Tobacco and Vapes Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLord Bishop of Oxford
Main Page: Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops - Bishops)Department Debates - View all Lord Bishop of Oxford's debates with the Department of Health and Social Care
(3 days, 1 hour ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Stevens. I rise to support this important Bill and to express the support of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of London, who sends her apologies that she cannot be here today. I thank the Minister for her very clear introduction, and other noble Lords for their principled and non-partisan support.
This is an extremely important and effective public health measure that prioritises preventive health at a time when demands on acute services are so significant. Stark inequalities in health remain one of the most persistent and negative health outcomes of modern times. Smoking falls clearly along this line of inequality. Action on Smoking and Health goes so far as to say that smoking is the leading cause of
“the gap in healthy life expectancy”.
The Government have already committed to being smoke-free by 2030 and although the most well-off parts of the country may be on track for that, Cancer Research UK reports, as the noble Lord, Lord Stevens, has said, that the most deprived areas are not likely to meet that target until 2050 at current rates.
We know from the evidence given by Professors Javed Khan and Chris Whitty to the Health and Social Care Select Committee that the tobacco industry continues to target the young and vulnerable and relies, as we have heard, on them becoming addicted. This leads to a highly profitable outcome for the industry and a highly harmful outcome for the individual and the family. In England, 352,000 years of life are lost in this exchange every year. Though unintentional, the inhalation of second-hand smoke is also harmful. The “smoke-free generation” element of the Bill, which raises the age of sale by one year every year, is controversial for some because it is about choice. However, it recognises that our choices are made not in a vacuum but with consequences for others.
We all submit to the law and exercise limited rights for the good and protection of our neighbours. We are called to love our neighbours and seek their good; indeed, what is profoundly Christian is that this may be at the expense of ourselves and our own choices and preferences.
We agree on the need to reduce health inequalities and to reduce the overall smoking rate in line with the Government’s smoke-free commitments. Much of the onus for these tasks is on integrated care boards, so I ask the Minister: what will the impact of the announced 50% cuts to operational costs be on stop-smoking services and, more widely, on the reduction of health inequalities? In the midst of such pressure on the health service, and in such a time of transition for the NHS, a change like this is required to reduce this enduring inequality in health outcomes. It also seems clear that a “polluter pays” levy should be considered to support these and other stop-smoking services.
I am glad to see the introduction of this Bill and commend the Government and the previous Government for their courageous action on the issue.