ECCA AGM 14th of april. Any requests?

[giles]

Crossed post.

Let me make myself clear - I think that talking about consumer rights vis-a-vis suppliers is just fiddling while Rome burns. I don't give a monkeys for what ECCA is trying to achieve other than protecting us from the politicians. I don't give a damn about any arguments that happened two years ago, and I really don't want to listen to any more argument about who is or isn't a vendor. And I think that most consumers would agree with me.

I think people join consumer associations when they think they have a serious problem, and they join because they expect the association to at least try to solve it. The serious problem here isn't the suppliers, it is the politicians.

[fred]

Apr 15, 2013 12:53:39 GMT giles said:

Crossed post.

Let me make myself clear - I think that talking about consumer rights vis-a-vis suppliers is just fiddling while Rome burns. I don't give a monkeys for what ECCA is trying to achieve other than protecting us from the politicians. I don't give a damn about any arguments that happened two years ago, and I really don't want to listen to any more argument about who is or isn't a vendor. And I think that most consumers would agree with me.

I think people join consumer associations when they think they have a serious problem, and they join because they expect the association to at least try to solve it. The serious problem here isn't the suppliers, it is the politicians.

Well said, giles.

Once we have sorted the politicians out, then, if there is a need, ECCA can sort out the suppliers.
If the politicians are not sorted, there will be no future need to sort the vendors.

[matt1988]

I fully agree giles but I do think there should be a line. And I think my comments on what is classed as a vendor is just the right side of the line.

Would you like a vendor as the chair of ECCA? This is why they need to determine what a vendor is.

Edit: But yes, its not like we are having E-lites Owner or Chairman on the comittee, and if it is only someone making e-juice on the side of their garage business, hardly a conflict of interest.

[igetcha]

For 2 years the exact same confusion has been going round in circles over and over again with regards to what a consumer association should represent. If that is not a sign that there is a quite blatant issue that needs addressing for ECCA to progress then I don't know what is!

And why 2 parties? Just let trading standards deal with consumer issues as usual and free up ECCA to concentrate solely on the politics

If they just openly state "our goal from this day forward is solely focused on the prevention of any possible bans" then everyone is on the same page, everyone knows what they are about and everyone will be able to move forward!

[matt1988]

Apr 15, 2013 13:03:17 GMT igetcha said:

For 2 years the exact same confusion has been going round in circles over and over again with regards to what a consumer association should represent. If that is not a sign that there is a quite blatant issue that needs addressing for ECCA to progress then I don't know what is!

And why 2 parties? Just let trading standards deal with consumer issues as usual and free up ECCA to concentrate solely on the politics

If they just openly state "our goal from this day forward is solely focused on the prevention of any possible bans" then everyone is on the same page, everyone knows what they are about and everyone will be able to move forward!

Hear Hear. So from this day forward, until the legislation is safe, ECCA shall concentrate 100% on the politcal side of vaping, to represent the consumer.

Done 

[MarkS]

Apr 15, 2013 12:07:23 GMT igetcha said:

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

You do make  fair and correct points about what a consumer organisation should be Scott, but ECCA find themselves in a pretty unique position in the sense that there are political proposals that threatens their very existence. I think any consumer group in their position would be raising a call to arms for their members to do as much as they possibly can to stop that from happening. I also think it would take priority in any consumer group.

I don't think the likes of Which would just stand by and let the trade body deal with it if there were proposals being tabled that would see all the products they normally assist their members with regulated to the point of uselessness or out of existence.

So whilst I do agree with you about what a consumer organisation should ultimately be, I don't think because of the current political concerns ECCA can be only just that alone right now.

Even ECITA have said time and again it us the consumer writing to MEP's and MP's and such that is making a big difference to the language being used in Brussels right now and I personally think that can only be magnified if we have a strong and united consumer body representing us too.

I've never personally ever used a consumer body to represent me in light of receiving bad service or product, although I know people do. I can complain with the best of them and normally resolve issues like that to my advantage myself. I don't need ECCA to write to trading standards, that is easily accomplished by just visiting TS's website.

I've no opinion on if Ged would be a good Chairman or not as of yet, but if it had been put to the vote last night it would have been a firm no, regardless of having read his threads on ECR and getting where he was coming from. He just never came across as the right man for the job for me when hearing him in person for the first time. Although has I said in my last post I was prepared to sleep on it due to the circumstances of which he had entered the meeting and the obvious frustrations that needed venting.

This isn't going to go down well with folk, but I think ECCA needs a strong leader, more or less a dictator who will not tolerate the pettiness of constantly revisiting past failures. Some one who will basically say this is the direction we are taking and if you don't like it, then either lump it or leave. Just stop bitching about it because posts on forums slagging off this that or the other does no one any favours and just devalues everything we all do.

I think that had a lot to do with what was going on in chat last night in the meeting. That people had come in with their minds firmly made up and showed no respect, not just to Sam or Chris (which may be understandable), but to other members of ECCA who were there to try and get things moving along and wanted to see real change, not just to disrupt proceedings.


Things do have to change and I hope they do and that credible candidates put themselves forward to take ECCA in the right direction, I just think that direction right now is a political one because the current situation makes it so.

[igetcha]

Apr 15, 2013 13:21:17 GMT MarkS said:

I've never personally ever used a consumer body to represent me in light of receiving bad service or product, although I know people do. I can complain with the best of them and normally resolve issues like that to my advantage myself. I don't need ECCA to write to trading standards, that is easily accomplished by just visiting TS's website.

precisely! and that applies to every single other person too!

that is the very reason why i am saying that they can eliminate all this fannying about by simply stating that from now on ECCA deals with the protection of electronic cigarettes rather than the consumer issues applicable to trading standards.......they should then just call themselves ECA (Electronic Cigarette Association) and end all these petty issues in one swift swoop

i bet if they done that so from now on everyone is extremely clear of their purpose and the consumer aspect causing disputes and confusion is eliminated then they will find people to be far more willing in coming forward to help / promote etc......simply because they will know that everyone is on the same page with the same goals

it also then would not matter one bit if a supplier was funding them or even if a supplier was sitting in the hot seat. but whilst it remains as a consumer association then the supplier issue will constantly be a topic for questioning......after all, how can you have a supplier funding a consumer association without there being a conflict of interests that will undoubtedly be dragged up over and over again


remove the consumer tag, switch to ECA, declare the mission statement to be about protection and then it wont matter about suppliers bank rolling them and everyone else can focus on the task in hand...if it doesnt change then we will still be discussing this in another 2 years time

[MarkS]

Cannot disagree about the supplier/vendor argument and this does seem to be the main bane of contention. That's why I think ECCA needs a strong leader who says this is how it is and that is it. no more discussion on the matter. Anyone who stands for a committee position has to declare any interest and if the members currently on the committee feel there maybe a conflict of interest then they dismiss the application. End of.

Also if any current serving committee member becomes an issue due to conflict of interest they are also dismissed from the committee. Deal with the problem when it arises rather than causing an issue out of something that may or may never arise. As it stands currently it just leaves everybody chasing their tails.

I can't agree about removing the consumer tag though, as in whatever direction it takes it's aims should be to act as a voice of the consumer whether that be product or politically based.

[igetcha]

but the "consumer" part is probably the main reason why there has been no progress over the past 2 years and endless discussions carried on over and over again about the exact same thing.....some say as a consumer association they should deal with issues related to trading standards and some say that they should concentrate on the politics. as long as there is "consumer association" in the title then this confusion and debate will continue and that is not doing anyone any good and serving zero purpose

Electronic Cigarette Vapers Association would probably have been more fitting in hindsight

[Jemima]

I agree with MarkS and igetcha. on the leadership points. It does need someone to take a strong grip of the controls and steer in the direction the members want it to go. The time we are in now is critical to our future use of e-cigs and cannot be squandered with petty arguments. On some counts I feel Itsmeitis may be to passionate and may go off half cocked to get the job done and Sam and Roly sometimes a little too procedure based, if we could get the 3 of them to put past issues aside and get along then they could turn out to be a force to be reckoned with. Itsmeitis could spur Sam and Roly into action a little more and they would be able to reign him in when needed and provide some experience of the last two years. Or it could all end in tears...

There's 3 top positions up for voting, Chair, Vice-Chair and Secretary. All 3 work closely with each other. Sam stated he has done his turn as Chair and would like to hand it over. The only other person who's hat went in the ring for it was Itsmeitis (or did I miss someone else in the arguing?). If a decision isn't made we end up with no chairman (ECCA folds) or a chairman who doesn't want the job (ECCA will be next to useless) or we wait, either way its not a win win for any of us. they just need to decide what is more important their ego's or ECCA. Once we have the leadership in place we can sort out the rest asap.

[matt1988]

Exactly Jemima and that is why we couldn't vote last night. You cant have someone who just rolls in and say I want to Chair. There would be so many non-voters that it would be void (with any luck) and it was wrong of Chris to try and force the voting on us, but instead should have said what MarkS did. But he was caught up in the moment.

This is a critical time to get things in motion. There are funds in the account to get moving, just need a leader to lead us.

[MarkS]

Apr 15, 2013 14:19:58 GMT igetcha said:

but the "consumer" part is probably the main reason why there has been no progress over the past 2 years and endless discussions carried on over and over again about the exact same thing.....some say as a consumer association they should deal with issues related to trading standards and some say that they should concentrate on the politics. as long as there is "consumer association" in the title then this confusion and debate will continue and that is not doing anyone any good and serving zero purpose

Electronic Cigarette Vapers Association would probably have been more fitting in hindsight

I'm not so sure and still maintain that if any consumer body found the consumers they represent under such a serious threat, they would be taking a political stance to protect them.

[matt1988]

Can I make a positive observation, this is the longest ECCA thread in this forum. Every cloud.

Any publicity is good publicity

[giles]

Apr 15, 2013 14:19:58 GMT igetcha said:

but the "consumer" part is probably the main reason why there has been no progress over the past 2 years and endless discussions carried on over and over again about the exact same thing.....some say as a consumer association they should deal with issues related to trading standards and some say that they should concentrate on the politics. as long as there is "consumer association" in the title then this confusion and debate will continue and that is not doing anyone any good and serving zero purpose

Electronic Cigarette Vapers Association would probably have been more fitting in hindsight

Don't agree. If the people had been good enough there would have been progress. You just say - OK, you want to do that, do it, we'll do this - and get on with it. Let the bureaucrats organise it into sub-committees and create committee titles if they want, but don't spend any time arguing over it.  Anybody who says it is wrong for anybody on the committee to get involved in the politics is clearly talking nonsense and should have been sidelined at day one and voted out at the first AGM. Same with trading standards as it goes - you want to do that, do it - but don't stop us using the organisation for politics too.

There is nothing confusing about the title "Consumer Association". You've allowed yourself to become confused by the fact that different people have different priorities.

Whatever the situation may have been two years ago, the current priorities are clear. If they are not clear to you, pose a question to ask the AGM.

[igetcha]

Sigh......