"I got it wrong and I'm going to try and get it right as best I can."
Timeline:
27 March 2024:
"History has shown for generations that prohibition doesn't work, particularly when you've got a marketplace that has exploded. In essence, the genie's out of the bottle."
"The National Party has been clear on this. We've taken that step. As a party room we've understood that, while our intent was right—our intent was about making sure that this product was brought in to try and get people off cigarettes—it hasn't worked. This isn't about big tobacco. In fact, if you want to take big tobacco out of this, you could regulate a product in this country where big tobacco isn't even allowed to actually display the contents of it. Why wouldn't we think about what the options and the possibilities are, that have worked previously, that we've got to be able to regulate a product? We're not trying to be reckless in anything we're doing. We're simply saying that much of the work that a previous Labor government has done with cigarettes should be heralded as a symbol and as an example of how we can minimise harm, particularly for the next generation. We believe in having licensed points of sale. We believe that only people over 18 should have these products. There should be strict verification of that."
"What you've got to understand is that, with the path that we've gone down—saying that you've got to go and get a prescription to go to a pharmacy to get this, when we have over 1½ million Australians already doing this—I think we're naive to think that they're going to change their habits because of that. I don't doubt that there'll be some success at the border and some other places. In fact, the night before last I saw that 30,000 vapes were intercepted at the border. That's about two or three hours worth of vaping. It's not going to touch the sides."
"I suspect that at some juncture we'll all be back here again, and I might be standing here saying, 'You were wrong.' I just hope we will all say, 'We got it wrong and we're going to need to change this and get it right, because what we've done in the past hasn't worked.'"
The Analysis🔎:
David Littleproud’s speech on the Therapeutic Goods and Other Legislation Amendment (Vaping Reforms) Bill 2024 presents a refreshingly pragmatic approach compared to the rigid prohibitionist stance of the current Australian government. While he acknowledges past mistakes and supports harm reduction strategies, some aspects of his argument still require further scrutiny. Below is an analysis of what he gets right and what he gets wrong.
What He is Right About:
1. Prohibition Has Failed and Has Fueled the Black Market
✅ Correct: Littleproud acknowledges that Australia’s prohibitionist model has failed.
🔹 Only 8% of vapers obtain their products legally through prescriptions, proving the pharmacy model is ineffective.
🔹 The black market has exploded, leading to criminal syndicates smuggling illicit, unregulated products.
🔹 Border control alone cannot stop illegal vape imports, as evidenced by seizures that barely dent supply.
Regulated legal sales would be the most effective way to eliminate the black market and ensure product safety.
2. History Shows That Prohibition Doesn’t Work
✅ Correct: Prohibition has historically failed in controlling substance use.
🔹 The US alcohol prohibition (1920s) led to organised crime taking control of the market—the same is happening with vapes in Australia.
🔹 Other drug prohibitions have not eliminated use but have driven illicit trade and increased associated harms.
A strictly regulated retail model, like those in the UK and New Zealand, is a proven alternative to prohibition.
3. The Prescription Model Was a Mistake
✅ Correct: Littleproud admits that the Nationals got it wrong when they previously supported a prescription model.
🔹 Mandating prescriptions for vaping forced consumers into the black market, rather than transitioning them to safer, legal alternatives.
🔹 Smokers will not go to a doctor just to get a vape prescription, especially when cigarettes remain widely available.
Acknowledging past policy failures is crucial to making better decisions moving forward.
4. Regulation is Key to Protecting Young People
✅ Correct: He rightly points out that strict regulations on retail vape sales could help prevent youth access.
🔹 Licensed retailers with strict age verification would be more effective than a blanket ban.
🔹 Banning retail vape sales while allowing cigarette sales is illogical—a safer alternative is being made harder to access than the deadliest consumer product available.
A well-regulated model, like the UK’s, would ensure adult access while preventing youth uptake.
5. Excise Tax Could Fund Harm Reduction and Law Enforcement
✅ Correct: A regulated market could generate tax revenue that could be used to fund:
🔹 Stronger policing against illicit vape sales.
🔹 Public education on vaping and harm reduction.
🔹 Research on vaping.
Using taxation to fund enforcement and education is a far better approach than ineffective prohibition.
However it is important that vapes are NOT taxed at a rate like tobacco or alchohol.
Overtaxing vapes will only lead to the continuation of a prosperous black market.
❌ What He is Wrong About
1. The Claim That Medical Advice Should Be “Limited” in Regulation
❌ Wrong: Health experts must play a key role in regulation.
🔹 Littleproud argues that medical advice should not dictate how vapes are regulated—this is problematic.
🔹 Public health experts are essential in ensuring product safety, nicotine limits, and appropriate harm reduction measures. At the same time, consumers must be heard to help gain real world evidence!
While border control and enforcement are important, health regulations should dictate product safety standards.
2. The Overstatement of Youth Vaping as a Crisis
❌ Wrong: While youth vaping is a concern, it is not the crisis that some politicians claim.
🔹 Most youth who vape are already smokers or at high risk of smoking, meaning vaping is more likely to displace smoking than create new nicotine users.
🔹 Countries like the UK and New Zealand, which allow regulated vape sales, have seen youth smoking rates continue to decline.
The focus should be on enforcing strict age verification laws, not on restricting adult access.
3. The Idea That Vapes Should Be Treated Like Cigarettes
❌ Wrong: Vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking and should not be treated the same way.
🔹 The UK’s Royal College of Physicians, NHS, and Public Health England all confirm that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking.
🔹 Vapes do not contain tar, carbon monoxide, or thousands of toxic chemicals found in cigarettes.
Vapes should be regulated as a harm reduction tool, not equated to cigarettes.
4. The Underestimation of the Impact of Flavour Bans
❌ Wrong: Flavours play a key role in helping smokers quit.
🔹 Most adult vapers prefer fruit and sweet flavours over tobacco flavours, as they make quitting smoking easier.
🔹 Banning flavours would push consumers back to cigarettes or the black market.
Instead of banning flavours, the government should introduce stricter retail regulations and penalties for underage sales.
Final Verdict: A Realistic, But Not Perfect Approach
✅ What He Gets Right:
✔️ Prohibition has failed and has fueled the black market.
✔️ History proves that banning substances does not eliminate demand.
✔️ The prescription model was a mistake that needs to be corrected.
✔️ Regulation is key to preventing youth vaping while allowing adult smokers access.
✔️ Excise tax on regulated vapes could fund law enforcement and public education.
❌ What He Gets Wrong:
❌ Health experts should absolutely be involved in regulation.
❌ The youth vaping “crisis” is often exaggerated—most youth who vape are already smokers.
❌ Vapes should not be treated like cigarettes—harm reduction must be a priority.
❌ Flavour bans would backfire by pushing users toward black-market products or cigarettes.
What Australia Needs Instead:
📌 A strictly regulated retail model allowing adults to access safer products while preventing youth sales.
📌 Heavy penalties for illegal sales to minors instead of broad prohibitions.
📌 Public education campaigns to combat misinformation on vaping risks and benefits.
📌 Excise taxation on vapes to fund law enforcement, harm reduction programs, and research.
David Littleproud deserves credit for admitting past mistakes and pushing for a more practical, evidence-based approach to vaping regulation. His recognition that prohibition has failed and a regulated model is needed is a step in the right direction. However, his approach could be improved by fully incorporating harm reduction principles and ensuring health experts remain central to regulation.
📢 The best approach is a balanced model that prioritizes harm reduction, youth protection, and eliminating the black market through legal, controlled access—just like in the UK and New Zealand.