Reply from Labour MEP

[Fleabag]

I emailed my MP and most of my MEPs earlier this week - got a reply from one of the Labour MEPS:

"Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding e-cigarettes.

Labour Euro MPs have received many emails from constituents who have found e-cigarettes to really work in helping them to cut down on smoking, and we are aware that many people feel strongly that their access to these products should not be limited in any way.

There has been a lot of misinformation circulating about a proposed ban on e-cigarettes. To clarify, within the European Parliament there has been no proposals to ban e-cigarettes and that is certainly not the intention of Labour Euro MPs. We see e-cigarettes as a promising development in smoking cessation and we have spoke to many doctors who specialise in tobacco related illnesses and who have been recommending them to their patients.

Since e-cigarettes are such a new development, there is no specific legislation to cover the, and at the moment they are largely unregulated. It is exactly because of the potential of e-cigarettes that Labour Euro MPs think it is important that consumers can be confident that the products they buy are tested, safe, meet quality standards, and deliver to users what they claim on the package.

The UK Government has been looking at the issue for several years, and has recently concluded that e-cigarettes should be regulated in the same way as nicotine gums and patches – i.e. under light-touch medicines legislation. In a vote in the Health Committee of the European Parliament on Wednesday 10th July, a majority of Euro MPs agreed with this approach.

The “medicines” label would change very little in terms of the availability of e-cigarettes in the UK; over-the-counter products like paracetamol are already widely sold in supermarkets, corner shops and garages, as well as in pharmacies. As nicotine is already a well-known substance, e-cigarettes would not be required to undertake costly clinical trials, which may pushed the price up, and there are event some advantages in terms of a lower VAT rate, and the possibility of e-cigarettes being available free to patients on prescription.

Some constituents have raised concerns about extra-strong and flavoured e-cigarettes being banned under the medicines route, but this would be a decision for the UK regulator. I would be in favour of maintaining a wide choice for consumers, as long as the safety and quality of the product is proven. (Nicotine gum and inhalers in different flavours and in strengths of up to 15mg are already available in the UK).

Health organisations including Cancer Research, the British Heart Foundation, ASH, and doctors associations all support the UK Government medicines approach, as this would ensure e-cigarettes are not promoted to children or non-smokers, creating a new generation of nicotine addicts (there have already been some press reports about schools having to ban e-cigarettes from the classroom). It would also mean that the products are monitored, as little is known about long-term effects.

We are still a long way away from any changes. The final legislation will only be agreed following a negotiation process involving Euro MPs and national Ministers. Once a deal is reached, Labour Euro MPs will be working to ensure that e-cigarette companies will have several additional years in which to adapt to the new rules, so that there are no interruptions on the market.

I hope this information is helpful."

 

[Mawsley]

I hope this information is helpful

As helpful as anal beads made from potassium.

 

[whipitup]

Sorry, but when I read that all I saw was "bollocks, crap, lies, money, more lies, back handers, greed, misinformation, blah, blah............................"

 

[Fleabag]

and from Liberals:

"Thank you again for getting in touch. I thought I would write to update you on the latest news regarding what Liberal Democrat MEPs are doing to stop restrictions on e-cigarettes.

As you might be aware, Labour MEPs are seeking tougher restrictions on e-cigarettes which would mean that they would be treated as medicines. We are concerned that this would reduce their availability compared to tobacco and put big new costs on users.

In the public health committee of the European Parliament, of which I am a member, I am sorry to say that MEPs voted to support the Labour position and treat e-cigarettes as medicines.

However this is not the last part of the parliamentary process and Lib Dem MEPs will continue to campaign for e-cigarette users. The issue will now be the subject of a vote by the full European Parliament in the autumn.

E-cigarettes work by vaporising nicotine that is then inhaled, providing nicotine addicts with their hit without many of the carcinogens and second-hand smoke produced by conventional cigarettes. Many smokers have instead become ‘vapers’ and claim it has helped them become healthier.

In an ideal world no-one would be addicted to nicotine but we don’t live in an ideal world and it is better to vape than to smoke. I see e-cigs as a potential game changer in the fight against tobacco because smokers find them enjoyable to use. They can help people break their addiction in a way that conventional nicotine replacement therapies will never do. They could save millions of lives.

I have been contacted by hundreds of constituents who have had their lives improved by e-cigarettes. Labour MEPs may think they are protecting people from themselves but restricting e-cigarettes will only hurt vapers and their families as they turn back to tobacco.

We now have only a few weeks to change minds and try and win the vote in the full Parliament. Please do contact your Labour, Conservative and UKIP MEPs and persuade them to vote against restrictions on use of e-cigarettes. "

 

[Fleabag]

Libs are much more on our side - problem is, I'd already done what he suggested and got the platitudes from labour.

Maybe I should email the labour MEP back and ask if they can guarantee that nic content, flavours and freedom of access/vendors will be protected as she claims - as that's not the message we've been getting about the implications of medicinal regulation. How do they propose we'll have the same freedom when no-one but the big players will be able to afford the licenses?

 

[Mawsley]

Sorry, but when I read that all I saw was "bollocks, crap, lies, money, more lies, back handers, greed, misinformation, blah, blah............................"

Just that post or each one I type?

 

[freddo]

It's going to take them years to come to an agreement. Probably won't happen anyway

 

[steffijade]

The standard Labour reply just goes to show that they still don't understand the implications of the proposed regulations or more likely (at least imho), they know full well what the implications are and don't give a flying feck.

The reasons they don't give a flying feck are open to question.. could be corruption, could be arrogance, could be that deep seated need that Labour seem to have to control every aspect of peoples' lives, could be blinded by the perceived need to eradicate smoking (and anything that resembles it) at any cost.. ad infinitum.

The only letter I feel like sending to a labour politician regarding vaping would be one containing a pile of steaming excrement. No doubt they would reciprocate in their 'stock' reply.

 

[stumpey]

At the end of the day its about money and who is going to get fat. Be it the Government, MP's, Pharma or Tobacco Co's, its not about the end user the little guy the Hoi Polloi. Nothing changes its the same old crap.......

 

[Shorty]

At the end of the day its about money and who is going to get fat. Be it the Government, MP's, Pharma or Tobacco Co's, its not about the end user the little guy the Hoi Polloi. Nothing changes its the same old crap.......

Totally agree,we are the pawns and nothing will ever change,my quote(Fucking shite).