you try to significantly restrict the sale of tobacco: illicit tobacco sales start showing up more, especially in communities where there are fewer legal retailers.
"Convenience stores in New Zealand reported increased thefts and robberies targeting tobacco products, indicating an underground demand.
"Customs and law enforcement in New Zealand also noted a rise in smuggling and illegal imports. When legitimate, regulated access is denied, serious illegal alternatives fill the vacuum. So I caution noble Lords as we go forward against totally believing that age restriction can and will work. I ask noble Lords to look at the core mechanism in Committee."
“Dangerous Precedent”
Backing Lord Scriven, Conservative peer Lord Brady of Altrincham described the bill as setting a "very dangerous and worrying precedent."
He said, "The idea that we have always accepted and worked upon in this country is the premise that when you achieve or attain an age of majority you will be in an equal position to other citizens to exercise choices as to whether you use certain legal products or not and other choices that you make in life.
"I cannot think of another example where legislation has so blatantly sought to discriminate against different adult citizens according to their exact date of birth, and I find that deeply worrying. It is wrong in principle, and it is something we really need to think about far more."
Small Shops in the Crosshairs
Lord Howard of Rising raised concern over the economic fallout, particularly for small businesses.
He pointed out, "The weight of compliance will fall heaviest on small businesses—corner shops, independent retailers and family-run enterprises—which often lack the resources to keep up with ever expanding regulatory demands.
"These businesses form the backbone of our local communities, but they will struggle to meet the stringent requirements outlined in the Bill."
Lord Howard of Rising added that the cost of enforcing the legislation will be significant.
"Trading standards will require a colossal increase in funding to successfully monitor compliance, conduct inspections and prosecute violations. In a time of constrained public finances, we must ask: is this the best use of taxpayers’ money? Could these resources not be more effectively deployed towards improving our schools, strengthening palliative care or tackling crime?"
He added that history teaches us that prohibition does not eliminate demand.
"As a number of your Lordships have pointed out this afternoon, it merely drives it underground. Excessive restrictions on tobacco and vaping products will pave the way for a mass unregulated black market where safety and quality are sacrificed.
"This is not mere speculation, it is a lesson that has been learned time and again. If nicotine products are pushed underground, we risk turning law-abiding citizens into criminals and jeopardising the health and safety of consumers."
"Increase in attacks on shop workers"
Baroness Hoey shared her concern for convenience stores.
She stated, "There has been an increase in attacks on workers in small shops more recently. They face regular abuse and physical threats; ID checks already cause a lot of verbal abuse.
"The idea that our shop workers will bear the brunt of this new legislation seems very unfair. That is not even counting the extra costs of the proposed new licensing arrangements that, without doubt, will threaten the viability of some of our local family-run shops.
"The real winners from the Bill, if it goes through unamended, will be the organised crime gangs, which no doubt are already gearing up to benefit. They certainly could not care less about the age of anyone who is buying from them. I wonder whether the Government have thought through any strategy to deal with this."
