Disposable vapes to be banned over concerns of sharp increase in children’s use

Published

2 years ago

January 29, 2024

admin

Rishi Sunak has announced plans to ban disposable vapes in a bid to crack down on their use among children.

The prime minister is also set to unveil new powers to restrict vape flavours as a means to make them less appealing to children.

The Scotland and Wales governments will also ban single-use vapes.

The proposed ban, which will form part of legislation that has to be approved by parliament, comes amid concern at the rise of vaping among children, with teachers reporting pupils showing signs of nicotine dependency in the classroom.

The prime minister will also make it illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 as part of his pledge to create a smoke-free generation, while vaping alternatives such as nicotine pouches will also be outlawed.

Announcing the move ahead of a visit to a school on Monday, Mr Sunak said: “As any parent or teacher knows, one of the most worrying trends at the moment is the rise in vaping among children, and so we must act before it becomes endemic.

“The long-term impacts of vaping are unknown and the nicotine within them can be highly addictive, so while vaping can be a useful tool to help smokers quit, marketing vapes to children is not acceptable.

“That is why I am taking bold action to ban disposable vapes – which have driven the rise in youth vaping – and bring forward new powers to restrict vape flavours, introduce plain packaging and change how vapes are displayed in shops.

“Alongside our commitment to stop children who turn 15 this year or younger from ever legally being sold cigarettes, these changes will leave a lasting legacy by protecting our children’s health for the long term.”

Smoking remains the UK’s single biggest preventable killer, causing around one in four cancer deaths and leading to 80,000 deaths per year, while the health effects of vaping remain unknown.

Will the smoking ban be subject to a ‘nanny state’ backlash?

Tamara Cohen

Political correspondent

@tamcohen

As smoking has been increasingly curtailed in public, it’s easy to forget that it’s still one of the leading causes of death and illness in the UK.

It kills around half of those who smoke, making it the biggest one that’s entirely preventable. The habit kills 76,000 people a year, according to the NHS.

From a public health perspective, Rishi Sunak’s plans are being hailed as a game-changer, and the vaping ban will reassure the message boards full of worried parents of teenagers.

But there’s still something about the ban on cigarettes altogether, that sits uneasily, particularly with politicians on the right.

Read analysis in full here

The new measures follow a government consultation into smoking and vaping which was launched last year, in which nearly 70% of parents, teachers, healthcare professionals and the general public indicated their support for further restrictions.

Enforcement agencies, including Border Force and HMRC, are in line to receive £30m in new funding a year to enforce the measures.

The government will also bring in new fines for shops in England and Wales that sell vapes illegally to children, in addition to the maximum £2,500 fine that local councils can already impose.

Further restrictions on vaping have been touted after recent figures show the number of children using vapes in the past three years has tripled.

Under its plans, the government is expected to use the Environmental Protection Act to ban disposable vapes and hopes to achieve its aim by the end of 2025 at the latest.

The move has been welcomed by health and environmental campaigners. It is estimated that five million disposable vapes are thrown away each week – up from 1.3 million last year.

Dame Rachel de Souza, the Children’s Commissioner for England, said parents would be “extremely relieved” at the proposals.

“When I asked children a couple of years ago about all aspects of their health and wellbeing, I was shocked and concerned to hear from children as young as 12 who told me that vaping was normalised among their peers – even on school premises,” she said.

“This announcement will help tackle that issue and I know that many children and parents will be extremely relieved.”

Your e-cigarette health questions answered

How safe are e-cigarettes?

Vaping is not completely risk-free, but it poses a small fraction of the risk of smoking cigarettes.

The long-term risks of vaping are not yet clear.
E-cigarettes do not produce tar or carbon monoxide, two of the most harmful elements in tobacco smoke.

The liquid and vapour contain some potentially harmful chemicals also found in cigarette smoke, but at a much lower level

What about risks from nicotine?

While nicotine is the addictive substance in cigarettes, most of the harm from smoking comes from the thousands of other chemicals in tobacco smoke, many of which are toxic.

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has been widely used for many years to help people stop smoking and is a safe treatment.

Are e-cigarettes safe to use in pregnancy?

Little research has been conducted into the safety of e-cigarettes and e-liquids in pregnancy. It is not known whether the vapour is harmful to a baby in pregnancy.

If you’re pregnant, licensed NRT products such as patches and gum are the recommended option to help you stop smoking.

But if you find using an e-cigarette helpful for quitting and staying smoke-free, it’s much safer for you and your baby than continuing to smoke.

Source: nhs.uk

And Libby Peake, head of resource policy at the Green Alliance, said: “This ban can’t come soon enough, not only for the health of future generations, but also for the health of the planet.

“This bold move by the government is nothing but good news.”

Around 9% of 11 to 15-year-olds are now using vapes and teachers have expressed concern that children are struggling to concentrate in lessons without them.

However, former prime minister Liz Truss said Mr Sunak should “reverse” the ban.

“While the state has a duty to protect children from harm, in a free society, adults must be able to make their own choices about their own lives,” she said.

“Banning the sale of tobacco products to anyone born in 2009 or later will create an absurd situation where adults enjoy different rights based on their birthdate.

“A Conservative government should not be seeking to extend the nanny state.”

Wes Streeting, the shadow health secretary, said: “What has taken the government so long? Labour put forward measures to tackle vapes being aimed at children more than two years ago, but these were blocked by the Conservatives.

“In the meantime, the numbers of young people vaping have soared.”

UK

Prince Andrew insisted on ‘gag order’ to stop allegations spoiling Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, memoir claims

Published

10 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Prince Andrew insisted on 'gag order' to stop allegations spoiling Queen's Platinum Jubilee, memoir claims

Prince Andrew insisted his accuser, Virginia Giuffre, sign a one-year gag order – to prevent details of her allegations tarnishing the late Queen’s platinum jubilee, her memoirs have claimed.

Andrew relinquished his Duke of York title and remaining honours on Friday evening.

It came after discussions with King Charles, in consultation with the Prince of Wales, both of whom wanted to bring an end to the long-lasting scandal.

But, according to The Telegraph, Ms Giuffre’s book, which is due out on Tuesday, is focusing further attention on the sexual assault allegations and the prince’s friendship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, which led to the royal’s downfall.

She tells how Andrew’s “disastrous” Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis was like an “injection of jet fuel” for her legal team, and it raised the possibility of “subpoenaing” his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, and daughters Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie and drawing them into the legal case.

The Telegraph also reports Ms Giuffre’s claims that she got “more out of” Andrew than a reported £12m payout and $2m (around £1.4m) donation to her charity because she had “an acknowledgement that I and many other women had been victimised and a tacit pledge to never deny it again”.

The former duke paid to settle a civil sexual assault case with Ms Giuffre in 2022, despite insisting he had never met her.

Ms Giuffre alleged she was forced to have sex with the prince when she was 17, after being trafficked by Epstein. Andrew continues to vehemently deny her allegations.

Queen Elizabeth II was celebrating her platinum jubilee in 2022 – the first British monarch to reach the milestone – as the civil case against her son was gathering pace.

It was settled nine days after she reached the 70th anniversary of her accession.

According to the Telegraph, Ms Giuffre, who died in April, reveals in her book: “I agreed to a one-year gag order, which seemed important to the prince because it ensured that his mother’s platinum jubilee would not be tarnished any more than it already had been.”

In January 2022, a US judge ruled the civil case against Andrew could go ahead, and the Queen went on to strip him of his honorary military roles, with the prince also giving up his HRH style.

‘Devastating’ interview

His 2019 Newsnight interview, which he hoped would clear his name, backfired when he said he “did not regret” his friendship with convicted paedophile Epstein, who trafficked Ms Giuffre.

Andrew also said he had “no recollection” of ever meeting Ms Giuffre and added he could not have had sex with her in March 2001 because he was at Pizza Express with his daughter Beatrice on the day in question.

Ms Giuffre, whose book is called Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice, wrote, according to The Telegraph: “As devastating as this interview was for Prince Andrew, for my legal team it was like an injection of jet fuel.

“Its contents would not only help us build an ironclad case against the prince but also open the door to potentially subpoenaing his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, and their daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.”

‘Amazed he was stupid enough’

She also told how Andrew had “stonewalled” her legal team for months before settlement discussions began moving very quickly when his deposition was scheduled for March 2022.

Ms Giuffre also wrote she was “amazed” that a member of the royal family would be “stupid enough” to appear in public with the convicted paedophile, after a photo of the pair walking in New York emerged.

Andrew, who remains a prince and continues to live in the Crown Estate property Royal Lodge, said on Friday the “continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the royal family”.

He insisted he was putting his “family and country first” and would stop using “my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me”.

UK

Why William and Camilla likely had influential roles in decision over Prince Andrew’s titles

Published

10 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Why William and Camilla likely had influential roles in decision over Prince Andrew's titles

It’s not the first seismic statement I’ve had to deal with from the Royal Family late into the evening.

But what I have learnt from past experience is that when they do come in this way, it’s because the decision has been made to act now and act fast.

Which inevitably has us all wondering, why now?

The latest stories about Prince Andrew and his email to Jeffrey Epstein were again a sign of just how close he’d been to the convicted paedophile, and an extract released from the late Virginia Giuffre’s book was heartbreaking and excruciatingly seedy.

And yes, the full book is released on Tuesday.

But in some ways, we have heard a lot of these lurid details before, albeit allegations that Prince Andrew denies.

Which is why it feels like this time, the family had just had enough.

It’s framed as a personal statement from Andrew, but the involvement of his relatives could not be any clearer: “In discussion with the King, and my immediate and wider family,” he writes, followed up by, “with His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further”.

It has always been hard to get a full picture of how much the King has engaged in the problems with his brother.

Speak to those who know the family well and they’ll tell you our current monarch “doesn’t like confrontation”, just like Queen Elizabeth II.

And while there has always remained “a warm familial feeling between the two brothers” which we’ve seen through Andrew’s appearance at family events, it is “tempered by the King’s responsibilities as head of state to be entirely separate from the perceived, real or alleged activities of the Duke of York”.

In the end, as head of the institution, and not as his brother, the King would have had to lead the discussions about the Andrew problem, but I suspect with heavy involvement from his eldest son and wife.

William, only in recent weeks, has told us there will be change when he becomes monarch, his advisors stressing he isn’t afraid to question why the Royal Family continues to do things in a certain way.

His very visible unease at standing next to Prince Andrew at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral showed us how uncomfortable he felt about his uncle being there at such a public moment.

His involvement in those discussions behind the scenes and making sure the institution was seen to be taking action against Andrew is likely to have been considerable.

I know that Queen Camilla is also a quiet but hugely powerful influence behind palace walls.

She is her husband’s listening ear, sounding board, but also not afraid to tell him when she believes there needs to be change.

Her own work to break taboos around sexual violence and encourage survivors to speak out must have made it even more difficult for her to read the stories about Andrew’s links to Epstein, and the sexual allegations against her brother-in-law, even though he has always vehemently denied them.

And then there are those closest to the Prince.

You have to have sympathy with his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie. Did they tell their father that he needed to do something for their sake to try and shut down the noise?

His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, has also been burned in recent weeks by her association with Epstein – a spectre who, despite his death, has continued to haunt the royal family.

So what of Prince Andrew? How will this impact him?

Any sense he might have a chance at returning to some kind of public life has truly evaporated. We wait to see if, with time, he is again allowed to appear at least for family occasions.

I’ve always been told “he is robust and self-contained and always has been”.

Interpret that how you will – arrogance that he could ride it out, or a very strongly-held conviction that he has never done anything wrong?

Either way, he clearly believes he has been unfairly punished by the court of public opinion.

One thing a source did tell me is that there is a sense he’s never really needed the affirmation of his family.

He may not need their emotional support, but in the end, we have again seen how no member of the family is bigger than the institution.

Protecting the reputation of “the firm” has to come first.

Prince Andrew may feel that he has done the right thing, even done his family a favour, by personally relinquishing the use of his titles and honours, but this, in the end, was not just his choice.

No longer to be known as HRH or the Duke of York, he is now Prince Andrew only – ultimately forced to fall on his sword by his own family.

UK

Everything we know about Prince Andrew’s titles decision

Published

10 hours ago

October 18, 2025

admin

Everything we know about Prince Andrew's titles decision

Prince Andrew has announced he is giving up his royal titles, including the Duke of York.

The decision is understood to have been made in close consultation with King Charles and other members of the Royal Family.

Prince Andrew said continued accusations against him were distracting from the King’s work.

He had been accused by Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, of sexual assault. He denies this.

Which titles is he giving up?

Prince Andrew is giving up his Duke of York title. Sky News understands this will be immediate.

He will also give up his knighthood as a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) and his Garter role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.

He will retain the dukedom, which can only be removed by an Act of Parliament, but will not use it.

Prince Andrew will also remain a prince, as the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

Why is this happening now?

Ms Giuffre, who was one of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, alleged Prince Andrew sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17, and sued him in 2021.

In her posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl, due to be published on Tuesday, she alleged he was “entitled” and “believed having sex with me was his birthright”.

Prince Andrew has always denied the allegations.

He has also always claimed that a well-known image of them together was doctored. Before her death, which her family said was by suicide, the case was settled outside of court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Ms Giuffre’s posthumous memoir goes on sale a week after an email emerged showing Andrew told Epstein “we are in this together”.

The email was reportedly sent three months after he said he had stopped contact with the convicted sex offender.

On Friday evening, the US House Oversight Committee also released documents from Epstein’s estate showing “Prince Andrew” listed as a passenger on the financier’s private jet – the so-called Lolita Express – from Luton to Edinburgh in 2006, alongside Ghislaine Maxwell.

He was also listed on another flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2000.

The flight logs have been reported on for years but the release may have added to pressure.

“The situation has become untenable and intolerable, and this week in particular, the tipping point had been reached,” said royal correspondent Laura Bundock.

It is understood that the changes will take effect immediately.

The Giuffre family has called for the King to go further and “remove the title of Prince”.

Prince Andrew’s decision to relinquish his titles also comes following increased pressure over his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

Will this affect his ex-wife and daughters?

Sky News understands that Andrew will continue to live at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge. His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also remain living at the Royal Lodge.

But for the second year running, he will not attend the Royal Family’s annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham, it is understood.

Andrew’s ex-wife will also no longer use her Duchess of York title.

She was dropped by numerous charities last month after it emerged that she wrote to convicted sex offender Epstein, calling him a “supreme friend”, despite publicly disowning him in the media.

The decision over Andrew’s titles will not impact on the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, it is understood.

Sky News royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills says the move may not stop the influx of negative stories about him.

She said: “This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

“Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain. But in what is the prince’s first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying, ‘I vigorously deny the accusations against me’.”

What did Prince Andrew say in his statement?

In his statement, Prince Andrew said: “In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

“I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

“As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.