Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    B735 - Electronic Cigarette Bill 2015, TSR UKIP

    Electronic Cigarette Bill 2015



    An Act to ban the advertising of electronic cigarettes and to prohibit their use in public places, where normal smoking is currently banned.


    BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—


    1. Advertising

    1) All advertising in the media of electronic cigarettes is completely prohibited.
    (A) In the media includes, but is not exhausted to: TV, Cinema, Radio, Newspaper, Noticeboards.
    2) E Cigarettes may not be sold in a positive manner in any shop or stall and no advertising in shops may occur.
    3) Promotions may not be held for e cigarettes, this includes any special offers or promotional deals encouraging people to purchase these items.
    4) The fine for advertising e cigarettes will be £1000 for the first offence, and £15,000 for any further offences.
    (A) Any money collected through these fines will be given to the Department of Health.

    2. Use of Items

    1) Electronic cigarettes must be treated like normal cigarettes when it comes to use.
    2) E Cigarettes may not be used in public, where a normal cigarette is prohibited.
    3) The fine for using E Cigarettes in public is a £100 for the first offence, and £350 per later offence, and fines may be distributes by the police, or any other bodies which hold authority.
    (A) Any money collected through these fines will be given to the Health Budget.


    Short Title, Commencement, and Extent

    1) This bill, when passed, may be referred to as the Electronic Cigarette Bill 2015.
    2) This Act shall come into force on the 1st April 2015.
    3) This Act shall extend to the whole of the United Kingdom.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Nay.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    aye
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Agree with 1(1) and 1(1)A

    Don't really understand 1(2)

    I am not sure whether this bill places e-cigarettes on the same level as conventional cigarettes... or gives them a disadvantage in the marketplace?

    I am also wondering whether I would rather people turned to e-cigarettes. I see the eventual demise of conventional cigarettes as a good thing. Though I don't know what the medical profession has to say about e-cigarettes being a desirable alternative.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. Nanny state nonsense.
    Offline

    15
    Abstain, I'm divided on this one as I get it in the sense that they're worse but also they're to help stop smoking so
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Aye. Tax the crap out of them too.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    Last time I checked people aren't fined for smoking in public outside so nay. This is making e-cigs a second choise to normal cigarets
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    I like the idea that smoking is a bad habit that should be stomped out. However, I do believe that E-cigarrettes are better than normal cigarettes. So nay

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    Nay. E-Cigs should be promoted above the normal cigarette.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Obiejess)
    Nay. E-Cigs should be promoted above the normal cigarette.
    I wouldn't quite go that far.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Definite NAY, and for this I would encourage others to do the same.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I'm sure E-Cigarettes were shown to be less addictive and harmful than normal cigarettes, no? Why would you impose such harsh restrictions.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    I'm sure E-Cigarettes were shown to be less addictive and harmful than normal cigarettes, no? Why would you impose such harsh restrictions.
    Well, from Farage's comments last week, I think it is UKIP policy to get everyone smoking...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Nay.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Aye. Following some research E-cigarettes are just as dangerous as normal cigarettes, and this bill by Adam places them both on an equal footing. The next step is to tax them more. As a side point, I believe the best way to cut down on smoking is not to promote it, nor is it to promote smoking's equally as harmful alternatives, we should be ignoring smoking altogether to focus on its dangers to scare people.

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/249784.php
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasperha...g-up-in-smoke/
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/wom...-was-safe.html
    http://gizmodo.com/why-e-cigarettes-...ink-1589485508
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ims-study.html
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Nay, stupid idea.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Aye. Following some research E-cigarettes are just as dangerous as normal cigarettes, and this bill by Adam places them both on an equal footing. The next step is to tax them more. As a side point, I believe the best way to cut down on smoking is not to promote it, nor is it to promote smoking's equally as harmful alternatives, we should be ignoring smoking altogether to focus on its dangers to scare people.

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/249784.php
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasperha...g-up-in-smoke/
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/wom...-was-safe.html
    http://gizmodo.com/why-e-cigarettes-...ink-1589485508
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ims-study.html
    Ok so ignoring the daily fail and gizmodo which didn't give much evidence just 'we don't know's
    the one on the top was a study of 32 people which is hardly significant.
    The second stated that e-sigs are less harmful also that we should ban butterscotch popcorn.
    and the last one suggests you ban all sources of nicotine not just e-sigs but also patches, potatoes, tomatoes, aubergine ect. Because after all someone could go over board on the all the veggies and get nicotine poisoning.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Ok so ignoring the daily fail and gizmodo which didn't give much evidence just 'we don't know's
    the one on the top was a study of 32 people which is hardly significant.
    The second stated that e-sigs are less harmful also that we should ban butterscotch popcorn.
    and the last one suggests you ban all sources of nicotine not just e-sigs but also patches, potatoes, tomatoes, aubergine ect. Because after all someone could go over board on the all the veggies and get nicotine poisoning.
    TSR won't let me rep this sadly.

    Nay to the bill
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    While some are saying we should do nothing on the grounds that they are better than normal poison sticks, i don't object to that. But by encouraging their use you risk people who don't smoke or stopped smoking previously, starting to smoke e-cigs. That must not be tolerated!

    ..

    On a side note i will declare that if one is going to smoke, it should be a cigar on a special occasion.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 8, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.