My letters are away...

[Cammy]

I'll keep you posted on any replies here. In the mean time I'm about to begin my stockpile....

[Cammy]

First reply from Struan Stevenson:

Dear Cameron,



Thank you for your email regarding the Tobacco directive which is currently under renewal.



The directive will be coming before the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Committee in the European Parliament for consideration later this year. At this stage the European Commission's proposals include regulating, packaging and the composition of cigarettes and related products, including electronic cigarettes.



I fully recognise that there are health implications to smoking and I believe that there should be public awareness of this. Yet once informed, I believe that there should also be freedom of choice.



However, this freedom of choice should not impinge on the freedom of others, so a programmatic solution must be found. Smoking has health implications for smokers and it is scientifically proven that there are also implications for passive smokers as well. Advertising and the presentation of smoking at present needs to be reviewed and I believe that this directive will do just that.



More than ten years have passed since the adoption of the current directive on the issue, during which time various developments have occurred. In response to this, I look forward to making concrete contributions towards the proposed directive when the time arrives.



With reference to your specific comments on electronic cigarettes the directive will look at this aspect, and I myself would be very interested in the scientific background that specifically relates to the health effects before making any judgements.



I hope you find this information helpful and please let us know if we can be of any further assistance.



Best wishes,



STRUAN



Struan Stevenson MEP

[Cammy]

And today from Alan smith


Dear Cameron,

Many thanks for getting in touch.

I have been in contact with our group advisors regarding the Tobacco Products Directive, specifically the sections relating to electronic cigarettes, and have been informed that this is the start of what will be quite a substantial process. The proposal has only recently been published which means that the European Parliament has yet to appoint the Rapporteurs for each of the committees involved or on a timescale. The committee which will be responsible for this file will be the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Committee which, unfortunately, I am not a member of. This committee will go through the proposal line by line, submitting specific amendments until they reach a position where the text is agreed upon by the majority of MEPs in that committee. Certain other committees in Parliament will be asked for their opinion on the text and, once this is agreed upon, the text will then be put to the full Parliament at a plenary session and, if passed, this becomes the position of the European Parliament. This then goes to the Council and, depending on whether they agree with the Parliament's position or not, the text could be amended further and sent back to Parliament again. As the European Institutions must compromise on certain aspects of legislation, this means that the
final text is rarely the same as the proposed text.

As a result of this there is very little that I or any other MEP can do to influence this directive at this stage. We have received a number of emails from constituents on this matter and will bear the concerns in mind.

One of the main concerns that has been raised with us by constituents is that the Commission is proposing to ban electronic cigarettes under the new Directive. This is certainly not the case. Instead, the proposal states:

"Extension of the scope of the Directive : Nicotine Containing Products (e.g. electronic cigarettes) below a certain nicotine threshold are allowed on the market, but must feature health warnings; above this threshold such products are only allowed if authorised as medicinal products, like nicotine replacement therapies. Herbal cigarettes will have to carry health warnings" (Page 9 of proposal and article 18 on page 39)

However, as I have said, this may be subject to amendments by the committees involved and so may change. Given your interest in the work of the office, I will if I may add you to our email list of updates on such matters. Your email is of course kept strictly confidential, I am registered under the Data Protection Act and you can opt out at any time.

I thank you for your interest.

Yours aye

Alyn Smith MEP

[Cammy]

Another reply from Ian Hudghton



Thank you for your recent email regarding the recent proposals to revise the EU Tobacco Products Directive, particularly on the issue of electronic cigarettes.

I note your opinions, from your own personal experience as an electronic cigarette user, and understand that you believe there to be benefits in using an electronic cigarette as an alternative to a conventional tobacco cigarette.

I will take your views into account as the debate in the European Parliament on E-cigarettes progresses, ultimately seeking a balanced position that takes into account scientific health assessments and the legitimate concerns of E-cigarette consumers.

Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Hudghton MEP

[Cammy]

And another from Jackson Carlaw




Thank you for your email regarding electronic cigarettes.

I appreciate the positive effect electronic cigarettes have had on your life. Many people have likewise found electronic cigarettes to be an effective substitute to smoking tobacco.

As any directive proposed by the EU would have to be discussed in the Scottish Parliament let me assure you I will closely examine any proposals which come before Holyrood in regard to this issue.

Yours sincerely

Jackson Carlaw MSP
Deputy Leader, Scottish Conservatives

[Cammy]

5th reply from a dozen or so MP/MSPs I emailed

Thank you for your email concerning the EU Tobacco Products Directive, and
how it will affect electronic cigarettes.

European Parliamentarians have the bulk of their work concentrated within
specific committees, mine being International Trade, Constitutional Affairs
and Human Rights. All UK Labour MEPs are members of the European
Parliamentary Labour Party, and prior to debate and voting we exchange
information and discuss priorities. My colleague, Glenis Wilmott MEP is a
member of the Environment, Public Health & Food Safety Committee that is
responsible for this piece of legislation. I have forwarded to her office
your concerns and she has responded with the detailed information below that
I hope will be helpful to you.

Because e-cigarettes are a relatively new product they are regulated
differently in each EU country. Some countries allow e-cigarettes to be sold
without any regulation at all. Others have banned the sale of e-cigarettes.
As the UK is part of the EU's internal market it is important that we
harmonise the way we deal with this product, otherwise consumers could be
buying unregulated products which do not conform to basic safety standards,
either within their own country, or by easily purchasing it over the
internet from a neighbouring country.

The European Commission has proposed that all 'nicotine containing products'
with more than 2mg per unit should not be classed as tobacco products.
Instead, under the Commission's proposals, nearly all e-cigarettes will need
to get authorisation as a pharmaceutical product, in the same way as
nicotine patches, sprays and gums.

Of course there is a balance to strike. On one hand e-cigarettes have the
potential to be a helpful way to help somebody quit smoking entirely and
greatly improve their health. On the other hand e-cigarettes currently can
contain up to 48mg of nicotine - far more than a regular cigarette, making
them highly addictive. As nicotine is the drug that makes cigarettes
addictive, somebody that tries e-cigarettes could be much more likely to go
on to smoke regular cigarettes. Furthermore, there is no evidence that
e-cigarettes are safe, and it is concerning that they are being marketed as
a 'healthy' alternative to smoking. Currently we do not have any conclusive
evidence either that e-cigarettes are helpful for giving up smoking, or that
they encourage it.

While we do not have this scientific evidence to rely on I think it is
wise to have a cautious approach to e-cigarettes. If they are
effective in helping people to stop smoking, then it is appropriate that
they are regulated in the same way as other smoking cessation tools, such as
nicotine patches.

The Commission proposal is not final and there will be many months of
negotiations by the European Parliament, as well as health ministers from
the UK and other EU countries, before the legislation is agreed. During this
time Labour MEPs will be looking carefully at all of the measures and trying
to find the best way to ensure that we effectively reduce smoking rates in
the UK and across Europe.

Kind regards,

David

DAVID MARTIN MEP
Labour MEP for Scotland

[Banky]

Hi Cammy, I see you've got the same rubbish of an explanation from our wonderful MEPs and MSPs,
a suppose it was worth a try.

[Anne (fuzzy)]

That last one sounds very familiar. >

[greendollar]

mmmm the last one is exactly the same as the one I got from one of my MEP

[kibbster]

I guess politicians do talk to each other then (getting their stories straight I guess.)
Makes me wonder how many of these are fob off letters.

I've written to my MP twice, useless ****wit hasn't even acknowledged me, had no replies from my MEPs either but only wrote to them a week ago or so.

My already tenuous belief in the democratic system of MPs in this country has been even more shaken and once again I'm wondering why my hard earned taxes are going towards paying this useless lot if all they do is cut and paste letters to their constituents.

[Cammy]

Yep, I've noticed that they don't have the decency to reply to our emails individually - I'm working on a reply to highlight all the faults in their stock replies. I'm finding it difficult to be polite and courteous to these pompus tw@ts who think they can fob us off with pre-penned replies. I ain't going away.

[Cammy]

4 weeks it took for this pompous twat to reply:
Mis-informed is putting it lightly and if this is the calibre of my MSP I think I will abstain from voting for these fools in the future...

Any hints on what my reply should be, please?

Here it is:

Dear Mr Heggie

Mr Maxwell has asked me to thank you, on his behalf, for writing to him on the subject of electronic cigarettes.

Mr Maxwell has asked me to let you know that of course, as he is not an MEP he has no influence or say on EU directives.

However Mr Maxwell certainly supports the proper regulation of e-cigarettes and at present, as you are aware, they are practically unregulated.

Electronic cigarettes are marketed variously as Nicotine Replacement Therapy or as a way of getting around the smoking ban or as a way of carrying on smoking.

British & American Tobacco have recently purchased an e-cigarette company which shows that they believe that they assist their business.

Other Nicotine Replacement Therapy products are available which are properly regulated and do not replicate the smoking habit, but do help smokers to quit.

Mr Maxwell has asked me to pass to you his very best wishes.

[MarkS]

Personally I would reply in a way as to say I am concerned about Mr Maxwells views as he seems to have been grossly mis-informed.
I would ask where such endorsements as e-cigs as NRT are being marketed other than via user experience.

I would point out that e-cigs are in fact regulated (nicked this from ECCA) "They are regulated by law (about fifteen consumer protection, electrical, toxicity, certification, packaging and labelling laws apply) and actively controlled in practice by an executive arm of government right down to local level (by the Trading Standards authorities) Since electronic cigarettes are not classed as a tobacco product in the UK, and are not a medicine, they fall into the general sales products (GSP) Customs & Excise classification, and also for Trading Standards procedures. They must conform with around 15 separate Acts that control the sale of products, and are therefore regulated by the Department of Business (BIS) through the executive arm of the Trading Standards organisation."

And that recent studies show NRT's are largely ineffective and some such as Champix can have quite severe side effects.

You could also reference Professor John Britton or send them this link from the BBC interview with the Professor:
And ask what qualifications or information he has that proves contrary to this statement from a respected expert in his field.


I would also love to put Mr Maxwell really should do a bit more research on subjects that could have dire consequences for public health other than reading a Daily Mail column, but fear that would be counter productive.