National
governments are represented by the Lithuanian Presidency and the EP negotiating
team is led by the rapporteur Labour MEP Linda McAvan, along with the shadow
rapporteurs from the other political groups. The Liberal group is represented
by Belgian Liberal MEP Frédérique Ries, co-author along with myself and Chris Davies of
amendment 170 on e-cigarettes.
After the
first trialogue meeting which addressed the issue of e-cigarettes, Frédérique tweeted the following:
"#trilogue #ecig: ça
va mal, la Présidence lituanienne ne veut rien entendre, RIEN. Pas un
geste, aucune volonté! Je bataille contre un mur"
(translation:
"It's going badly for e-cigs in trialogue, the Lithuanian Presidency
doesn't want to listen at all. Not a gesture, no willingness whatsoever! I am
fighting against a brick wall")
However,
along with Frédérique, the centre right (EPP) and Conservative (ECR) shadow
rapporteurs, German MEP Karl Heinz Florenz and UK Tory MEP Martin Callanan made
it clear that e-cigarettes were a red line for their respective groups. If
those three groups (ALDE, EPP and ECR) vote along the same lines, they form a
majority in the European Parliament and once an agreement is reached on the
tobacco directive, it will have to be approved by the Parliament (a simple yes/no
vote).
An
agreement on the tobacco directive which is not fully supported by three
political groups which constitute a majority of MEPs is unwise, and therein lies the hope
for sensible regulation of e-cigarettes.
Since the
July 2013 position of national governments on the tobacco directive, which
included an agreement to support medicines regulation for e-cigarettes, the ground
has shifted significantly. Not only did the European Parliament clearly vote
against medicines regulation, but action at national level has drawn this
matter to public and political attention. In addition, there have apparently
been complaints to the Lithuanians that they are going too quickly on e-cigs
without allowing national governments the chance to consider other options.
The
key country right now is France, which is believed to no longer be supportive
of the medicines route for e-cigarettes (and was reluctantly supportive previously), although no
official change of position has been announced. In France, 100 leading doctors
recently sent a letter to the French government asking them to act on this
issue and push for sensible regulation. It is thought that if France changes
its position on e-cigs, this may lead other countries to do the same.
The irony
of a Socialist government in France opposing medicines regulation of e-cigs,
contrary to the position of the Socialist group in the European Parliament,
while a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition government in the UK supports medicines
regulation against its own MEPs, is not lost on me!
What
is needed right now from a UK perspective is to get increasing numbers of
Westminster MPs to question the government/MHRA position. Some Liberal Democrat
colleagues of mine at Westminster including Norman Lamb MP, the social care
minister, Dan Rogerson MP and Lorely Burt MP have been doing this as has
Conservative MP Sarah Woolleston, who is a GP.
Along with
Chris Davies, I will carry on trying to win over LibDem colleagues at
Westminster, but this effort needs to be extended to Conservative and Labour
MPs too. I would therefore repeat my previous call for concerned individuals to
contact their MP to raise this issue (see previous blog: http://rebeccataylormep.blogspot.be/2013/10/e-cigarettes-and-tobacco-directive.html).
It would
also be worth noting when you contact MPs that the MHRA is still (as of last
week; Jeremy Mean spoke at the e-cigarettes summit in London http://e-cigarette-summit.com/) unable to give
more than very vague answers to specific questions about how e-cigarettes could
be regulated as medicines. This does not fill me with confidence.....
The battle for sensible regulation of e-cigs is not yet
over and can still be won!
