If in doubt, ban it

Having kept a low profile when the Government announced its response to ‘The Khan review: make smoking obsolete’ last week, the author of that ‘landmark’ report has broken his silence.

After urging the Government to promote vaping ‘to help people to quit smoking tobacco’, Javed Khan, a former CEO of Barnardo’s, now believes his proposals to simultaneously deter young people from vaping didn’t go far enough.

One of the 15 critical recommendations Khan included in his review was to:

Offer vaping as a substitute for smoking, alongside accurate information on the benefits of switching, including to healthcare professionals (critical intervention). The government should accelerate the path to prescribed vapes and provide free Swap to Stop packs in deprived communities, while preventing young people’s uptake of vapes by banning child friendly cartoon packaging and descriptions.

The Financial Times now reports that:

Javed Khan, a former executive who led a landmark government review into smoking last year, said the “worryingly high” levels of underage use “tipped the balance conclusively” in favour of a ban on flavoured, single-use vapes.

“If I knew then what we know now, I would have been stronger in calling for an outright ban,” said Khan, who was the chief executive of child protection charity Barnardo’s between 2014-21.

Khan’s support for a ban is not however shared by ASH whose CEO, Deborah Arnott, favours something less draconian - the imposition of a £4 excise tax on disposable vapes ‘to make them less affordable to younger users’.

That may have some effect on the number of children vaping, but it will also make many vulnerable to the black market and illicit traders.

It’s worth pointing out too that the sale of e-cigarettes to under 18s is already illegal.

Therefore, instead of punishing impoverished adult vapers (who may be trying to give up smoking, a more expensive habit), perhaps the Government, and Trading Standards, should concentrate on enforcing existing laws rather than introducing new measures that may be counter-productive.

Unfortunately the default position of many public health campaigners seems to be, ‘If in doubt, ban it’.

How unimaginative, and tiresome.

My advice to ASH? Put a sock in it or change the record

A week after the Government ignored their pleas for a huge spike in spending to meet the ‘Smoke-free 2030’ target, anti-smoking campaigners are back demanding more funding.

An open letter in the British Medical Journal today claims that ‘Meagre spending on tobacco control is costing the economy billions’:

Achieving a Smokefree 2030 would do much to reduce pressure on our NHS and social care systems, significantly increase disposable incomes for many of the poorest in society and deliver the economic growth our country so desperately needs.

If the government is ‘unwilling or unable’ to pay for additional tobacco control measures from the public purse, they want the tobacco industry to cough up via a “polluter pays” levy.

Coordinated, no doubt, by Action on Smoking and Health, the letter is signed by all the usual suspects including Nick Hopkinson, chairman of ASH; Kevin Fenton, president of the Faculty of Public Health; Charmaine Griffiths, chief executive, British Heart Foundation; Ian Walker, executive director, Cancer Research UK; Linda Bauld, director, SPECTRUM public health research consortium; and Sarah Woolnough, chief executive, Asthma+Lung UK.

The list of signatories also includes Pat Cullen, chief executive of the Royal College of Nursing whose members recently rejected the Government’s latest pay offer and will continue with their hugely damaging series of strikes. Welcome aboard, Pat!

Sadly, the letter failed to attract much interest among national news editors, with only the online Independent publishing the Press Association's report.

(It's had a bit more traction on local newspaper websites but overall there has been very little coverage.)

I wonder, perhaps, if journalists are beginning to tire of their special pleading for more dosh. Here's Forest's response, as quoted by the PA:

Simon Clark, director of the smokers’ lobby group Forest, said: “With smoking rates at their lowest recorded levels, funding anti-smoking initiatives during a cost-of-living crisis is not justifiable, nor is it a good use of taxpayers’ money.

“A so-called polluter pays levy would undoubtedly be passed on to the consumer, punishing smokers for their habit, and forcing many more to buy their tobacco from the unregulated black market, with a subsequent loss of revenue for government.”

Calls for a levy have also been around for years, so it's hardly a news story.

I remember the then Chancellor, George Osborne, rejecting the idea in, I think, 2015. Gratifyingly, he used the very same argument that Forest was using and continues to use today - that the cost would be passed on to the consumer.

However the idea of a levy goes back even further, to at least 2012.

Today hardly a month goes by without calls for a levy (I can't remember the last time ASH's Deborah Arnott gave an interview without mentioning it) and still the Treasury won't budge.

Given the number of chancellors we've had since Osborne left office you'd have thought ASH would have got the message by now, but apparently not.

Meanwhile, responding to the claim that tobacco control is under-funded, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Social Care said:

“We are committed to achieving our ambition of a smoke-free 2030 and are backing this with significant funding.

“Last week we announced up to £58 million over the next two years as part of new plans to cut smoking rates and tackle youth vaping.

“This is on top of £68 million from the public health grant which was given to local stop smoking services last year, with a further £35 million committed to the NHS so that all smokers admitted to hospital are offered NHS-funded tobacco treatment services.

Truth is, when the likes of ASH say the Government's tobacco control plans are 'nowhere near enough', it should be taken with a pinch of salt because nothing short of prohibition will ever be enough for these so-called health charities.

Remember when all they wanted was more smoke-free areas in restaurants? Well, look where we are today and they're still not happy!

So my advice to ASH? Put a sock in it, or change the record, because this is getting boring. And I'm not alone in thinking that!

Why disposable vapes should not be banned

The All Party Parliamentary Group on the Environment will today host a discussion about a possible ban on the sale of disposable or single-use vapes.

The event was first publicised two weeks ago. Chaired by Selaine Saxby MP, vice chair of the Environment APPG, three of the panellists - Libby Peake, Green Alliance; environmental campaigner Laura Young; and Caroline Johnson MP - have all called for a ban on disposable vapes.

Another panellist - the FT’s Alexandra Heal - will likely be less partisan and more nuanced but here’s how her colleague, Oliver Barnes, summarised, on Twitter, a feature they co-wrote in March:

They are terrible for the environment, they are pushing up vaping rates among UK teens and Shenzhen vape companies are making $$$

To be fair, the extensive, long-read article (The environmental cost of single-use vapes) did acknowledge the value of vapes to help smokers quit, but it concluded with this parting shot:

Until then, back in Leicestershire, it is left to educators like [headteacher Dan] Cleary to clean up the mess as more pupils pick up vaping habits. “I’d be really intrigued to know how people who produced these things are sleeping at the moment,” he says. “I suspect the wealth that they’re attracting might make that easier.”

But back to that APPG line-up. My first reaction on seeing it was to tweet, 'Looks a very balanced panel', with an eye-rolling emoji.

I then discovered, three days ago, that John Dunne, director general of the UK Vaping Industry Association, had (belatedly?) been added to the panel.

The UKVIA recognises the issues with disposable vapes (many of which are illicit) but, to the best of my knowledge, the industry doesn't support a ban on the product.

Hopefully, John will bring some balance to a discussion that was looking very one-sided, but he's still outnumbered.

Defra minister Rebecca Pow will give the Government’s response in her concluding remarks. I suspect she will play the same straight bat that public health minister Neil O’Brien wielded so expertly when fielding questions from the tobacco control industry following his speech at Policy Exchange last week.

Truth is, whatever their environmental impact, banning disposable vapes would be a massive backward step for a government that has put its faith in e-cigarettes as a safer alternative to smoking.

It would also deny consumers choice although the unregulated black market would quickly meet demand because there is one very simple reason why single use vapes are popular with consumers - convenience.

As I wrote here seven years ago:

My gut feeling – based on no research whatsoever – is that if hundreds of millions of smokers worldwide are to switch to vaping (e-cigarettes or heat not burn products) the device has to be as simple to use as a combustible cigarette.

I based my argument on the fact that in the 20th century the convenience of the mass manufactured cigarette effectively made the pipe obsolete, and the only way for the cigarette to be consigned to history in the 21st century is for consumers to be offered something that is just as easy (and pleasurable) to use as the combustible cigarette, and many e-cigarettes aren't.

See ‘Convenience and competition are key for emerging products’ (March 2016).

I accept there are issues with single-use vapes that need addressing, but banning them would be akin to throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Put simply, if the Government’s tobacco control strategy is based on encouraging smokers to switch to an alternative, and safer, nicotine product, as Neil O’Brien outlined in his speech last week, I can’t see how a ban on single use vapes would be anything other than counter productive.

I’m not saying environmental issues aren’t important, but disposable vapes must be seen in context and regulated accordingly. It can’t be beyond our intelligence to find solutions that stop far short of prohibition.

Meanwhile, what are we to make of the absence of a consumer group on today’s APPG panel? It’s not a surprise, but it has been noted.

Wes Streeting on Sunday

Wes Streeting was on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg (BBC1) this morning.

The last time Labour’s shadow health secretary was on the programme, in January, he generated national headlines by suggesting that Labour would consider a New Zealand style ban on the sale of cigarettes.

His remarks followed an interview, given to The Times and published the previous day, in which he said he was ready to take on the ‘libertarian right’ over smoking, a comment I responded to here - ‘Labour, law and libertarians’.

According to the Telegraph, one of many newspapers that rose to the bait:

A Labour government could ban the sale of cigarettes in order to eradicate smoking by 2030, says the shadow health secretary.

Wes Streeting said Labour would consult on banning the sale and purchase of cigarettes as part of a “radical” package of measures to stamp out smoking.

He told the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg that the Government needed to consider more radical options as the UK was set to miss its target of the UK being “smoke-free” by 2030.

Less than a month ago, pushed by ITV’s Robert Peston on whether “Reducing smoking and vaping is a priority for you?”, Streeting replied, bullishly, “100 per cent.”

I wonder if he’s changed his mind.

Today, just days after the Government announced its latest tobacco control plans, including vape kits to help smokers quit, the subject didn’t merit a single mention.

Instead (and understandably), the Kuenssberg interview was all about the NHS, and the threat of further strikes by nurses and junior doctors.

A few minutes later Streeting popped up again, this time on GB News.

Interviewed by Camilla Tominey, he was grilled about the NHS, the strikes, smart motorways (introduced, according to Tominey, by Labour in 2006), and the party’s anti-Sunak attack ads.

And still no mention of the Government’s policies on smoking and vaping. Why?

Well, followers of Streeting on Twitter (he is described as ‘prolific on social media’) will know that this week he has tweeted not a single comment on this week’s announcements.

Few politicians are currently as ambitious and media savvy as Labour’s shadow health Secretary, so what Streeting’s silence tells us is this.

One, he wants to set the agenda on smoking and vaping, not react to it.

Two, given everything that is going on, in the NHS and elsewhere, even he must know that tackling smoking is not a priority for government (or opposition), and banging on about it will merely make him, and Labour, look foolish and out-of-touch, especially in what used to be their heartlands.

So, thanks, Wes. You’ve just confirmed what we’ve known for years, and now the Government knows it too.

Tackling smoking is not a priority, nor is it an election issue.

Oh, and the Government got it right with last week’s announcements. The carrot not the stick is the best way forward for tobacco control, because choice and personal responsibility are paramount.

Take that away and voters won’t thank you. Especially if the Conservatives remain committed to a more liberal, less interventionist, agenda.

Update: By coincidence (!), today’s Mail on Sunday also features an interview with Streeting and that doesn’t mention smoking or vaping either.

So not such a priority after all (which is good news).

Minister - No Khan do

Perhaps I had low expectations but I was pleasantly surprised by Neil O’Brien’s speech at Policy Exchange on Tuesday.

As I wrote in my previous post, I wasn’t 100 per cent confident that the public health minister wouldn’t make a further announcement - raising the age of sale of tobacco, for example - to complement the initiatives that had already been disclosed and widely reported.

But I needn’t have worried. The speech, which you can read here (or watch here), was pretty bland and lasted no more than 20 minutes before attendees, in the room and online, were invited to ask questions.

The big ideas - a task force to reduce the illegal sales of vapes to children, ‘free’ vape kits to be given to up to one million smokers to entice them to switch, and pregnant women to be offered up to £400 to quit smoking - had all been revealed in advance.

Not leaked, btw, but deliberately announced in two press releases ahead of the speech.

It had also been reported (by The Times) that the Government had rejected proposals ‘to ban smoking in parks and pub gardens or to stop people under a certain age from ever buying cigarettes’.

I was reasonably sure, therefore, when I walked into the Policy Exchange offices in Westminster, that no nasty surprises were in store, but you can never be certain, which is why I wanted to hear the minister's speech for myself.

Fair play, though, to O’Brien. Parts of his speech may have been lifted from the tobacco control template, but I was impressed by his short but firm answers to the questions that followed.

Gratifyingly he also emphasised the Government’s belief in personal responsibility which, together with freedom of choice, is the principal platform Forest has stood on for over 40 years.

If that can't be chalked up as a small victory, I don't know what can, and if Monday's post – 'Go on, minister, surprise me' – cast doubt on the Conservatives’ commitment to this important principle, I can only apologise!

O'Brien's speech and this week's announcements won’t be the end of it, though. In the room on Tuesday ASH and Cancer Research just about managed to keep their frustration in check, but I suspect they are rather more livid than they are letting on, and the pressure on government to go further will only increase over the coming months – right up to the election, in fact.

Labour too will no doubt try to get in on the act. Briefed by ASH, expect to hear 'Government not going far enough' in the coming weeks and months.

The Times, which seems to have replaced the Guardian as the most strident anti-smoking newspaper in Britain, has already demanded further action from government. In a leading article today, the paper argues that ‘ministers must do more to extinguish the country’s deadly habit’.

‘It is not too late for ministers to reconsider,’ thunders the paper, adding:

Conservatives are always squeamish about state intervention, often with good reason. But no government has ever regretted butting in to the private lives of smokers whose habit not only kills themselves but blights the lives of others, and costs the NHS billions of pounds. If ministers are truly serious about a smoke-free Britain, they should have the courage of their convictions, and act on them.

However, as I noted in January (How The Times has changed), the days when a leading article in The Times carried much weight are long gone, so I don't expect ministers to take much notice, nor should they.

To be clear, when answering questions on Tuesday, Neil O’Brien did not rule out further measures (and we know from the plain packaging debacle in 2015 how quickly government can change tack when it suits them politically), but it’s hard to make a case for the sort of measures advocated by Javed Khan, The Times and ASH when smoking rates are already at their lowest recorded levels across all age groups, including teenagers, and the Government has so many more important issues to deal with.

It was noticeable that despite the Khan review being commissioned by his predecessor Sajid Javid, the Secretary of State for Health Steve Barclay was nowhere near this week’s announcements. Instead he was up to his ears with the junior doctors’ pay dispute and left the issue of smoking to a junior minister.

The public has of course consistently signalled that the Government and the NHS have far more pressing priorities than tackling smoking, as confirmed by a series of polls commissioned by Forest over several years including, most recently, in February.

My own reaction to O'Brien's speech was principally one of relief because the announcements this week could have been so much worse.

I have some reservations when it comes to taxpayers paying for vape kits and other incentives to encourage smokers to quit. As I have said before, why should the public (the majority of whom are non-smokers) pay for smokers to switch or quit?

Nevertheless, of all the policies the Government could have announced this week, these are probably the least coercive so we should be grateful for that.

Likewise I don’t see how anyone could object to the proposal for inserts in cigarette packs that offer the consumer more information about vaping and how to switch. You either read them or you don’t, and if you read them it’s still your choice whether to switch or not.

I don’t have a problem with smokers being informed about alternative nicotine products. The important thing is that they are not forced to quit or switch, and their lives are not made even more unpleasant with the imposition of further petty regulations.

Consider some of the ideas recommended by Javed Khan in his now infamous report:

Increasing tobacco duty by more than 30 per cent, banning the sale of tobacco in supermarkets, radically rethinking how cigarette sticks and packets look, tackling portrayals of smoking in the media, banning smoking in more outdoor public spaces, banning smoking in social housing ...

The flagship recommendation was raising the age of sale of tobacco by one year every year until, eventually, no-one would be allowed to purchase tobacco any more.

Even ASH distanced themselves from that idea. Instead they urged the Government to raise the age of sale from 18 to 21, an issue we tackled head on during our recent panel discussion in London.

Thankfully the Government isn’t inclined to adopt any of these ideas. In fact, O'Brien's strongest answer on Tuesday was in response to Shaun Walsh, head of public affairs and campaigning at Cancer Research UK, who pushed the Government to raise the age of sale.

Raising the age of sale, said O'Brien, was "too big a departure" and the Government wasn't going to pursue it.

Impressed though I was by O'Brien during the Q&A part of the event, the role of the Treasury can't be underestimated. As I wrote last week, intel suggested that the Treasury had been pushing back against Khan's invasion of 'their' territory, and this was clear from several of O'Brien's answers.

As for the author of ‘The Khan review’, O’Brien may have thanked him in his speech but the reality is that most of his recommendations have been ignored or rejected by the Government.

Significantly, Khan himself was nowhere to be seen on Tuesday. To the best of my knowledge he hasn’t commented on the Government’s proposals, nor has he posted a single tweet referencing them, which tells its own story.

Last year I noted that he had been invited to speak at a new tobacco harm reduction conference in New York. A few weeks before the event, in a post entitled ‘Javed takes Manhattan’, I wrote:

I had hoped the author of The Khan review: making smoking obsolete would quietly exit the stage, especially after the resignation of health secretary Sajid Javid who commissioned the ill-conceived report.

Instead Dr Khan is one of several UK-based speakers who have been invited to address a new conference – 'New Approaches to Tobacco Control' – at the Harvard Club of New York next month.

Given that Dr Khan's recommendations are no more than that and the UK Government has given no hint that it will adopt any of them, it seems a bit presumptuous for his 'keynote' address ('The Khan Review in a Global Perspective - The UK as Case Study on Tobacco Control') to be given such a grand title but it must be very flattering for someone who was unheard of as a tobacco control influencer only six months ago.

He's also taking part in a panel discussion ('How Can the Best Practices from the UK and the US FDA be Globalized to End Smoking in All Countries'?) so it looks like we'll never hear the end of it, or him.

Fingers crossed, this week may be the last we hear of the Khan review.

To be clear, I have nothing personal against Dr Khan who seems a decent man driven by good intentions. I do however think he was poorly advised and unwisely ‘protected’ by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) who made sure he wasn’t exposed to heretical opinions from the likes of Forest.

To this day I still don’t know if he saw or even read our submission to his review, or whether he was even aware of our request for a meeting to balance similar meetings he was having with the anti-smoking lobby.

Either way we never got to present our case to him with the result that his ‘independent’ review came across as very one-sided, and rather naive.

The fact that we were then barred from attending, in person, the launch of his report merely added fuel to the fire but, again, I blame the DHSC more than Javed Khan.

I can imagine this has been a bruising experience for him, and I would be surprised if he returned to this particular battlefield any time soon.

I wish the same could be said of the tobacco control industry but we know they will regroup and come again because that’s what they always do.

Before the vaping industry is tempted to get further into bed with ASH et al, it’s worth noting another comment by O’Brien in response to a question from someone who wanted to know what measures the Government was taking to help people quit, not smoking, but vaping.

The minister's reaction was the same message we’ve heard many times from tobacco control. "In an ideal world, it's best not to do either," he said.

And that, ultimately, is the direction of travel. It may take decades but the long-term goal of the stop smoking brigade is the eradication of all recreational nicotine products and they will never be happy until that goal has been accomplished.

Nevertheless, credit where credit’s due. Knowing it would be criticised in some quarters, the Government held its nerve this week and announced smoking cessation policies that, for once, put the carrot before the stick.

After two decades of anti-smoking legislation that has frequently put bullying and coercion ahead of information and education, that’s a significant step forward.

So I take back part of what I wrote on Monday.

Minister, you DID surprise me!

PS. As an aside, while I was waiting for the lift to take me to the Policy Exchange offices on the third floor of the building at 1 Old Queen Street, I saw a familiar figure scurry past the main entrance.

It was Deborah Arnott, CEO of ASH, and she appeared not to know where the Policy Exchange office was. (I had just had a similar experience so I was sympathetic.)

Being a decent chap I wandered outside, through the automatic door, hoping to catch and direct her inside.

When I got to the street however she was too far away, with her back to me and still walking, so I went back inside and made my way to the conference room.

Ten minutes later, having finally got her bearings, she appeared in the room, made a beeline for O’Brien, and spent the next ten minutes chewing the poor man’s ear off, her voice ringing across the room.

I'm in awe – what a woman!

Government announces tobacco control policies

Breaking news!

My application to attend ‘in person’ Neil O’Brien’s speech at Policy Exchange today has been accepted.

Having waited several days for confirmation I didn’t think it would happen but despite the short notice (8.15 this morning) I thought it would be rude not to go so I am currently on a train to London.

As things stand though I’m not sure there will be any startling revelations because the Government has done a good job of revealing the minister’s speech in advance.

Following reports at the weekend that O’Brien is going to announce a task force to crack down on rogue retailers illegally selling vapes to children, it was reported this morning that the Government wants to encourage more smokers to switch to e-cigarettes by giving away ‘free’ vape kits.

According to the BBC:

Almost one in five smokers in England will receive a kit alongside behavioural support, the government said.

In a speech on Tuesday, health minister Neil O'Brien is expected to say the free vape policy - dubbed "swap to stop" - is the first of its kind in the world.

That’s two major initiatives announced in advance of today’s speech.

Furthermore, according to a DHSC press release issued last night:

Health Minister Neil O’Brien will also announce that following the success of local schemes, pregnant women will be offered financial incentives to help them stop smoking. This will involve offering vouchers, alongside behavioural support, to all pregnant women who smoke by the end of next year.

The government will also consult on introducing mandatory cigarette pack inserts with positive messages and information to help people to quit smoking.

So far, so good. (Nothing much to complain about there.)

My concern is that they may be holding something back - for this evening’s news bulletins and tomorrow’s papers - that may be far less palatable.

Or am I just being paranoid?

Update: The Times reports:

The government is avoiding recommendations from an official review to ban smoking in parks and pub gardens or to stop people under a certain age from ever buying cigarettes.

Good news, if true, but that ray of sunshine, Deborah Arnott, CEO of ASH, isn’t happy:

She pointed out that last year’s government-comissioned report by Javed Khan called for investment of £125 million a year to reverse years of cuts to local stop-smoking services, “not to mention the absence of the tougher regulations Khan recommended to raise the age of sale and reduce the appeal of smoking”.

The vaping schemes are welcome, she says, but “nowhere near sufficient”.

More to follow …

Go on, minister, surprise me

As I mentioned on Friday, public health minister Neil O'Brien will tomorrow give the Government’s response to last year’s Khan review: making smoking obsolete.

The advertised speech, ‘Achieving Smokefree 2030: Cutting Smoking and Stopping Kids Vaping', is expected to include proposals that may, or may not, be subject to a public consultation, although we all know how those end.

Yesterday, thanks to a press release issued over the weekend, it was revealed (in advance) how the Government intends to ‘stop kids vaping’. According to the BBC:

An enforcement squad made up of trading standards officers will be set up to carry out test purchases and clamp down on shops selling vapes to under-18s.

The fact that the Government chose to announce that initiative ahead of O’Brien’s speech suggests that ministers want the main focus tomorrow to be on smoking, not children vaping, which is probably seen as a distraction, especially as promoting vaping is one of four core recommendations in the Khan review.

Javed Khan’s report featured 15 recommendations although several included more than one policy proposal.

Recommendations included raising the age of sale by one year every year until no-one can legally buy tobacco, more money (£125m a year) to pay for additional smoking cessation services and anti-smoking campaigns, and increasing tobacco duty by more than 30%.

Other proposals included a ban on supermarkets selling tobacco, radically rethinking how cigarette sticks and packets look, and tackling portrayals of smoking in the media.

The review also recommended banning smoking in more outdoor public spaces, while local authorities ‘should make a significant proportion (70% or more) of new social housing tenancies and new developments smoke free’.

Although Khan highlighted four principal recommendations (increasing investment in smoke free policies, increasing the age of sale, promoting vaping, and improving prevention of illness to help the NHS), the scattergun approach to tobacco control did the review no favours because it seemed to many of us that Khan had simply included every crackpot idea suggested to him during his meetings with tobacco control campaigners, with the result that the report lost credibility.

Nevertheless the Government has to throw Khan, and the anti-smoking industry, a bone or two and I suspect that raising the age of sale from 18 to 21 may be one of them.

Hopefully I’m wrong but it worries me that the Government is still committed to achieving a ‘smoke free England’ (sic) by 2030 when it is almost certainly unachievable without the sort of draconian policies that ought to be incompatible with a society that values freedom of choice and personal responsibility.

I used to think these were Conservative values too but those days are long gone.

Tomorrow, Neil O’Brien could put clear blue water between the Conservatives and Labour by standing up for individual liberty and the freedom to make ‘bad’ choices.

He could do this by emphasising the need to allow adults to make informed decisions, recognising and respecting the fact that sometimes those choices might go against the prevailing orthodoxy.

He won’t because a paternalistic Conservative government has embraced a new form of socialism that dictates how we live, eat and breathe.

By all means promote vaping as a healthier alternative to smoking - given the evidence, I have no problem with that - but if adults (and we are all adults at 18) choose to smoke in preference to vaping (or quitting altogether) that choice MUST be respected and no-one should be punished for their habit or bullied until they stop.

Go on, minister. Surprise me.

Update: My attempt to register to listen to Neil O’Brien’s speech in person at Policy Exchange tomorrow has received a not unexpected response.

In red letters, it reads: ‘Not approved’.

Fancy that.

Happy Easter!