I am
pleased to have played a role, along with my colleagues Chris Davies, Lib Dem
MEP for the North West of England, and Belgian Liberal MEP Frédérique Ries in getting
amendment 170 on e-cigarettes adopted by the European Parliament (EP) in the
plenary vote on the tobacco products directive (TPD).
The EP
will now enter negotiations with the 28 EU national governments ("The Council")
as part of the co-decision legislative procedure. The Council position on the TPD
includes e-cigarettes being subject to medicines regulation, but on key tobacco
control measures e.g. health warnings, their position is rather similar to the
EP.
There is
now serious time pressure to get the TPD concluded under the current Lithuanian
Presidency of the EU and not to run into the Greek Presidency (which starts in January
2014), as Greece is Europe's biggest tobacco producer with a rather weak record
on tobacco control.
Frédérique Ries MEP will represent
the ALDE (Liberal) group in negotiations with national governments and will
push to keep the parliament's position on ecigs in the final agreement. We (Frédérique, myself and Chris) will
be consulting relevant experts to find practical solutions to concerns likely
to be raised in relation to the regulation of ecigs, but what can activists or
concerned individuals do?
The focus
is now on national governments whose health ministers will negotiate the TPD
with the EP. I suggest contacting your MP to raise your concerns as well as the
relevant Health Minister (for England, this is the newly appointed Public
Health Minister Conservative MP Jane Ellison).
Keep your
correspondence concise, polite and firm without over-dramatising or being
aggressive, i.e. it fine to say "ecigs save lives", but not a good
idea to accuse people of trying to kill you. I understand the passion involved,
but being aggressive rather than assertive can lead to your concerns being
dismissed as hysterical or bullying, or even worse, turn an undecided into a
bona-fine supporter of medicines regulation.
Many of
those who support the medicines route seek (as I do) to make sure good quality
e-cigarettes reach as many smokers as possible, but they believe (unlike me)
that medicines regulation will achieve that.
In any
contact you have, I would suggest mentioning the following (please put into
your own words, do not copy and paste!):
•
That
ecigs attract smokers in a way that NRT products do not and thus have great
potential to reduce smoking rates in Europe. (NB: if you are an ex-smoker who
has switched to ecigs, briefly recount your personal story.)
•
The
EP plenary voted clearly in favour of regulating e-cigarettes as consumer
products (386 votes in favour, 283 votes against, 7 abstentions) and that all
Liberal Democrat MEPs and all but one Tory MEP voted in favour of this
amendment.
•
The
EP position would require ecigs to be correctly labelled including in relation
to nicotine levels, institute an under 18 sales ban and allow governments to
impose marketing restrictions e.g. ban misleading advertising or that aimed at
children/teenagers.
•
That
medicines regulation would impose additional costs that add no value, e.g.
pharmaceutical grade manufacturing facilities and that many SMEs will be priced
out of the market reducing consumer choice as well as decimating small businesses.
•
That
in many EU countries medicines regulation would make ecigs much less widely
available than tobacco products, which will benefit the tobacco industry.
A
battle has been won, but the war is not over yet.
