Updates on Plenary

[ckc]

Yes 30mg nic but hopefully that is something that can be worked on. It had to be defeated as medical regs first so they can be moved on.

This is 169 + 170 so you need to scroll down.

www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+AMD+A7-2013-0276+169-170+DOC+PDF+V0//EN

[kibbster]

Exactly if 71 had passed we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

[barrynorton]

Oct 8, 2013 11:33:25 GMT ckc said:

This is 169 + 170 

Thank you. So 169 passed? (I really couldn't work out why anyone would be excited by 170, which merely documents the existing legislation into an annex)

[4madcats]

Oct 8, 2013 11:30:05 GMT barrynorton said:

Can anyone clarify which amendment imposes the 30mg restriction and whether the wording means we'll face a restriction in nicotine solutions for DIY?

This is the one your looking for with the ALDE amendments on the right, problem is all it does it give you the proposed outcome without explaining how it will be put into place.

www.scribd.com/doc/171395066/20130927-Alde-Draft-Am-New-on-E-cig



Edit - too blerdy slow again

[Sassy]

Oct 8, 2013 10:54:33 GMT kibbster said:

No to med regs and no to banning flavours

[barrynorton]

Oct 8, 2013 11:35:05 GMT kibbster said:

if 71 had passed we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

71? 71 rewords:

"The prohibition of
the sale of oral tobacco should be
maintained in order to prevent the
introduction to the internal market of a
product that is addictive, has adverse
health effects and is attractive to young
people."

to:

"Upholds the ban on
tobacco products for oral use, however,
such a ban should not affect historically
traditional tobacco products for oral use,
which may be allowed by individual
Member States."

[barrynorton]

Oct 8, 2013 11:40:37 GMT 4madcats said:

Oct 8, 2013 11:30:05 GMT barrynorton said:

Can anyone clarify which amendment imposes the 30mg restriction and whether the wording means we'll face a restriction in nicotine solutions for DIY?

This is the one your looking for with the ALDE amendments on the right, problem is all it does it give you the proposed outcome without explaining how it will be put into place.

www.scribd.com/doc/171395066/20130927-Alde-Draft-Am-New-on-E-cig

Thanks again, so the wording is:

"nicotine containing products with a nicotine level exceeding 30 mg/ml are not placed on the market"

Whether or not we can continue to buy pharma-grade nicotine solution will now depend, as I opined last week, on the definition of 'product' (which I guess is scoped to the final version of the TPD).

[4madcats]

Oct 8, 2013 11:41:00 GMT barrynorton said:

Oct 8, 2013 11:35:05 GMT kibbster said:

if 71 had passed we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

71? 71 rewords:

"The prohibition of
the sale of oral tobacco should be
maintained in order to prevent the
introduction to the internal market of a
product that is addictive, has adverse
health effects and is attractive to young
people."

to:

"Upholds the ban on
tobacco products for oral use, however,
such a ban should not affect historically
traditional tobacco products for oral use,
which may be allowed by individual
Member States."

I think they'er talking about the Swedish Snus

[kailey]

Yeah!!!

[barrynorton]

Oct 8, 2013 11:44:38 GMT 4madcats said:

I think they'er talking about the Swedish Snus

Me too. I think kibbster meant a different amendment. The press might confuse tobacco and 'nicotine-containing products', but the directive doesn't.

[kibbster]

Oct 8, 2013 11:41:00 GMT barrynorton said:

Oct 8, 2013 11:35:05 GMT kibbster said:

if 71 had passed we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

71? 71 rewords:

"The prohibition of
the sale of oral tobacco should be
maintained in order to prevent the
introduction to the internal market of a
product that is addictive, has adverse
health effects and is attractive to young
people."

to:

"Upholds the ban on
tobacco products for oral use, however,
such a ban should not affect historically
traditional tobacco products for oral use,
which may be allowed by individual
Member States."

I get thoroughly confused when I look to closely at EU documents so I'll leave it to someone more knowledgeable to figure it out than me

[4madcats]

"nicotine containing products with a nicotine level exceeding 30 mg/ml are not placed on the market"

Whether or not we can continue to buy pharma-grade nicotine solution will now depend, as I opined last week, on the definition of 'product' (which I guess is scoped to the final version of the TPD).

Now the devil will be in the detail, it depends how it's implemented by the UK, if they medicinalise anything over 30mg then I'm guessing that you will need some kind of license to buy it, but all speculation ATM

[barrynorton]

Leo on ECF also says 71 - maybe I'm confused (but I thought numbering was canonical and I got that from the EU's own official publications):

www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/eu-legislation/477711-8th-ocotober-2013-eu-rejected-ecigs-medecine.html

[barrynorton]

Oct 8, 2013 11:49:21 GMT 4madcats said:

Now the devil will be in the detail, it depends how it's implemented by the UK, if they medicinalise anything over 30mg then I'm guessing that you will need some kind of license to buy it, but all speculation ATM

I know what's going to be in my freezer in 2016...

[ckc]

Ammend 71 I think was this wording :-

1. Nicotine-containing products may only be placed on the market if they are authorised pursuant to Directive 2001/83/EC, taking into account the well-established use of nicotine.

So the ECF reads right.

www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A7-2013-0276&format=XML&language=EN#title1