This is awesome

[4madcats]

Just a pity it's come to late for this round of the TPD, but hopefully it may still have some impact on UK MPs



Viscount Ridleys speech from the House of Lords e-cig debate

[giles]

Great speech.

[Brambles]

That is a must read, very well put argument.

[reefcat]

Very well said

[Deleted]

Brilliant....so pleased and well put...made my day

[Deleted]

Fantastic speech ... lets hope the Government doesn't turn a deaf ear to such a reasoned argument.

[Pezz]

Would love to hear the response this got from whoever was on the other side of the debate

[saphire]

That was a fantastic read, just a shame its a little late. I had to slow down my ereader so I didnt miss anything,

[barrynorton]

Unfortunately the effect of his position can be seen in the dismissive answer to his questions in Hansard:

Asked by Viscount Ridley

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency has spent on economic modelling of the price impact of medicinal regulation on consumption of e-cigarettes and tobacco products.[HL3230]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what forecast the Department of Health has made of the percentage change in (1) the average price, and (2) the level of consumption, of e-cigarettes, as a result of the introduction of medicinal regulation; and how they have derived those figures.[HL3231]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have made any estimate of the cost of building a manufacturing plant for e-cigarettes that is compliant with the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency's definition of good manufacturing practice; and, if so, what is that estimate.[HL3233]

I.e.:

Earl Howe: The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) published on its website an impact assessment (IA) on the regulation of nicotine containing products (NCPs), including electronic cigarettes, on 12 June 2013 which provided estimates of the costs associated with medicinal regulation of NCPs. A copy has been placed in the Library and is available at:

www.mhra.gov.uk/NCPs.

18 Nov 2013 : Column WA172

The IA was prepared by the MHRA and the cost of its production has not been calculated.

The IA does not estimate the cost of achieving Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP). Manufacturing in this sector is almost exclusively conducted outside the European Union and the IA makes the assumption that in the first instance, the foreign manufacturers would bear the costs of achieving GMP. The IA also makes the assumption that any production that might be established within the EU in the future would bear similar costs of achieving relevant manufacturing standards regardless of whether the unlicensed NCPs come into the scope of medicines regulations or not.

The IA makes the assumption that it is likely that manufacturers, EU marketing authorisation holders, and all other participants in the supply chain would seek to pass their incremental costs onto their buyers, and ultimately to consumers. The extent to which United Kingdom consumers would bear the incremental costs is unclear. Pricing of NCPs seems to be constrained at the upper bound by the pricing of tobacco products. The IA suggests that NCP consumers would be unlikely to suffer from substantial price increases if these products were regulated as medicines.

The intention of regulating NCPs under the medicines framework is to ensure that products which meet appropriate standards of safety, quality and efficacy are available to support reducing the harms of smoking to smokers and those around them. The value of the health gains associated with a single successful quit attempt is very substantial — the Department estimates it to be £74,000. The orders of magnitude of estimated compliance costs suggests that a policy of licensing e-cigarettes would have to create very few additional successful quit attempts for the benefits to justify its costs. It is estimated that implementing policies to reduce smoking prevalence by 1% per year for 10 years in the UK would prevent over 57,000 deaths in that period.

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldhansrd/text/131118w0002.htm



[My italics.]

In other words, the potential savings from smoking cessation are so great that we vapers should definitely pay up to the price of smoking cigarettes anyway. That would really help out Her Majesty's Government. Thanks.

[4madcats]

You can watch the debate here just need to FF to 16.00 for the e-cig stuff.

Parliament player

[toots]

Just watched it.


At last someone getting it right for a change, what a brilliant speech that was by the 3rd guy who stood up. I think he did a splendid job on putting our case forward. What he said just made sense, and I liked the bit about him stating the drop in percentage sales to the tobacco industry and about 'big pharma' interests and competition against their NRT products which haven't worked in 30 odd years - bravo Mr - we need people like him fighting for our e-cigs

[blakey]

And this is the thinking that we're up against

www.thevapersrest.co.uk/topic/945-chris-davies-trying-to-clear-up-some-of-the-tpd-confusion/

[toots]

Dec 18, 2013 20:01:33 GMT blakey said:

And this is the thinking that we're up against

www.thevapersrest.co.uk/topic/945-chris-davies-trying-to-clear-up-some-of-the-tpd-confusion/

[Fockskey]

A shame there was not a similar speech in the commons. Middle class non or ex smokers that just want to interfere with peoples lives. Many will vote for the regulations just because they can. Oh' and because they are draconian, arrogant and uneducated in the benefits of e-cigs.

[kibbster]

It was a brilliant speech and if it had come a week ago, a month ago or even a year ago we might not be staring down the abyss like we are today.

Still, he's another supporter and we desperately need those at the moment to overcome the utter contempt the majority of the MPs feel towards us.