I welcome this long overdue legislation to further regulate vapes and to finally regulate nicotine pouches. As has repeatedly been the case with these new nicotine pouches, regulation arrives too late. The use of vapes and nicotine pouches has surged with a new generation increasingly dependent on nicotine. The Minister of Health and her predecessors have not shown the level of urgency required with a piecemeal approach to regulation that is consistently behind the curve. It took the previous Minister of Health, Stephen Donnelly, until the very end of 2023 to ban the sale of vapes to under 18s. While welcome, this was hardly bold policymaking. At the time, most people assumed that the sale of vapes to under 18s had already been prohibited and understandably so, and even the bare minimum interventions failed to include nicotine pouches. Only now is that finally addressed in this legislation, two and a half years later. This is despite the fact that my colleague, Deputy Whitmore, has been raising this with Government for years. In 2024, two years ago, a European School Survey Project found that 4% of 15- to 16-year-olds in Ireland were using nicotine pouches with 8% having used them at some point. Why has there been such reluctance to act decisively? For years, we have had more than just compelling anecdotal evidence, we have had the data. When it comes to banning disposables, the pace of change has even been slower. It took the Government until December last year to finally introduce that legislation, and although it has passed all Stages in the Dáil, we are still waiting for it to pass through the Seanad. I appreciate that a six-month notification process must be followed and that the delay is out of the Government's hands but the process should have commenced years ago, not just last December. Stephen Donnelly talked about his intentions to ban disposable vapes as far back as November 2023. He eventually secured Government approval to move forward with the ban in September 2024, and that was after two rounds of public consultations, one run by the Department of Health and the other by the then Department of Environment, Climate and Communications. Why is there always such hesitation when it comes to progressing vape regulation? There is strong talk but no substance for action even though we know that children are being targeted by the tobacco industry. When it is passed, the Bill before us will finally deal with the tobacco industry's concerted efforts to manufacture vapes that appeal to children. This is welcome, although again long overdue. We know from Central Statistics Office data that 7% of adults in Ireland vape daily, most of whom are current smokers or ex-smokers. The real concern, however, is that vaping rates among children are much higher at double that of the general population. A WHO study of school going children in Ireland found that 13% of 12- to 17-year-olds are currently vapers having vaped in the previous 30 days. Another study conducted by the European School Survey Project on alcohol and other drugs found that 16% of 15- to 16-year-olds in Ireland currently vape. When young adults, many of whom started vaping in their teens, are included, the number is even worse. According to the most recent Healthy Ireland survey, 17% of 15- to 24-year-olds report daily or occasional vape use. This should not be news to anyone. Just look at any of our cities, towns our villages. This Government and its predecessor have sleepwalked us into a youth vaping crisis with its lacklustre approach to regulation. While available evidence indicates that vaping is safer than smoking, the long-term impacts are yet to be understood. We do know that vaping is not risk-free. According to the HSE, the short-term impacts of vaping include nicotine dependence, sleep problems, mental health difficulties, such as anxiety, damage to heart, lung and blood vessels and exposure to toxins. Children are thought to be at even more risk, with the HSE citing particular concerns around attention and learning, mood, impulse control and anxiety. Vaping causes real harm. It is, therefore, welcome that the Bill provides for a ban on vapes that resemble toys and games because the manufacturing of vapes designed to appeal to children must be one of the tobacco industry's most despicable moves of late. It must be repeated again and again that a considerable share of the vape market in Ireland and globally is controlled by the tobacco industry. These companies recognised the shift away from cigarettes and moved quickly to exploit it, adopting their business model to recruit a new generation of nicotine dependent customers to feed their profits. The products and branding may have changed, but the companies have not. Marlboro and PJ Carroll have already diversified into vape products. The disposable brands that have captured the Irish market, namely Elf Bar and Lost Mary, are produced by ambiguous Chinese companies. According to the Irish Heart Foundation, evidence indicates that China's vape market is now overseen by the state's national tobacco corporation and the state tobacco monopoly administration. It does not end with vaping. Big tobacco is also driving the surge in nicotine pouch use, another product being aggressively and cynically marketed to young people. Last August, the Irish Cancer Society reported that big tobacco took centre stage at several festivals and concerts across the country, heavily promoting highly addictive nicotine pouches at festivals like Electric Picnic and Altogether Now. It is unsurprising that the tobacco industry has turned to vapes and other novel nicotine products to safeguard its profits. Not only do vapes mitigate against falling cigarette sales, they offer tobacco companies other significant benefits, including larger profits through lower taxation, the opportunity to circumvent tobacco legislation, such as marketing flavoured brands, preventing the loss of customers who quit cigarettes by getting them to switch to vapes and attracting new customers who would not have started smoking cigarettes in the first place. Thankfully, the Bill and other measures will call a halt to many of the benefits for big tobacco, at least domestically. The most sinister and under-reported benefit for tobacco companies has been the opportunity to have a seat at the table again through funding research and the promotion of vapes as harm reduction products. I fear this argument is a Trojan horse, allowing the tobacco industry back into the conversation and giving it access to policymakers, albeit not directly. As I have said, the evidence indicates vaping is less harmful than cigarettes. The harm reduction argument is made when it comes to those trying to commit smoking, but the tobacco industry is not genuinely interested in harm reduction. It is only interested in creating addiction. That is why all of us need to examine the harm reduction argument critically, consider who is making it and, critically, who is funding it. We must not just accept this at face value. The connection between Philip Morris International, the producers of Marlboro, and the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World has been exposed in recent years. The Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, which has since rebranded, was said to have the stated aim of ending smoking in this generation. In 2023, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners described the foundation as nothing more than a fig leaf for Philip Morris's real business, namely nicotine addiction. Between 2019 and 2021, the world's largest tobacco company contributed over €160 million to the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World. During this period, less than 1% of the foundation's revenue came from other sources. As of 2023, the foundation has financed more than 70 academic papers on topics including vapes and rates of smoking cessation. In 2024, the UK Royal College of Physicians said tobacco company funded research accounted for a significant proportion of the science on new nicotine products and harm reduction approaches. It went on to raise serious concerns about the quality and veracity of that research. That is something we all need to be cautious about and careful of when making these arguments. We need to know exactly who is funding much of the research that is being put out there. I would like to make a few points on the provisions of the Bill. I welcome the advertising ban on vape and nicotine pouches, the restrictions on displays and the introduction of plain packaging for vapes. The packaging and display of these products should be treated in the same way as tobacco, namely out of sight and in closed containers behind shop counters. Pick-and-mix style displays of vapes has gone on for too long. I am, however, concerned that the plain packaging rules and flavour name restrictions will not apply to nicotine pouches. That seems short-sighted. Why is the Minister repeating the mistakes of the past? Inevitably, we will be back in the House rehashing this debate in a couple of years. On the question of flavours, I am glad the regulation is finally being advanced. This was recommended by the health committee as far back as 2022, when the committee had a Sinn Féin Chair, and had cross-party support. There can be no justification for the array of flavours currently available, most of which are clearly designed to entice children. However, the approach taken would regulate flavour names rather than the flavours themselves. According to the Library and Research Service, the understanding is that this approach would be easier to implement rather than one which restricts certain ingredients or sensory attributes. I would be interested in hearing more from the Minister of State on the reasons for this approach and the research carried out by the Department to support this view. This may well be the best approach, in particular from an enforcement point of view, but it would be beneficial if she could provide Members with a briefing note, in particular in advance of Committee Stage. I would also appreciate if she could provide further information regarding the decision to restrict flavour names to just two options, namely tobacco and unflavoured. Specifically, I would like to know whether the Department considered the inclusion of menthol or mint, as flagged in previous debates, and what the update is on that. This is where the line should be drawn. The suggestion that was made on the floor of the House that banning vapes is like banning cider because it tastes like apples is a ridiculous argument and one that should not be entertained. Finally, I would like to again restate the support of the Social Democrats for the Bill. We have long called for measures to address the alarming increase in vapes and nicotine pouch use, in particular among children and young people. It has been clear for some time that we need to address the normalisation of these products and treat them in a similar manner to cigarettes. I have no doubt that the new restrictions will be unpopular with many, but history will look favourably on these important public health measures. I commend the Bill.

Sentiment score: 0.03