ECCA AGM 14th of april. Any requests?

[lazydog]

Apr 15, 2013 1:02:37 GMT Jemima said:

Hell no I sucked at forum rep lol

I dont think you did with the limited amount of information you had to hand you always kept the forum up to date and pointed me in the right direction a few times.Dont put yourself down.

[MarkS]

Right this is how I saw last nights events.


It started with Chris (ECCA Vice Chair) pretty much explaining the current situation with Brussells and the MHRA and what he believes are the different strategies they are trying to get electronic cigarettes. In Short he believes they are trying to create a whole new law/policy? where they can class any product they like a Tobacco product. He urged that we continue to write (not email), phone or meet with our MEP's/MP's and continue to provide them with our stories and the facts about vaping.
Our very own member on AAEC fred has compiled an excellent spreadsheet that we can all use for this and I mentioned that to Chris at the AGM and it will be submitted to ECCA for publication.

There was talk about the Media and I did mention that although it is often stated the worlds media come to ECCA for information on Electronic Cigarettes, we rarely ever see them accredited with providing it, and that had to change.

Things that were achieved at the meeting was the appointment of Matt1988 as treasurer of ECCA and myself as forum Representative.
Forum Representatives for UK Vapers, Electronic Cigarette Forums, E-cig review Forums & Planet of the Vapes were also nominated.
I'll update this thread with who they were once I get their full details.

Then it all turned into a bit of a fiasco. As far as I can make out Sam Munro resigned as Chairman saying he is not the right man for the job. So people needed to be nominated. Silence. Then a voice piped up and nominated his friend and long serving ECR member 'itsmeitis' who was not attending the meeting. Chris then said he thought the guy was to negative and this is where it all started to spiral out of control and although Chris was saying what he felt, it was the wrong place and time to be saying it. 'itsmeitis' then connected to the meeting and instead of putting a case forward for why he would be a great candidate for Chairman of ECCA used it to defend himself from Chris's comment and basically release his frustrations at how he believed ECCA had been run. Justified maybe, but again like with Chris's "Negative" comment, wrong place and time to do it.

itsmeitis then disconnected and then reconnected after it was said he would still be considered for Chairman if he wanted it and yet more mud slinging from both sides ensured. It did start to calm before the meeting was ended abruptly, but by then no credible vote could have been cast for anyone.

The chat application had been trolled from start to finish of the meeting and had no moderation. You had people connecting under stupid names who had no intention other than to disrupt proceedings. Idiots who were shouting obscenities and abuse over microphones etc. God help us if anyone of any importance was attending the AGM, they would be laughing all the way to Brussels .

I suggested that any candidates who want to be Chairman of ECCA should leave a post in a dedicated Thread on the ECCA forums stating there case for their nomination. All ECCA members can then read their proposal and make an informed decision, rather than a forced one which is what it would have ended up being last night if the vote had gone ahead. I suggested they do that and we adjourn the meeting until next week when the vote will take place.

People agreed with my suggestion. Some didn't, and the meeting promptly ended. As far as I am aware the meeting will be taking place next Sunday, but I will obviously update you all accordingly when I have more details.

I would also like to say that I do not think it would be fair to judge 'itsmeitis' just on last night. He had been gee'd up before connecting to the meeting and was venting 2 years of maybe justified frustration. Take a look over at ECR Forum and you will see he is a passionate and informed Vaper with a wealth of experience. It would be a shame if all that was ignored based on 10 minutes of empassioned ranting.

I will not put myself forward for chairman for the reason I've already stated. If anyone here would like to put themselves forward then I'll let them know when the thread is up at ECCA for them to do so.

I will sum up by Saying congratulations to Matt, and thank you to Jemima, she coached me beautifully and gave me confidence.

To the rest of our members, all of your ideas and suggestions have not gone wasted and will be aired at a later date. I just need a chairman to put them too.

[matt1988]

Very good summary there MarkS and thank you for the congratulations, although I am unsure whether there will be a re-vote on my position as many members want a re-vote on commitee positions.

Anyway, as you rightly say, don't judge Geds personality on how he acted last night, I think James had a lot to do with it, and I think he was stirring things away from the meeting, however I can't be sure on that.

[igetcha]

hi all,

i was not at the meeting last night so do not really know who was in the wrong or right with regards to why the meeting descended into a slanging match / fiasco, but i would like to share some thoughts with regards to Ged (itsmeitis)

ive known Ged for quite some time now via my forum and he is without a shadow of a doubt an argumentative git (though he would say debatable git, lol). to many he may well come across as negative or a troublemaker, but when it comes to ECCA, consumer rights and a consumer association i can assure you with 100% confidence that if you as a consumer had an issue with a supplier and were given a choice between the current ECCA set up or Ged to act on your behalf then Ged is who you would want in your corner every single time. this is for the very simple reason that Ged is only concerned about the rights of the consumer and could not give a toss if a supplier got upset in the process

with the current ECCA setup, if a consumer went to them with a problem they would 1st have a meeting to decide whether a meeting to discuss the issue is worthy. they would then vote for the aforementioned meeting once they have decided a new date to have a meeting so the vote can take place. a new meeting would then have to be put in place to decide what voting options should be considered but then the vote meeting would have to be reconvened to a later date because everyone has already forgotten what the original meeting was about in the 1st place (confused? precisely my point!)

alternatively, if a consumer approached Ged and said im having an issue with a supplier he would look at the situation, decide if there was cause for complaint, approach the supplier, if no resolve with the supplier he would then take it up with a trading standards rep........job done


personally i am neither for or against ECCA, but i just cant see what they can offer a consumer that trading standards dont already. if anything i feel that ECCA should be a source of information based around consumer rights and correct selling practices and that they should definitely get friendly with a trading standards representative who will actually carry some weight. i.e. ECCA should act as a go between the supplier and trading standards when a consumer dispute arises

myself and a few others spoke to Roly via my chat room several months ago and explained that ECCA dont carry any clout to deal with consumer issues. we stated that ECCA should get in touch with trading standards and get their own personal point of contact / rep so when consumer disputes arise they can pick up a phone and speak to the person directly for advise which they can then forward on to both supplier and customer whilst gathering their own evidence and information from the upset consumer. if the trading standards rep feels the consumer has a valid case and the supplier still wont budge then ECCA can provide their trading standards rep with all the facts / evidence / statements etc from which trading standards then take it to the next level armed with a ton of information

as it currently stands, if a consumer with an issue approached ECCA and they then approached the supplier (after many meetings of course) the supplier would more than likely tell them to sling their hook simply because they have no clout.....but if that supplier knew ECCA were working alongside trading standards and that if they didnt comply they faced prosecution etc then it would be a very different outcome


so just ask yourselves, if you was a consumer with an issue would you want people representing you that are more interested in not upsetting the supplier, endless meetings discussing politics and almost no forward moving progress in their 2 year existence......or an argumentative git that will vigorously fight your case and demand immediate action because he is passionate about your consumer rights

let ECITA deal with the politics / bans etc (which i believe they are!) and let ECCA deal with consumer rights......after all, its meant to be a consumer association!


cheers

scott

[markm]

Interesting post Scott,
I can see your point about it being a consumer association, so politics are a little outside the remit.
Perhaps there should be a political user group "Vapers for Justice" - put on a batman costume and chain yourself to:
A steam engine, boiler room, sauna.......what?

[igetcha]

ive got a Gimp outfit....any good? lol

[markm]

If that's what floats it for you, might be hard to get the TV interested before it gets dark, the watershed an all.

[matt1988]

Interesting Scott, and I can fully see your thinking, and yes about the meetings, that shouldnt be happening. However I will add that, ECITA have their own agenda for e-cigerettes, and the majority of their members sell cig-look-alikes, and if push come to shove, they would happily settle for only pre-filled cartos being available to sell, and as we know there are many many vapourers that don't use these, and will therefore be pretty useless to them.

I do think ECCA's primary issue should be the impending EU classification on e-cigerettes and/or the TPD. But of course those are my thoughts and not the majority of the consumer base (which ECCA are representing).

[vereybowring]

If passion drives you, let reason hold the reins. -
Benjamin Franklin

I was unfamiliar with Ged (itsmeitis) before this since while a member of ECR I have not been there very much.
Thanks Scott for your input and I have also been over looking at ECR so I can attempt to make my own judgement.

I agree in some ways a consumer group needs passionate leadership who will stand for us, however they also need to cultivate respect and authority and not just come across as ranting troublemakers who just argue. If passion goes too far anyone in authority will dismiss you as such and your enemies will use it against you.
As it stood at the end of the meeting I have lost respect for Roly who should not have behaved as he did, but similarly Ged would not have got my vote as he came across badly.

Passions ran too high last night and sensible debate left quite early on.
Hopefully a rescheduled meeting will have better decorum and participants can keep control of themselves.

[giles]

Thanks for the info about Ged Scott. Useful to know.

I don't agree with you at all about leaving the politics to ECITA though - I think the reverse - I don't feel in any great need of protection from suppliers and I feel in great need of protection from politicians.

I don't believe ECITA can be relied on to represent our interests at the EU and elsewhere. Most of the suppliers we use aren't members. I suspect that most of the revenue of ECITA members comes from selling pre-filled cartridges. The current EU directive seems to me to point towards making it impossible to sell nicotine in anything other than pre-filled cartridges.

So far ECITA seem to have been making the right noises in Brussels, but we don't know what their final position will be.

The fact that it is a consumer association seems to me to make protection of consumers from adverse legislation automatically part of its remit.

There's no point in a consumer association if the consumers have been legislated out of existence, and we would be crazy to expect the likes of E-lites to represent our interests.

[igetcha]

But is that a consumer associations objective or should that be something a whole new e-cig political setup should be dealing with?

Yes, a ban etc would obviously concern consumers, but my definition of a consumer association is an organisation that deals with consumer rights rather than political agendas

The political side of things has always been ECCA's main focus so why not just change the name to avoid all this fuss and confusion. Probably the biggest issue of ECCA is that they want to follow the political route whilst allowing many people to believe that they are a consumer association (because people have a very different view as to what a consumer association represents)......change the name, remove the connection, eliminate the confusion

[matt1988]

I understand your points, but I am sure ECCA would like to fight on both counts, political and consumer issues. But unfortunatley they don't have the man power or rescources to do this. So they have to prioritise, and at the moment the biggest consumer issue right now is the impending reclassification.

Now if we get enough members to be able to fight both battles then we are in a win win situation. But I said, ECCA aren't in that position and are prioritising. If the legislation passes, there will be no need or ECCA as there would be no consumers.

[igetcha]

This confusion has been going on for 2 years with zero progress made and will just continue to hold back ECCA from what it is they are trying to achieve then

Seriously, this is like Groundhog Day......this exact scenario was being discussed 2 years ago! Lol

[giles]

igetcha I don't understand why you think a consumer association should only be concerned with those rights of consumers which relate to suppliers.

The EU is trying to remove our right to vape altogether.

I would think that most consumer organisations would expect to be consulted over any legislative change which made a major difference to their consumers. I am appalled that ECCA was not represented at the recent Brussels discussions.

Having two organisations would be an unnecessary confusion both to the consumers and to the politicians.

[matt1988]

Apr 15, 2013 12:40:59 GMT igetcha said:

This confusion has been going on for 2 years with zero progress made and will just continue to hold back ECCA from what it is they are trying to achieve then

Seriously, this is like Groundhog Day......this exact scenario was being discussed 2 years ago! Lol

Ok, so you would like us to pull away from the political side, and focus on consumer issues. While we do that, ECITA focuses on working for their members benefits and hopefully won't stab the vaping world in the back.

How about this then, I know it was mentioned in the meeting, and ECCA seem to be waiting for another trade group to come up, but I think we should work with ECITA more than we are. But fundamentaly they will be focusing on getting the best possible outcome for their members that pay £600 pcm.

Which I don't personally feel we can afford to leave ECITA to deal with the politcal side of e-cigs. But if ECCA are really struggling for members, how would a new body find members?

Don't get me wrong, and I totally agree with your points, and I'm sure once the EU ruling gets overturned ECCA can start to focus itself towards consumer issues, which it was originally set up to do.