Rishi Sunak’s flagship smoking ban has passed its first parliamentary hurdle despite opposition from within his cabinet – as Labour backed the bill.
Mr Sunak wants to raise the legal age to buy cigarettes annually in a bid to phase out the habit, as well as restrict the sales of vaping products.
The proposals would make it illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone born after 1 January 2009 – with the prime minister hoping to create a “smoke-free” generation.
Conservative MPs were given a free vote in the Commons this evening, meaning they were allowed to oppose the government if they wished without facing repercussions.
The House of Commons voted in favour of the plan by 383 votes to 67.
There was a sizeable Tory rebellion and a significant number of abstentions.
Kemi Badenoch, the business and trade secretary and a former leadership contender, said she would not support the legislation before the vote.
Ms Badenoch – who has also been tipped to run to replace Mr Sunak if he loses the next election – said on social media that while she agrees with the plan’s intentions, giving adults “born a day apart… permanently different rights” is an issue with the policy – as is the practicality of asking businesses to enforce it.
Advertisement
Other ministers who voted against the bill included Andrew Griffith, Steve Baker, Julia Lopez, Lee Rowley and Alex Burghart, as well as Conservative deputy chair Jonathan Gullis.
In total, 57 Conservative MPs voted against Mr Sunak’s plans, with 106 abstaining.
One such abstention was Anne Marie-Trevelyan, a Foreign Office minister, who said ahead of time that she would not support the Tobacco and Vapes Bill.
Another was Commons leader – and another party leadership hopeful – Penny Mordaunt.
Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick was one of those former ministers who signalled beforehand his intention to vote against the government’s proposed smoking ban.
“I believe in personal freedom,” he posted on X. “Let’s educate more and ban less.”
Other senior Conservatives – like former prime minister Liz Truss, former business secretary Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg and former home secretary Suella Braverman – all said before the vote they did not support the bill, and they all voted against it.
Another former Tory prime minister, Boris Johnson, has also criticised the plan – calling it “mad” and “nuts”.
Labour MPs were whipped to support the prime minister’s plans, with shadow health secretary Wes Streeting speaking in support of the policy in the Commons debate ahead of the vote.
Image: Ms Truss was one of the Conservatives leading the charge against the bill. Pic: AP
The arguments within the Conservative Party centred around whether the ban impinged on civil liberties at the cost of health.
Some, like current Health Secretary Victoria Atkins and former office holder Sajid Javid, said smoking removes choice as young people get addicted and cannot choose to stop – before noting the high costs to the NHS caused by smokers.
Smoking kills about 80,000 people a year and costs the NHS and the economy an estimated £17bn annually.
The other side of the argument – put forward by former prime minister Ms Truss – said the bill would limit people’s freedoms, and trying to protect people from themselves is problematic, before warning of potential further bans on products like alcohol and sugar.
Mr Sunak announced his plans at his party’s conference in Manchester last year, saying it would mean someone aged 14 would “never legally be sold a cigarette and that they and their generation can grow up smoke-free”.
On vapes, he stated his desire to restrict the way they are marketed, including looking at flavours, packaging displays and disposable vapes.
At the time, a similar plan for a rising smoking age ban in New Zealand was touted as an example for the UK to follow – but this restriction was scrapped before it came into force in the country.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Tax changes announced in the budget could have “devastating, unintended consequences” on live music venues, including widespread closures and job losses, trade bodies have warned.
The bodies, representing nearly 1,000 live music venues, including grassroots sites as well as arenas such as the OVO Wembley Arena, The O2, and Co-op Live, are calling for an urgent rethink on the chancellor’s changes to the business rates system.
If not, they warn that hundreds of venues could close, ticket prices could increase, and thousands could lose their jobs across the country.
Business rates, which are a tax on commercial properties in England and Wales, are calculated through a complex formula of the value of the property, assessed by a government agency every three years. That is then combined with a national “multiplier” set by the Treasury, giving a final cash amount.
The chancellor declared in her budget speech that although she is removing the business rates discount for small hospitality businesses, they would benefit from “permanently lower tax rates”. The burden, she said, would instead be shifted onto large companies with big spaces, such as Amazon.
But both small and large companies have seen the assessed values of their properties shoot up, which more than wipes out any discount on the tax rate for small businesses, and will see the bills of arena spaces increase dramatically.
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
In the letter, coordinated by Live, the trade bodies write that the effect of Rachel Reeves’s changes are “chilling”, saying: “Hundreds of grassroots music venues will close in the coming years as revaluations drive costs up. This will deprive communities of valuable cultural spaces and limit the UK creative sector’s potential. These venues are where artists like Ed Sheeran began their career.
“Ticket prices for consumers attending arena shows will increase as the dramatic rise in arena’s tax costs will likely trickle through to ticket prices, undermining the government’s own efforts to combat the cost of living crisis. Many of these arenas are seeing 100%+ increases in their business rates liability.
“Smaller arenas in towns and cities across the UK will teeter on the edge of closure, potentially resulting in thousands of jobs losses and hollowing out the cultural spaces that keep places thriving.”
Image: The full letter from trade bodies to the prime minister.
They go on to warn that the government will “undermine its own Industrial Strategy and Creative Sector Plan which committed to reducing barriers to growth for live events”, and will also reduce spending in hotels, bars, restaurants and other high street businesses across the country.
To mitigate the impact of the tax changes, they are calling for an immediate 40% discount on business rates for live venues, in line with film studios, as well as “fundamental reform” to the system used to value commercial properties in the UK, and a “rapid inquiry” into how events spaces are valued.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:38
Sky’s Jess Sharp explains how the budget could impact your money
In response, a Treasury spokesperson told Sky News: “With Covid support ending and valuations rising, some music venues may face higher costs – so we have stepped in to cap bills with a £4.3bn support package and by keeping corporation tax at 25% – the lowest rate in the G7.
“For the music sector, we are also relaxing temporary admission rules to cut the cost of bringing in equipment for gigs, providing 40% orchestra tax relief for live concerts, and investing up to £10m to support venues and live music.”
The warning from the live music industry comes after small retail, hospitality and leisure businesses warned of the potential for widespread closures due to the changes to the business rates system.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:15
Sky’s political editor Beth Rigby challenged Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on the tax rises in the budget.
Sky News reported after the budget that the increase in business rates over the next three years following vast increases in the assessed values of commercial properties has left small retail, hospitality and leisure businesses questioning whether their businesses will be viable beyond April next year.
Analysis by UK Hospitality, the trade body that represents hospitality businesses, has found that over the next three years, the average pub will pay an extra £12,900 in business rates, even with the transitional arrangements, while an average hotel will see its bill soar by £205,200.
A Treasury spokesperson said their cap for small businesses will see “a typical independent pub pay around £4,800 less next year than they otherwise would have”.
“This comes on top of cutting licensing costs to help more venues offer pavement drinks and al fresco dining, maintaining our cut to alcohol duty on draught pints, and capping corporation tax,” they added.
The Chancellor Rachel Reeves has acknowledged there were “too many leaks” in the run-up to last month’s budget.
The flow of budget content to news organisations was “very damaging”, Ms Reeves told MPs on the Treasury select committee on Wednesday.
“Leaks are unacceptable. The budget had too much speculation. There were too many leaks, and much of those leaks and speculation were inaccurate, very damaging”, she said.
The cost of UK government borrowing briefly spiked after news reports that income taxes would not rise as first expected and Labour would not break its manifesto pledge.
An inquiry into the leaks from the Treasury to members of the media is to take place. But James Bowler, the Treasury’s top official, who was also giving evidence to MPs, would not say the results of it would be published.
Committee chair Dame Meg Hillier asked if the group of MPs could see the full inquiry.
More on Budget 2025
Related Topics:
“I’d have to engage with the people in the inquiry about the views on that”, replied Mr Bowler, permanent secretary to the Treasury.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:21
OBR leak ‘a mistake of such gravity’
The entire contents of the budget ended up being released 40 minutes early via independent forecasters, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).
A report into this error found the OBR had uploaded documents containing their calculations of budget numbers to a link on the watchdog’s website it had mistakenly believed was inaccessible to the public.
Tax rises ruled out
The chancellor ruled out future revenue-raising measures, including applying capital gains tax to primary residences and changing the state pension triple.
Committee member and former chair Dame Harriet Baldwin had noted that the chancellor’s previous statement to the MPs when she said she would not overhaul council tax and look at road pricing, turned out to be inaccurate.
During the budget, an electric vehicle charge per mile was introduced, as was an additional council tax for those with properties worth £2m or more.
Strategy, the largest Bitcoin treasury company, submitted feedback to index company MSCI on Wednesday about the proposed policy change that would exclude digital asset treasury companies holding 50% or more in crypto on their balance sheets from stock market index inclusion.
Digital asset treasury companies are operating companies that can actively adjust their businesses, according to the letter, which cited Strategy’s Bitcoin-backed credit instruments as an example.
The proposed policy change would bias the MSCI against crypto as an asset class, instead of the index company acting as a neutral arbiter, the letter said.
The first page of Strategy’s letter to the MSCI pushes back against the proposed eligibility criteria change. Source: Strategy
The MSCI does not exclude other types of businesses that invest in a single asset class, including real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil companies and media portfolios, according to Strategy. The letter said:
“Many financial institutions primarily hold certain types of assets and then package and sell derivatives backed by those assets, like residential mortgage-backed securities.”
The letter also said implementing the change “undermines” US President Donald Trump’s goal of making the United States the global leader in crypto. However, critics argue that including crypto treasury companies in global indexes poses several risks.
Crypto treasury companies can create systemic risks and spillover effects
Crypto treasury companies exhibit characteristics of investment funds, rather than operating companies that produce goods and services, according to MSCI.
MSCI noted that companies capitalized on cryptocurrencies lack clear and uniform valuation methods, making proper accounting a challenging task and potentially skewing index values.
Strategy held 660,624 BTC on its balance sheet at the time of this writing. The stock has lost over 50% of its value over the last year, according to Yahoo Finance.
Bitcoin (BTC) is also 15% below its value at the beginning of 2025, when it was trading over $109,000, meaning that the underlying asset has outperformed the equity wrapper.
The high volatility of cryptocurrencies may heighten the volatility of the indexes tracking these companies or create correlation risks, where the index performance would mirror crypto market performance, according to a paper from the Federal Reserve.
Bitcoin and Ether volatility compared to stock indexes, oil and gold. Source: The Federal Reserve
The “common use” of leverage by crypto traders amplifies volatility and lends to crypto’s fragility as an asset class, the Federal Reserve wrote.
MSCI’s proposed policy change, set to take effect in January, could also prompt treasury companies to divest their crypto holdings to meet the new eligibility criteria for index inclusion, creating additional selling pressure for digital asset markets.