Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Department for Transport on 9 July (HC16088), on what basis each of the 12 additional journeys approved from their overseas posting in New Delhi under the qualifying hardship post policy was authorised; and whether each journey was taken by (a) the posted officer only, or (b) accompanying family members.
Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)
The Department for Transport follows the hardship policy set by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, including the entitlement to additional journeys, which enables staff and accompanying dependants at qualifying hardship posts to take a break away from local conditions during their posting. New Delhi is a qualifying hardship post under that policy.
Each of the 12 additional journeys referred to in the Answer of 9 July was authorised under the hardship-post entitlement available to staff and eligible accompanying dependants serving at qualifying hardship posts.
Of those 12 journeys, six were undertaken by the posted officer and six were undertaken by their accompanying partner.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, following the publication of the consultation by the Department of Health and Social Care, Tobacco and vapes: packaging, appearance and display, published on 10 July, whether impact assessments of anticipated benefits of the consultation were completed before publication of the consultation.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government published consultation-stage impact assessments covering the potential health benefits, reduced health and social care costs, and other potential impacts from reduced use of products in scope. We will continue to build the evidence base on the anticipated impact of the changes, including through information provided in response to the consultation, and we will carefully consider all consultation responses before making any final policy decisions. Updated impact assessments will follow in due course.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government, following the publication of the consultation by the Department of Health and Social Care, Tobacco and vapes: packaging, appearance and display, published on 10 July, why further regulation is deemed necessary before Part 6 of the Tobacco and Vapes Act has been implemented; and what is the effectiveness of the consultation in meeting public health objectives.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Our intention is that the ban on the advertising and sponsorship of vapes and nicotine products will come into force on 1 June 2027. As per the requirements of the Act, regulations are required to implement this ban on this date. This includes necessary consequential amendments made to other pieces of primary legislation, such as the Communications Act. These are not subject to consultation.
The consultation on packaging, display, device appearance and flavour descriptors that was published on 10 July 2026 covers different regulation-making powers under the Act and is a distinct exercise from the implementation of Part 6.
These measures will help tackle youth vaping and protect children from the risk of harm and addiction.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence from other countries, if any, they have considered when evaluating the effect of standardised packaging requirements for heated tobacco products on rates of youth uptake.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
On 10 July 2026, the Government launched a United Kingdom-wide consultation on proposals to reduce the appeal and availability of tobacco, vaping and nicotine products, particularly to children and young people. The consultation includes proposals for plain, white packaging for vaping and nicotine products, aligning existing tobacco display restrictions across relevant products, restricting the appearance of vaping and heated tobacco devices, and extending existing tobacco packaging requirements to other tobacco products and tobacco-related devices. The Government will carefully consider all consultation responses before making any final policy decisions.
Internationally, some countries have introduced packaging requirements for vapes and/or nicotine pouches, including Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, and Israel. As these policies have only recently been implemented, there is currently limited evidence on their evaluation. However, research by University College London and Kings College London has found, for example, that plain vape packaging reduced the appeal of vapes to young people without putting off adults who smoke. The proportion of young people who thought their friends would want to try a vape fell from approximately half, or 53%, with branded packaging to about a third, or 38%, with plain packaging, and to around a quarter, or 27%, when flavour descriptions were also limited.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence from other countries, if any, they have considered when evaluating the effect of standardised packaging requirements for vape products on rates of youth uptake.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
On 10 July 2026, the Government launched a United Kingdom-wide consultation on proposals to reduce the appeal and availability of tobacco, vaping and nicotine products, particularly to children and young people. The consultation includes proposals for plain, white packaging for vaping and nicotine products, aligning existing tobacco display restrictions across relevant products, restricting the appearance of vaping and heated tobacco devices, and extending existing tobacco packaging requirements to other tobacco products and tobacco-related devices. The Government will carefully consider all consultation responses before making any final policy decisions.
Internationally, some countries have introduced packaging requirements for vapes and/or nicotine pouches, including Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, and Israel. As these policies have only recently been implemented, there is currently limited evidence on their evaluation. However, research by University College London and Kings College London has found, for example, that plain vape packaging reduced the appeal of vapes to young people without putting off adults who smoke. The proportion of young people who thought their friends would want to try a vape fell from approximately half, or 53%, with branded packaging to about a third, or 38%, with plain packaging, and to around a quarter, or 27%, when flavour descriptions were also limited.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence from other countries, if any, they have considered when evaluating the effect of standardised packaging requirements for nicotine pouches on rates of youth uptake.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
On 10 July 2026, the Government launched a United Kingdom-wide consultation on proposals to reduce the appeal and availability of tobacco, vaping and nicotine products, particularly to children and young people. The consultation includes proposals for plain, white packaging for vaping and nicotine products, aligning existing tobacco display restrictions across relevant products, restricting the appearance of vaping and heated tobacco devices, and extending existing tobacco packaging requirements to other tobacco products and tobacco-related devices. The Government will carefully consider all consultation responses before making any final policy decisions.
Internationally, some countries have introduced packaging requirements for vapes and/or nicotine pouches, including Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, and Israel. As these policies have only recently been implemented, there is currently limited evidence on their evaluation. However, research by University College London and Kings College London has found, for example, that plain vape packaging reduced the appeal of vapes to young people without putting off adults who smoke. The proportion of young people who thought their friends would want to try a vape fell from approximately half, or 53%, with branded packaging to about a third, or 38%, with plain packaging, and to around a quarter, or 27%, when flavour descriptions were also limited.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to relax, suspend or repeal the zero emission vehicle mandate; and what assessment they have made of the impact of the mandate on vehicle manufacturing, investment and employment in the UK.
Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)
The Government has a long-standing commitment to publish a review of the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Mandate to ensure we are taking a pragmatic and balanced approach to the ZEV transition that works for industry. We intend to conclude the review in the next six months. This will include a public consultation, which will set out the relevant analysis undertaken as part of the review process.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to proceed with the introduction of Electric Vehicle Excise Duty in April 2028; and what assessment they have made of its impact on rural motorists, disabled motorists and those without access to off-street charging.
Answered by Lord Pitt-Watson - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
As announced at Autumn Budget 2025, Electric Vehicle Excise Duty (eVED) will be introduced from April 2028. Drivers of electric and plug-in hybrid cars will pay for their mileage alongside their existing Vehicle Excise Duty (VED).
The Government has carefully considered the impact of eVED on rural motorists, disabled motorists and those without access to off-street charging. The Government has confirmed eVED should apply to these groups on a consistent basis, as it is designed to mirror the contribution made by drivers of petrol and diesel vehicles through fuel duty, from which these groups are not exempt.
While those living in rural areas tend to drive more than those in urban areas, they are also significantly more likely to have access to lower-cost home charging. According to 2025 Department for Transport survey data, 84% of rural electric vehicle drivers have access to a dedicated home charger.
Support for disabled motorists continues to be available through existing schemes. Individuals in receipt of the higher rate mobility component of disability benefits, including Personal Independence Payment (PIP), qualify for a VED exemption. A 50 per cent reduction in VED is also available to those in receipt of the standard rate mobility component of disability benefits.
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office on 10 July (HC13240), what are the current overseas posts and locations classified as qualifying hardship posts for the purpose of additional journeys for staff posted overseas.
Answered by Lord Wood of Anfield - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Given the large number of posts and locations in the scope of the Noble Lord's question, I will arrange for a list to be placed in the library, containing details of: (a) the 150 locations classified as qualifying hardship posts for the purpose of additional journeys for staff posted overseas, at the time that the previous government left office in July 2024; and (b) the six locations that have subsequently been removed from that list.
The Noble Lord will see from the aforementioned list that these arrangements are not new, and indeed have applied consistently under successive governments for a number of decades.
Below, in reference to HL2091 (tabled on 14 July 2026), is a list of the 150 locations worldwide, which – at the end of the previous government’s term in office in July 2024 – were classified as qualifying ‘hardship’ posts for the purpose of additional journeys for staff posted overseas. In the subsequent two years, up to July 2026, six locations have been removed from the qualifying list: Bamako, Buenos Aires, Panama City, Pyongyang, Santiago and Sarajevo.
Abidjan
Abu Dhabi
Abuja
Accra
Adamstown
Addis Ababa
Ahmedabad
Algiers
Al-Khobar
Almaty
Amman
Ankara
Antananarivo
Apia
Ascension Island
Ashgabat
Asmara
Astana
Asuncion
Baku
Bali
Bamako
Bandar Seri Begawan
Bangkok
Banjul
Beijing
Beirut
Belmopan
Bengaluru
Bishkek
Bogota
Brades
Brasilia
Buenos Aires
Bujumbura
Cairo
Cape Town
Caracas
Casablanca
Castries
Chandigarh
Chennai
Chisinau
Chongqing
Colombo
Conakry
Dakar
Dar Es Salaam
Dhaka
Djibouti
Doha
Dubai
Dushanbe
Freetown
Gaborone
Georgetown
Grand Turk
Guangzhou
Guatemala City
Hanoi
Harare
Havana
Ho Chi Minh City
Honiara
Hyderabad
Islamabad
Istanbul
Jakarta
Jakarta (ASEAN)
Jamestown
Jeddah
Jerusalem
Johannesburg
Kampala
Karachi
Kathmandu
Khartoum
Kigali
Kingston
Kingstown
Kinshasa
Kolkata
Kuala Lumpur
Kuwait
La Paz
Lagos
Lahore
Lilongwe
Lima
Luanda
Lusaka
Male
Manama
Manila
Maputo
Maseru
Mbabane
Mexico City
Minsk
Monrovia
Monterrey
Moscow
Mumbai
Muscat
Nairobi
N'Djamena
Nassau
New Delhi
Niamey
Nouakchott
Nuku'alofa
Panama City
Phnom Penh
Port au Prince
Port Moresby
Port of Spain
Port Vila
Pretoria
Pristina
Pyongyang
Quito
Rabat
Rio de Janeiro
Riyadh
San Jose
San Salvador
Santiago
Santo Domingo
Sao Paulo
Sarajevo
Shanghai
St George's
St John's
Stanley
Suva
Tashkent
Tehran
Tel Aviv
Tirana
Tristan da Cunha
Tunis
Ulaanbaatar
Victoria
Vientiane
Windhoek
Wuhan
Yangon
Yaounde
Yekaterinburg
Yerevan
In the vast majority of cases, the locations listed above have been classified as qualifying ‘hardship’ posts since that system of classification – and accompanying staff allowances – were introduced more than three decades ago. Assessments of ‘hardship’ take into account a number of factors that apply irrespective of the financial wealth and standard of living in each post, but which may mean that members of staff are required to take additional respite breaks for the benefit of their physical or mental health, in locations where – for example – there are high levels of air pollution (e.g. New Delhi or Beijing), high levels of crime (e.g. Port of Spain or Pretoria), or regular and ongoing security threats (e.g. Tel Aviv or Riyadh).
Asked by: Lord Moylan (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 28 May (HL40), whether they have now made an estimate of the capital and ongoing operating costs of developing, launching and maintaining the proposed Great British Railways ticketing website and mobile application.
Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)
Potential estimates will not be published in advance of the launch and completion of the procurement process, as these are commercially sensitive.
We have recently communicated to the supplier market our target of launching the procurement process in late Summer/early Autumn.