Caroline Johnson MP: speeches

Speeches

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clause 39 provides the power to change the amount of fixed penalties. As the Minister has described, the fixed penalty is set at £200. The clause outlines the powers granted to the Secretary of State and Welsh Ministers to modify the details of fixed penalty notices, in terms of both the level of fine and any percentage discount granted for early payment. The powers seem sensible, as does having an overall limit. The limit that the Government have chosen to set is that of a level 3 fine on the standard scale, which will rise periodically from time to time. Question put and agreed to. Clause 39 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 40 Handing over tobacco etc to underage people in Wales Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Amendments 54 and 55 are probing amendments, like others we have tabled in a similar vein, to provoke discussion about the proportionality of offences, particularly where an offence has occurred inadvertently because someone has misjudged the age of an individual in front of them in an innocent way. I will not repeat myself, but we have already talked about the evidence that shows that people have great difficulty in identifying someone’s age, and the Government have not yet provided guidance on how individual shop workers should be trained to identify people’s age, whether they should be trained to always check ID and how they will prove they saw it and what it looked like. Until that guidance is provided, it is quite difficult to see how all offences can necessarily be proportionate for someone, particularly someone committing a first offence. However, clause 37 offers some opportunity for discretion within that process by providing for the issuing and handling of fixed penalty notices by local weights and measures authorities for certain offences relating to the tobacco and vaping regulations in England and Wales. It stipulates that local authorities can issue FPNs to individuals suspected of committing specific offences, such as selling tobacco or vaping products to minors or breaching the display or sale regulations. These offences are detailed in the sections mentioned in subsection (1), such as selling tobacco to those born on or after 1 January 2009 or selling nicotine products to under-18s. The notice offers the person an opportunity to avoid being prosecuted by paying a specified fine within a set period of 28 days. The fine is set at level 4 on the standard scale, or £2,500, whereas for some other offences it is set at £200. There is quite a different there, so I would be grateful if the Minister could explain the reason for that variation. The individual can pay the full fine within 28 days, or a reduced fine—50% of the original amount—if it is paid within the first 14 days. If the fine is paid within the relevant period of 28 days, whether that is the reduced fine within the 14 days or in full later at 28 days, the individual will not be convicted for the offence. If the payment is not made in time, legal proceedings can then begin. However, no legal proceedings can be initiated before the end of the 28-day period. If the person who has received the fixed penalty notice fails to make the payment and the local authority decides to initiate proceedings against them, the time that is calculated for the magistrates court will begin after the payment window of 28 days. The relevant authority can withdraw the fixed penalty notice at any time before the payment is made. The fixed penalty notice must explain that the local weights and measures authority has reason to believe that the person has committed an offence, why the penalty is that amount, and how and when to pay the system. As I understand it, it is designed to offer a simple and quicker alternative to prosecution, providing an incentive to resolve minor offences through the payment of a fixed fine.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  When the interested parties are informed, could the landlord step in at that stage, as an interested party, to appeal the restricted premises order, on the basis that they are in any case ending the tenancy of the individual company or person that caused the offence in the first place?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 54, in clause 37, page 19, line 25, at end insert— “(1A) In respect to sections (1) and (2) fixed penalties will not be issued where a person has admitted guilt, and it is a first offence.” This amendment ensures that fixed penalty notices for an offence under sections 1 and 2 will not be issued if it is a first offence in England and Wales.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  As the Minister has already described these clauses, I will not repeat that information, but I encourage him to answer my questions on the previous clauses, as they apply similarly to this group. The others were related to restricted premises; these clauses relate to restricted sales applying to people, but the questions are the same. If one appeals to the Crown court, how much will it cost? The Minister did not answer the question about the phraseology of “on the premises” and how that would relate to the collection of items bought online. In the debate on the previous clauses—the same question applies to these ones—he did not answer why the offences in clauses 4 to 6 and 13 to 15 are not considered relevant. Will he also clarify that a different relevant offence can occur on each of the three occasions within the two years? With regard to restricted sale orders, paragraphs (c) and (d) of clause 28(2) relate to machines used for the purpose of selling cigarettes and other banned products. It is illegal under previous clauses to sell items from a machine, so why would one need a restricted sale order to ban something that is already illegal?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clauses 35 and 36 provide ministerial powers. In clause 35, Ministers can decide that they will take over a duty to enforce part 1 of the Bill or regulations under clause 13 in relation to a particular case in England. Subsection (2) of the same clause provides for Welsh Ministers to do the same. Clause 36 gives a similar power to Ministers, only this time it applies to proceedings in respect of an offence, as opposed to a duty to enforce an offence under part 1 of the Bill or regulations under clause 13. Could the Minister give some examples of why Ministers, or the Secretary of State in the case of England, would wish to interfere in either the duty to enforce or the proceedings in respect of an offence? Could he also provide for what provisions are made for Northern Ireland and Scotland?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My understanding—the Minister may correct me if I am wrong—is that the money from FPNs would go into the relevant Consolidated Fund once the enforcement costs of investigating an issue in the FPN have been deducted by the local weights and measures authority. Were these amendments to come into force, the Government would need to provide the extra money to ensure that the enforcement agencies can still function, because at the moment some of their money is recycled from the FPNs, and that would not be the case. I understand the hon. Lady’s desire to ensure that the money that comes from FPNs for the sale of tobacco and other relevant products to under-age individuals is used to improve public health, but in practice if the money goes into the Consolidated Fund, the Government can use it for whatever purposes they deem useful for public health. There is therefore nothing to stop them using it entirely for public health, and for this House to decide what it should be spent on, because that is how the Consolidated Fund is spent. In my view, having a separate fund administering the FPNs would add an extra layer of bureaucracy, so I do not support the amendments, although I support the principle behind them of trying to ensure that public health is good, because all parties want that.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Clause 40 seems self-explanatory. It introduces schedule 5, which relates to the illegal act of handing over tobacco and nicotine products to individuals under the age of 18 in Wales. It amends the Public Health (Wales) Act 2017 to include vaping products, herbal smoking products, cigarette papers and nicotine products. This creates a difference between England and Wales. Obviously the Welsh are free to make changes where they wish to, but I am interested in why the Minister has decided that we should not have a corresponding piece of legislation for England.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I had another question on restricted sale orders. Why has the Minister chosen to include particular clauses and not others? I believe he will write to the Committee on that question.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister says that it is similar in Scotland—I would be grateful if he could confirm whether that is related to individual cases or to a wider takeover of a failing Department. The Minister has talked a lot about the proportionality of the offences, fines, and punishments that can be chosen by trading standards, and he says that he trusts trading standards to ensure that that is proportional to the offence on each occasion. The concern is that the clauses would allow the Secretary of State to interfere with that by taking over the proceedings or the decision to enforce in a particular case, which would mean, for example, that if a Secretary of State was concerned that his best friend was running a shop and was about to get into trouble, he could intervene on the basis of this legislation and prevent that person from having proceedings. Likewise, if an Opposition politician was in the same situation, he could intervene to make proceedings much harder and harsher than they would normally have been.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Is the Minister suggesting that if a shop worker or retailer selling an age-restricted product to an individual saw a form of ID that is not listed in part 3 but which they were convinced was a real and genuine certification of age, they could use that instead?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. Clauses 23 to 27 relate to restricted premises orders. Restricted premises orders stop sales on a premises whereon a relevant offence has taken place “whether made— (a) by the offender or any other person, or (b) by means of any machine”, and the orders prohibit the sale on the relevant premises of “any one or more of the following— (a) tobacco products; (b) herbal smoking products; (c) cigarette papers; (d) vaping products; (e) nicotine products.” They can apply, as defined in clause 23, for up to a year, and are designed to tackle persistent offenders. Clause 23(7) defines a persistent offender, stating: “A person convicted of a relevant offence is a ‘persistent offender’ for the purposes of this section if, on at least two other occasions within the period of two years ending with the date of the offence, the person committed a relevant offence in relation to the relevant premises.” Clause 23(8) defines a relevant offence. It states: “In this section ‘relevant offence’ means— (a) an offence under any of the following provisions of this Part— (i) section 1 (sale of tobacco etc to people born on or after 1 January 2009); (ii) section 3 (tobacco vending machines); (iii) section 10 (sale of vaping or nicotine products to under 18s); (iv) section 12 (vaping and nicotine product vending machines); (b) an offence under any of the following (which are repealed by this Act)— (i) section 7 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (sale of tobacco, etc., to under 18s); (ii) section 3A of the Children and Young Persons (Protection from Tobacco) Act 1991 (tobacco vending machines); (iii) section 92 of the Children and Families Act 2014 (sale of nicotine products to under 18s).” For a restricted premises order to be applied, the Bill says that the sale has to take place on the premises. How does this apply to online sales that are collected? I would like an assurance that there is not a loophole for sales whereby someone buys the product online and then collects it at a premises. Also, why are offences under the following clauses not included: clause 4, “Sale of unpackaged cigarettes”; clauses 5 and 6 on age of sale notices; clauses 13 and 14, which contain the display regulations; and clause 15 on the distribution of samples and promotions? I presume that the relevant offence could be any one of the different offences. For example, I presume that an individual could be convicted for illegally selling vapes on one occasion and tobacco products on another—that it would not necessarily need to be the same product on each occasion. Could the Minister could clarify that? Also, how does the landlord-tenant arrangement work? If the tenant behaves badly and is thrown out of the premises as a result, could the landlord rent the premises to another company or allow another person to run a business on the premises instead? Would that remove the restricted premises order? If it did, how does the Bill prevent another company set up by the same people or their relatives from getting around the restricted premises order? Clause 24 ensures that those subject to a restricted premises order will know about it, which is obviously important. An applicant must make “reasonable enquiries” to determine “(a) the occupier of the premises, and (b) any other person who has an interest in the premises.” Does that include shop employees? Otherwise, how would a shop employee know, unless their boss told them, that a restricted premises order was in place? Is it the intention that a sign be put up in the building that says so, or would we be reliant on the shopkeeper telling his shop workers? Clause 25 allows for appeals to the Crown court. How much does the Minister believe that that will cost in a typical case? Clause 26 provides for penalties for breaches of a restricted premises order, which is only a fine. How much will that fine be? Presumably, it will be substantially more than the relevant offence fines, or what would be the point in having it? If the penalty for repeatedly flouting the same law is a fine that is not much more than the original fine, it will not act as any form of deterrent. Will the Minister give some guidance on how much the fines will be? Also, if an employee—in a shop, for example—was not told that there was a restricted premises order in place, and in good faith sold the product because they believed that that was an okay thing to do, would that be counted as a reasonable defence? Clause 27 is essentially the same provision, but with respect to Wales. It allows the Welsh to extend the list of relevant offences in Wales, but subsection (2) only allows that if the offence “relates to tobacco products, herbal smoking products, cigarette papers, vaping products or nicotine products.” If the Secretary of State used his powers under clause 45, which we have not come to yet, to expand the Bill to include products that are used to consume tobacco—such as the bongs that I know interest the Minister so much—then the Secretary of State must get the consent of the Welsh to add them to clause 45. That is sensible, but clause 27(2) would presumably prevent the Welsh Minister from extending the relevant offences. Therefore, does subsection (2) need to say at the end, “or any product added under the provisions of clause 45”?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  On that basis, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 37 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 38 Fixed penalties: use of proceeds

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My understanding is that clauses 42 and 43 provide for enforcement of fixed penalty notices for the old age of sale offences in the intervening time between the Bill being passed and it coming into force. It seems therefore sensible. Question put and agreed to. Clause 4 2 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 43 and 44 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 45 Power to extend Part 1 to other products Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Has the Minister discussed it with his Scottish and Northern Irish counterparts, and can he say whether they have a similar provision? If they do not have it, why do they feel that they do not need it?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I may have misheard the Minister, but I am not sure he explain why he does not think it is necessary in England.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I asked about online sale and collection versus sale on premises. Finally, if an individual person is a repeat offender under clause 28 because they have sold tobacco three times, that would be fairly clear. If they have sold tobacco on one occasion, vapes on another and cigarette papers on another, does that still count as three relevant offences?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for outlining what these clauses do. I will not repeat his summary, but I will ask him one question: could he confirm what provisions are made for Scotland, please?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  One point to add is that individuals with certain disabilities may not have a driving licence, because their disability makes them ineligible to drive. The options available to them are quite substantially restricted, because most of the options on the list are forms of driving licence. Has the Minister assessed whether those with disabilities are more or less likely to have the documents listed, and is he happy that those with disabilities who wish to buy age-restricted products can do so?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for answering some of my questions. Another question related to clause 29 and appeal to the Crown court. How much does he anticipate that the average cost to interested parties will be? If he does not know, perhaps he could write to us. On clause 28, the relevant offences do not include offences in other clauses in part 1 of the Bill, including clauses 4, 5, 6, 13, 14 and 15. They are not included as relevant offences in clause 28, or indeed clause 23. Given that the Minister wants a robust and watertight approach, why is that not the case? The other question related to online collection.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I believe this is the clause the Minister previously mentioned in relation to bongs. It is his desire to ensure that items used for illegal drugs, which are currently legal only on the basis that they are used for tobacco, will not need to be used once tobacco is not as available. I have a question relating to the age of sale, because tobacco has a rolling age of sale. Is he suggesting that, to put these provisions in place and make these items illegal—such as the bongs that he has referred to so forcefully in the past—the smoke free generation will need to reach the point where there are no members of the smoking generation left?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for that information. Does he therefore envisage situations in which an individual receives an FPN recurrently but is not treated as a recurrent offender?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making an important point and I am grateful for her legal expertise. The tenant would be responsible for having committed the offence, but the landlord would effectively be punished too. I understand that there is a balance to be struck. We want to ensure that the tenant is not able to reconstitute his or her business under a different name, or perhaps take a new lease under their spouse’s name, in order to get around the restricted premises order, but is there any mechanism that my hon. Friend can see by which a landlord—who has genuinely re-let the property to a completely different, unrelated and unknown party—can get rid of the restricted premises order on it?

• 15 Jan 2025 · Higher Education Regulatory Approach · Hansard source

  More

  I respect the Secretary of State’s wish to ensure that she has considered the Act thoroughly. I regret that it has taken her so long to come to the conclusion that free speech is important, but I am glad that she has decided to bring into force many of the measures in the Act, which was introduced by the Conservatives. However, she has chosen to exclude student unions from the legislation. Can she say a bit more about how they will be held to account if they fail to keep in line with her desire to promote free speech?

• 14 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Lady for that.