Kim Rampersadh | Partner | Adams and Adams | mail me |
It has been widely reported that the Tobacco Products and Electronic Delivery Systems Control Bill (the Tobacco Bill) aims to tighten regulations on smoking and vaping.
Specifically, the bill seeks to introduce plain packaging. This refers to standardised packaging without branding, including logos and trademarks, and directly affects packaging and vaping controls.
Growing resistance to proposed measures
The Bill initially sought to treat nicotine and non-nicotine electronic delivery systems the same as combustible tobacco products. As a result, e-cigarettes or vapes would fall under the same regulations. These regulations include, among others, plain packaging and a ban on the public display of such goods, as well as stricter rules on packaging and vaping.
More recently, stakeholders raised further resistance during public consultations on the Tobacco Bill. In particular, opposition focused on provisions related to the advertising ban. Critics highlighted concerns about a rise in illicit trade involving counterfeit tobacco and nicotine products. They linked this risk to the implementation of plain packaging. They also pointed to limited law enforcement resources to police such activity.
At the same time, some stakeholders attempted to position vapes as a lesser evil than combustible tobacco products. They argued for possible exemptions from the same restrictions. However, the Department of Health rejected this position. It stated that safe and cost-effective, evidence-based tobacco treatments already exist, and these do not include vapes.
Shifts in regulatory direction
The Department further argued that nicotine-delivery products, including heat-not-burn products, still result in nicotine inhalation. Therefore, it does not consider them effective harm-reduction mechanisms.
Despite this firm stance, the Department indicated a willingness to consider limited exemptions. Specifically, it may exempt non-combustible products such as vapes from certain labelling and packaging requirements. However, this would apply only if these products avoid false or misleading advertising claims, keeping regulatory scrutiny on packaging and vaping practices.
This concession follows an earlier proposal to distinguish more clearly between combustible and non-combustible products. Consequently, the approach departs from the initial intention to implement a unified law.
Vapes may now fall under separate and distinguishable regulations, particularly regarding packaging and labelling requirements. Even so, the proposed laws still restrict the rights of trade mark owners. Accordingly, stakeholders continue to monitor developments closely.