Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Tenth sitting)

Jim Dickson Excerpts

Committee stage
Tuesday 21st January 2025 Public Bill Committees

[The Chair]

I will just leave it at that. I repeat, I wanted people to be aware of that, for clarity about their timings, understanding, domestic commitments and all the rest of it. The issue of discussions through the usual channels is a matter for those discussions through the usual channels; it is not a matter for me.

Clause 96

Information

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

I beg to move amendment 6, in clause 96, page 54, line 24, leave out “may” insert

“must within six month of the passing of this Act”.

[The Chair]

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Amendment 7, in clause 96, page 54, line 36, leave out “may” insert “must”.

Amendment 8, in clause 96, page 54, line 36, after “provision” insert “and publication”.

Amendment 9, in clause 96, page 54, line 38, at end insert

“, including provision of data with reference to areas specified in the regulations, which may be local authority areas.”

These amendments require the Secretary of State to make regulations which would require producers of tobacco products and other products to provide sales data by geographical area and would require the publication of such data.

Clause stand part.

Clauses 97 and 98 stand part.

[Jim Dickson]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd.

Amendments 6 to 9 stand in my name and I will endeavour to speak to them quickly in the light of the discussion we have just had. The amendments would require the Secretary of State to make regulations that, in turn, require the producers of tobacco products and other related products to provide sales data by geographical area, and require the publication of such data.

Tobacco companies collect rich data on the sales of their products, which is used for commercial purposes. Many times in Committee, we have heard how smoking is now spread unequally across our communities, with people in deprived areas being far more likely to smoke. Data is collected by companies on their sales and distribution, and could be put to better use to inform public health responses. In my case, as cabinet member for health in a London borough, I know my director of public health would have found that data incredibly useful to shape local policy.

Such data could also help researchers get better insights into tactics used by the industry to subvert price policies, thereby informing tax policy in the area and consultations on a “polluter pays” levy, which the Committee will be considering with new clause 2. The data would enable local authorities to get better insights into what is happening with sales in their area and to identify possible upticks in illicit tobacco use. There may be National Trading Standards’ uses for such data to support enforcement activity and improve the intelligence that local authorities have available to assess local problems with illicit sales.

We know that manufacturers change their sales tactics regularly. In a written submission to the Committee, Action on Smoking and Health provided an example of how access to the data could aid policy. It states in its submission that it has recently identified that cigarillos—small cigars—

“are increasing in use among young people. With timely access to industry sales data public health agencies and researchers could have identified this trend far more quickly”

and acted to do something about it. It continues:

“These products have fewer restrictions on them than other tobacco products, something that will be addressed”

by the Bill,

“but lack of knowledge has inhibited swift public health response.”

A lot of this data is shrouded in secrecy, and I hope that the Committee agrees that requiring the industry to make it public could support public health endeavours. I am sure that Philip Morris International, which submitted evidence to us, would agree that the company is committed to delivering a smoke-free future. This is one way the industry could help, but the Government should require it to do so.

[Dr Johnson]

May I clarify, Mr Dowd, that you wish amendments 6 to 9 and clauses 96 to 98 stand part to be debated together?

[Dr Johnson]

Thank you. I also point out that last Thursday the Opposition Whip put forward sensible proposals, and we finished to time on the clauses that were required to be assessed, so we can act very reasonably when we are asked to.

Amendments 6 to 9, tabled by the hon. Member for Dartford, would require the Secretary of State to make regulations requiring producers of tobacco products and other products covered by the Bill to provide sales data by geographical area, and would require the publication of such data. I am not clear how widely the hon. Gentleman wants the data to be published. Does he want it to be published and available on the internet, or does he want it to be provided just to the Government? Perhaps he could clarify his intentions.

I am not sure how helpful the hon. Gentleman thinks this measure will be, because people do not necessarily consume where they purchase. The figures for a major service station, for example—perhaps where the M1 meets the M25—could really skew the data that he intends to be collected. Data from around King’s Cross may reflect people having a cigarette before they leave on a long journey, and the same may be true at airports. Does he have a view on the effect of that, or how it would be mitigated?

[Jim Dickson]

Of course, occasionally there would be outlets for which the data is less useful, but if we looked at outlets in deprived areas—shops on estates, for example—and saw an uptick in a particular type of product being bought in the area, I think we could make a reasonable assumption that those products were being consumed pretty close to the place of purchase, and that would tell us something about trends in product use. That might tell us something very useful for public health purposes, if we were trying to promote smoking cessation or a decline in the use of particular products in the area.

[Dr Johnson]

I understand and support what the hon. Gentleman is trying to achieve. He seeks to ensure that individuals who smoke can be encouraged to quit, and to look at where products are sold more frequently as a way of trying to do that, but I wonder whether this data is, in effect, already collected by survey, and whether it would be a burden on businesses to require them to provide sales data. Does he envisage that the tobacco and vape companies themselves would provide data on which retailers they have supplied? Depending on how much stock a retailer is holding, that will not necessarily tell him how much has been sold. Or does he envisage that every corner shop would submit data to the Government? How much would it cost to process that data, and would it really tell us things we do not already know?

[Jim Dickson]

I can deal with that very quickly. We would be looking for the companies to publish the data they collect, broken down geographically, and to give us an idea of the volume of their sales, including of particular products. That is all information they hold already; we are merely suggesting that the Government should require them to publish it in that form, which would be particularly useful to public health professionals and, we think, for trading standards enforcement.

[Dr Johnson]

I support the hon. Gentleman’s aims, but can he clarify whether he intends the data to be published widely or just shared with the Government for the purposes of health? Will it be available to competitors, for example?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Dickson]

The data will be available publicly to anyone who wishes to look at the information. The companies may feel that that is a competition issue and try to make that case, but publishing the information for everyone to use, particularly public health authorities and trading standards, will be helpful in contributing to our objective of a smoke-free generation by supporting cessation efforts and enabling public health to shape policy around trends in the tobacco industry.

[Dr Johnson]

My support for the hon. Gentleman diminished slightly when he said that the data will be available for everyone to see. There is a point to saying that if the data is available, sharing it with Government, public health officials and those who treat it confidentially to try to improve the public’s health, and to trading standards to assist enforcement, may be useful, but providing data to competitors is the wrong thing to do.

First, that is unfair in a free market. Secondly, might not this data be used by companies in this industry, which we know is adaptable and agile, to increase sales in areas where they presumed a competitor was selling but have found out they are not? I am not sure that the data is required to be published for the public interest. The Minister could tell us whether there are any other instances where we expect private companies to tell us who they are selling to and where and to publish quantities of sale online for other companies to see. I cannot think of an example, but the Committee may be able to. Perhaps the hon. Member for North Somerset who is a pharmacist may be able to help, because he has more experience—

--- Later in debate ---

I was asked whether the responsible people will be liable for offences. Clause 103 provides regulations under part 5 to create offences for failure to comply with regulations. If the responsible people do not comply with regulations, including if they provide inaccurate, incorrect information to serve their purposes, that could include imprisonment, a fine or both. For that reason, I ask my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford to withdraw his amendment. I commend clauses 96 to 98 to the Committee.

[Jim Dickson]

I thank the Minister for his very comprehensive response. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 96 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 97 and 98 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Ordered, That further consideration be now adjourned. —(Taiwo Owatemi.)