Warning to vapers as people caught puffing at bus stops could face £100 fines
Transport bodies would get powers to issue on-the-spot fixed penalty notices for those caught puffing.
The authorities will be able to decide on the size of the charge — up to £100 — but failure to pay on time could result in fines of up to £1,000.
And it could apply to open-air bus stops as well as shelters with a roof and sides.
But Tories claim the clampdown is by the back door as the measures were buried in legislation to improve bus services.
It allows authorities such as Transport for London to introduce by-laws to tackle anti-social behaviour like smoking and fare-dodging.
Although vaping is banned on bus services and stations, it usually does not apply to bus stops.
Shadow Housing Secretary Kevin Hollinrake said: 'The Government is trying to crack down on vaping without being upfront about it.
'It's giving puffed-up mayors like Sadiq Khan more power to mess with people's daily routines.'
A ban on the sale and supply of disposable vapes came into effect last month.
And under separate legislation, Government is banning anyone born after January 2009 from ever being able to legally buy cigarettes.
A Department for Transport spokesman last night said: 'The suggestion these measures amount to a stealth vaping ban is totally false.'
He added the department will issue guidance that fines should be issued only as a last resort if initial warnings are ignored.
Police raid largest spice vapes operation after kids were left hospitalised
1
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
16 minutes ago
- The Sun
Mum's heartbreaking call for answers 2 years after girls, 8, were killed when Land Rover ploughed into Wimbledon school
THE PARENTS of two eight-year-old girls who were killed when a Land Rover crashed into their school have vowed to "uncover the truth" of what happened that day two years on from the tragic incident. Nuria Sajjad and Selena Lau both died after the tragedy at The Study Prep School, in Wimbledon, South West London on July 6, 2023. The horror unfolded as a Land Rover Defender smashed through a fence while school children and staff were having a tea-party outside on the last day of term. More than fifteen others were injured in the crash, including a seven-month-old baby girl. Speaking at a remembrance event on Sunday, Nuria's mother Smera Chohan said: "We have had to fight very hard - harder than any victim should ever have had to - but we remain committed to uncovering the truth about what happened." In January, the Metropolitan Police rearrested arrested driver Claire Freemantle 48, on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving. She remains in custody while investigations continue. The 48-year-old was originally released after an initial investigation by the Roads and Transport Policing Command, and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), concluded she should face no further action. Freemantle claimed she had an epileptic seizure behind the wheel and faced no charges. They added that there was no evidence Ms Freemantle had ever suffered a similar seizure before and she had no previously diagnosed medical condition. A review was carried out by the Specialist Crime Review Group (SCRG). It highlighted issues with how officers carried out the initial investigation. Family, friends & Liverpool teammates gather for Diogo Jota & brother Andre's funeral in Portugal after tragic car crash It was revealed there was a key problem with establishing the evidence of an epileptic seizure, and diagnosis without brain scans. "Our main priority is to ensure the lines of inquiry identified by the review are progressed. I would urge people to avoid speculation," Det Supt Lewis Basford said. At the memorial on Sunday, hundreds of people from the local area joined Nuria's mother Smera Chohan, her father Sajjad Butt and Selena's parents Franky Lau and Jessie Deng. Two benches dedicated to the victims' memories were decorated with flowers and messages and a two minutes' silence was observed. Following a two minutes' silence - one minute for each girl - Ms Chohan delivered an emotional speech. "We still await answers for what happened on that fateful day... and with all your support, we will continue our fight until we have the answers we deserve," Ms Chohan said. "Nothing is going to make our lives the same again... we were parents. "I sometimes don't know if I'm a mother, I need to know why I'm not a mother and Nuria deserved a thorough investigation." Selena's father added: "We are still waiting, we want a version of events that adds up." Helen Lowe, who was the school's headteacher at the time of the crash, said: "There are still no answers to what happened on that day, and in that two-year period, there have been a number of events which involved awful tragedy for children. "But the people who perpetrated those events have had to be answerable, and we don't have that, which makes it - for the parents and for us - impossible to move on." To provide information you can contact the major incident room on 0207 175 0793, call 101 quoting CAD 6528/27Jan, or message @MetCC on X providing the CAD reference. Alternatively, contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 or online. 4 4
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Eradicating drugs from prisons may be unrealistic, but it should be the goal
The widespread availability of drugs in British prisons has long been among the more baffling conundrums of national life. How come institutions specifically built and managed to be secure have a drug problem that has, by common consent, reached crisis proportions? To put it another way, how can it be that places expressly designed to prevent people from getting out find it so difficult to stop illicit, and ever more harmful, substances from getting in? The figures we report today are truly shocking – or they would be, were it not for the pervasive sense of resignation about everything that pertains to our prisons. The ubiquity of drugs then risks being seen as just one aspect of a disastrously failing system. It is more than that. It is at the root of many other prison problems. Recorded at 21,145, annual drug seizures by prison officers in the year to March 2024 were more than 35 per cent up on the previous year, and nudging the record of 21,574 set four years before. Given the likelihood of undetected, or unchecked, possession, the figure for actual seizures is likely to understate the problem. In what comes perilously close to a concession of defeat, the Independent Monitoring Boards of prisons in the UK describe the movement of drugs into these institutions as 'a seemingly unstoppable flow'. There was a time when prison was seen as an opportunity to treat those with a drug habit. Success may have been limited, but it seems an even less realistic objective today. In our report, Mike Trace, head of a charity providing drug treatment in prisons and former drugs 'Czar' in the Blair government, says the number of treatment programmes in prison, including drug-free wings, has been slashed from 110 in 2013 to just 15 now. It is by no means unheard of for offenders who entered prison clean to emerge from their sentence with a dependency likely to land them back behind bars. No one, of course, would argue that freeing prisons from the scourge of drugs is simple. If it were, it would have been done long before now. The extent to which the problem has grown in recent years reflects a host of factors, from cuts to prison staffing under the austerity policies of previous governments – which resulted in the loss of many more experienced staff – to technological developments, such as miniature mobile phones and drones that allow inmates to circumvent more traditional prison security. Drones also facilitate deliveries of drugs in far greater quantities than would be possible via visitors or corrupt employees, and reduce the effectiveness of recently introduced X-ray scanners. A further complication is the wider variety of illicit drugs in circulation, some being hard to identify, which can have more harmful effects than before. The consequence is an increase, both in emergency hospital admissions and in violence among inmates and towards staff. Reprisals for drug-related debts have become a particular problem – and these are debts, it should be stressed, that have been incurred in prison. In the past, it was sometimes argued that drug-taking was tolerated in some prisons because it could calm down otherwise under-occupied and frustrated inmates. That argument is less tenable now. All these changes are well known to the prison authorities and those with monitoring and policy responsibilities. In our report, His Majesty's chief inspector of prisons, Charlie Taylor, is quoted as saying that drugs are the biggest challenge currently facing many prisons, and that it is 'not acceptable that these levels of criminality are going on, unchecked'. He is right. It is not acceptable. But where is any real sense of urgency and direction to get to grips with such a pernicious and growing problem? The government has embarked on what it bills as the biggest overhaul of the prison system in decades. In the short term, it is addressing prison overcrowding through an emergency programme of early releases. It has a longer-term schedule for building new prisons and welcomes talk about a greater focus on work and rehabilitation. So far, so modestly good. But there is a lot of catching up to do, too – starting, perhaps, with better training, pay and status for prison staff. And it is hard not to detect a note of complacency in the response of the Justice Ministry to The Independent 's findings, which blamed past governments for the current situation, while asserting a 'zero-tolerance approach to drugs' and 'a clear impact' from the use of body scanners and drone no-fly zones. We are, though, a year into the new government, and it is hard to detect that tolerance for drugs in prison is any closer to zero than it was before, while the impact of scanners and no-fly zones seems a lot less clear than the Justice Ministry insists. Eradicating drugs from prison altogether may be unrealistic, but it should be the ambition, and it needs to be pursued with a lot more urgency and application than has been in evidence so far.
Telegraph
31 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Have no sympathy for Labour's ‘grown-ups', they brought this on themselves
The pattern for life under Labour has been set. Ministers, hopelessly out of their depth, try to save money, fail, reverse, ending up spending more, and yet the Left calls them closet-Tories and swans off to Jeremy Corbyn. The excess of lefty MPs in the Commons hasn't brought order to Labour but, like an experiment involving overbred mice in a cage, they've started to eat each other. No 10 will try to make a virtue of this. They will say: 'Keir Starmer is where the public is. He is trying to fix the mess left by the Tories in a fair way – balance the books, control the borders – and opposition from both Corbyn and Reform proves he is the non-ideological man we need.' He's the human version of the BBC. Everyone hates it, so it must be good. Except no one watches the BBC anymore, just as dwindling numbers vote Labour, and the vision of Starmer as a man patrolling the middle-ground doesn't ring true. It's more accurate of Rachel Reeves. For all her sins, she's been saying the same things for over a decade (loudly, through a fixed smile). As shadow work and pensions minister, she promised to be tougher on benefits than George Osborne. She did not serve under Corbyn. She called for immigration to be curbed after Brexit. By contrast, Starmer's career is built on a series of U-turns he believes it is our patriotic duty to forget. Forget that he was a militant Remainer, that he knelt for Black Lives Matter or that he won the Labour leadership calling Corbyn's manifesto 'our foundational document' stuffed with 'radicalism and hope'. Starmer, who said 'the free market has failed', stood for a 'moral socialism' that 'opposes austerity'. Left-wing activists had spent the 2010s alleging that welfare reform amounted to murder; John McDonnell quoted someone saying they wished to 'lynch' Esther McVey. Starmer's Labour might have turned on the Corbynites, but it drew from the same pool of assumptions and resentments. Torsten Bell called the two-child benefit cap immoral. David Lammy said his constituents were 'ruined by austerity, left hungry by Universal Credit'. Angela Rayner apologised for calling Conservatives 'homophobic, racist, misogynistic… scum.' Starmer ran ads that suggested Rishi Sunak was soft on paedophiles and his wife was a tax dodger. He called Boris 'pathetic', a man who 'had no principles, no integrity' (I 'loathed' him, he later said). Having abandoned a coherent critique of Tory economics – which, to be fair, had no coherence anyway – Starmer reframed politics from Left v Right to Good v Evil, and this is what a new generation of MPs presumably believed when they won in 2024. Everything the Tories had done was wicked and unnecessary, a choice born of greed. So, what happened when Reeves took over the Treasury, found Rishi had in fact spent too much money, and announced that 'Dickensian choices' had morphed into Labour necessities? Hurt and panic. Akin to a Puritan discovering their mother is a lush and daddy frequents a drag bar. And so the children rebelled – and we should have no sympathy for the adults who once claimed to be back in charge. Why? Because their moral tone before entering office implied that any effort to limit the state was class violence. Another example from Torsten Bell (there are many): in 2021 he wrote that revising the Covid-era uplift to Universal Credit, worth £20 a week, might damage not only 'family finances' but people's 'mental health'.Tory policy could drive you mad. Of course, the Left has well established in the popular mind that mental health is as serious as physical, so must get PIPs; that Britain is a nation of immigrants and human rights, so we can't deport lawbreakers; and the Earth is on fire, so we can't use new sources of fossil fuel. Many of the problems Labour inherited are the by-products of assumptions Labour has helped embed within British institutions (including within the Tory Party, which is why it did little to reverse the trend). Why was Starmer shouted at when he laid a wreath for the victims of the Southport killer last year? Why has Reeves been derided for crying in the Commons? Because most voters do not see Labour as a change agent with Fairy-soft clean hands, but rather as the latest iteration of a grubby establishment that has run this country for decades, and which shares as much blame as the Conservatives for where we are – arguably, more. New Labour bound Westminster with legal restraints, such as the Human Rights Act or the Climate Change Act, while empowering quangos that operate as watchdogs against elected officials. Whoever you vote for, policy options are narrowed so far that we can really only travel in one direction. Thus the economy is in constant crisis because spending is axiomatic, frugality penalised and alternatives for growth shut off (ask Liz Truss). Reeves, in her first year, found herself testing what this political system would tolerate with her modest mix of tax hikes and savings. Last week's welfare rebellion rules out further cuts, while her fiscal rules render it harder to borrow, leaving only taxes on the table, which will kill the growth that grows the pie that makes progressive government feasible. Changing course will be difficult. Starmer and Corbyn have profound differences, but they share the psychological defect of seeing themselves as Very Good People – a condition that makes it easy to give criticism but hard to take it. Good People cannot accept they are wrong because their rightness, or righteousness, is the rock upon which they construct a life. Sitting in Westminster, it's fun to hear Labour MPs bitch about each other. The Starmerites truly loathe the Corbynites; they are 'professional activists 'who harm the people they're meant to help'. The Corbynites say the Starmerites will never fix a capitalist system they don't understand, and thus haven't learnt to hate. Out of power, this conflict was barely worth a column in the Morning Star, but as we enter Year Two of the revolution, journalists must study every nuance, unpack every conference motion, to see where this civil war is taking us. If you want a vision of the future, Winston, it is pro-Gaza activists glueing themselves to a truck at London's Pride parade on Saturday. Black flags v rainbow flags. A family row with consequence, because the entire country is stuck in the traffic behind, pumping the horn, waving our fists, but going nowhere.
