EU Reply from Peter Skinner MEP Re:TPD

[low_tar_neil]

I know it's a standard response, but I'm so incensed by the disregard for the contents of my original email and willingness to assume I'm a tobacco lobbyist that I have to post this here:

Thank you for writing to me about the tobacco Products Directive. I understand that this is a controversial topic, and people hold many different views. For the European Parliamentary Labour Party, public health is the primary concern when it comes to regulating tobacco.

The Directive was informed by a large volume of independent research and aims to make tobacco less attractive to children and younger people. Whilst large pictorial warnings, more standardised packaging and less attractive flavourings may not change the habits of existing smokers, they are designed to change the perceptions of younger non-smokers, who are initially attracted to tobacco purely by the image of cigarettes and smoking. As tobacco kills one in two of all regular users, large graphic health warnings are vital to convey the danger that it poses to health.

It is also worth noting that the proposals are in-line with our obligations under the World Health Organisation's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, a legally binding international treaty which has been signed by 168 countries across the world, including the UK and all other EU members.

Whilst I understand your concern that products, such as menthol or slim cigarettes, will be taken off the market, we cannot allow manufacturers to make cigarettes more attractive by selling them in boxes that look more like a lipstick or a perfume, containing slim, elegant cigarettes and flavourings which are eye-catching to children.

The Tobacco Products Directive, like all laws in the European Union, will be decided by directly elected Members of the European Parliament and the 28 governments elected in each EU country including the British Ministry of Health's representatives.

I know we may not agree on this issue but please understand that I have carefully considered both sides of the argument and in this case I must prioritise the health of children and young people.

Best wishes
Peter Skinner MEP
Labour Representative for the South East of England
Suites 4 and 5
Fort Pitt House Business Centre
New Road
Rochester
Kent
ME1 1DU

 

[low_tar_neil]

This was my reply:


Dear Peter,

Whilst I do not expect a personal response, I do expect the intern doing the copy and pasting to have read my initial email and considered what is appropriate.

You will have little understanding of how angry and frustrating it is to get emails like this, I can only assume I'm one of many who have had this treatment from your office.

To sign off an email "I must prioritise the health of children and young people" insinuating that I don't, is not only deeply offensive but it highlights the lack of knowledge around the area of electronic cigarettes that I am trying to bring to your attention by engaging in the democratic process.

My sole interest in the TPD is to keep the biggest health revolution in tobacco, e-cigarettes, as easily available and equally as effective as they currently are. Your position, on this one matter, is to make a safer alternative less available and less effective than tobacco, so I would say, on this point it is my position that is in the interests of public health, not yours.

I should add that, with 50% of long term tobacco users poised to switch to e-cigarettes by the end of the decade under the current model, this is of far greater importance than anything else in the TPD, but sadly few people in your position can grasp that.

I like to engage further with you on this if I may, and I hope you will at least consider what I raised in my initial contact.

Kind regards,

Neil

 

[gayhalo]

I may have a clue to your problem. I wrote to my MP and got a reply the same day. The reply was very like yours and I was incensed like you. On closer examination of the reply I realised that it was not my email he was replying to. Someone had sent an email "on my behalf" and it was about tobacco not e cigs. It was just lucky that the reply contained the original email.

 

[low_tar_neil]

Well I did email him ahead of the plenary delay through write to them, but that's really worrying.

Do you think it is a case of you adding your name to one of the petitions or sites going round, and your name/email have been used against your wishes?

 

[low_tar_neil]

Reply & apology from Peter Skinner MEP

Dear Mr McLaren

Please accept my apologies for the previous incorrect response you received. My office receives hundreds of emails a week and unfortunately, although I am aware of the issues and read as many of them as I can, I cannot reply to them all personally. You were sent a response I wrote to a different aspect of the forthcoming Tobacco Products Directive.
I assure you that the issue of e-cigarettes has also been brought to my attention, in fact the number of emails and letters that I and my colleagues have received is in the thousands. Most have told me how e-cigarettes have helped them to quit smoking, and who are concerned that the proposals at EU could result in a de-facto ban of these products.
It might be worth underlining what has been said in Parliament so far: nobody wants to ban e-cigarettes, and that is certainly not my intention. But we do have a responsibility as legislators to ensure products are safe, quality controlled and deliver to users what they claim on the package. As you may be aware, the proposal on the table from the European Commission is for e-cigarettes to be regulated in the same way as nicotine patches and gums. MEPs have yet to come to a view on how best to regulate e-cigarettes on the market and whether and how to amend the proposal from the European Commission.

My colleague Linda McAvan is the MEP leading this draft legislation through the European Parliament, and she has taken evidence from e-cigarette companies, as well as from users, regulators and doctors.
The UK Government has been looking at the issue for a number of years, and gave evidence at a workshop in the European Parliament recently. The audio and video recordings of these meetings are available online here:
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety - Events
nuzone and here:
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety/ Policy Department: Economic and Scientific Policy.

After listening to all the different arguments, Linda tabled amendments proposing a lighter touch regulatory framework for e-cigarettes, which closes some of the current loopholes - such as manufacturing problems, quality control, and ongoing monitoring of use - but which is not as strict as medicines regulation, meaning that companies would not have to test and prove their products in the same way. It would also mean that e-cigarettes could be sold as widely as cigarettes, creating a more level playing field with tobacco products. She leaves the option for e-cigs to be authorised as medicines, as some companies (and users) may prefer this, given the advantages in terms of a lower VAT rate, and the possibility of e-cigarettes being available free to patients on prescription.

In short, Linda wants to encourage the potential benefits that e-cigarettes offer regular smokers in terms of harm reduction, but these potential benefits need to be balanced against the need for more studies into long-term effects, as well as the risk that e-cigs could turn into a gateway product for children. There were newspaper reports in the past few weeks that a number of schools in England have already had to ban e-cigarettes from classrooms. E-cigarettes do contain nicotine which is a highly addictive product and I am sure most people agree that we do not want a generation of young people recruited as addicts. We need minimum age limits on e cigarette sales and regulation of advertising.

These are still early days in the scrutiny process. Many colleagues from different political groups have also tabled amendments, and once these have been put to a vote, we will start negotiations with ministers from the 27 different EU countries. Only once MEPs and Ministers have reached agreement will there be a new law.

Thank you again for sharing your views with me - these will be taken on board in the ongoing discussions.

Best wishes,
Peter Skinner MEP

 

[tommy2bad]

After listening to all the different arguments, Linda tabled amendments proposing a lighter touch regulatory framework for e-cigarettes, which closes some of the current loopholes - such as manufacturing problems, quality control, and ongoing monitoring of use - but which is not as strict as medicines regulation,

Well that's the first we have heard of it if this is true. TBH I think he's just rephrasing Linda's version of what medical regs would be. Which as we know Linda has no say over and no authority to dictate the terms of medical regs to be applied.

Other than that, that's a decent reply. Shows how keeping on keeping on matters.

 

[SloHand]

Just listened to those links of the "Meeting with Representatives of the Electronic Cigarette Industry" .... man that Linda McAvan is an imbecile! I doubt she could find her rear end even with the stench to lead her to it??