TPD vote: Europe has fallen - Big Money has triumphed

Discussion in 'EU Legislation' started by Anjaffm, Feb 26, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Anjaffm

    Anjaffm Dragon Lady

    Supporting member
    TPD vote in European Parliament 26 Feb 2014: Europe has fallen - Big Money has triumphed

    Several MEPs spoke up before the voting and were summarily silenced.

    Europe has fallen. Europe has given in to the greed of corrupt politicians, Big Tobacco and Big Pharma.
    Pharma MacAvan was seen grinning.

    Citizens are not important. Neither is the health of human beings.
    There is no "democracy". Talks of "democracy" are all a big lie, told to children, to keep them quiet.

    To those in the United States:
    Be afraid. Be very afraid. Your FDA is watching.

    And Europe has fallen.
  2. AgentAnia

    AgentAnia Vaping Master

    Supporting member
    I cannot "like" your post, Anja, but thank you for posting. I am so angry, on your behalf and yes, because the FDA is surely watching...

    I presume the EU Ecig Black Market Planning Committee will be meeting soon? :facepalm:
  3. low_tar_neil

    low_tar_neil Administrator Admin

    A sad day, but expected, this fight goes on.

    We have strength in numbers and we need to keep getting the word out!
  4. FourWinds

    FourWinds Super Member

    There'll be legal challenges. So many more vapers will be around by the time there's any attempt to implement anything that it will be real hard to do anything to stop the vaping tsunami I think. Business as usual for now; fill up your freezers; make friends for the future.

    Corruption on a genocidal scale.
  5. Anjaffm

    Anjaffm Dragon Lady

    Supporting member
    I agree.
    Here in Germany, we will all drink a little something tonight and then consider our approach on the national level.

    It is not .. nice .. to see, however, how little consideration those corrupt bureaucrats in the EU have for citizens, people, human beings.
    And even for the MEPs, the elected representatives of the people. Did you watch the voting? It was sickening.
    "Democracy" is all a lie. One big lie and story to keep children quiet. Quiet until they conveniently die.
  6. sebt

    sebt Senior Member

    Stand by for endless arguments from authority by the jubilant* ANTZ: "well the EU have heavily restricted e-cigarettes..... [hidden premise: the EU is any kind of competent authority]".

    *I was going to say "joyful", but that's just not something that should ever be written in the same sentence as ANTZ. The joyless, smug, control-freak, arrogant bastards.

    Let me know when the first meeting is, I'll clear my diary.
  7. tommy2bad

    tommy2bad Super Member

    Bad but not unexpected result. Theirs too many uninformed politicians and too much horse trading in politics.
    This is now EU law which means it mostly aspirational until member states pass their own laws implementing it.
    That's when it can be challenged in courts. It will have to be challenged in all states separately but if it fails in court at the first challenge it could go back to the EU,depending on the grounds.

    It will be two years before it's mandatory to have it as member state law but I have a feeling that some won't wait that long, this could end up in court before the end of the year. One thing is certain, it will stall medical regulation for a long time as the old 'no regulations' argument is now dust. Med regs are now going to be voluntary.
  8. AgentAnia

    AgentAnia Vaping Master

    Supporting member
    I wonder if any of those 478 MEPs plus assorted "jubilant" ANTZ realize just how ANGRY they've made us, and just how many ANGRY usses there are....
  9. tommy2bad

    tommy2bad Super Member

    Well the irony would be that they claimed that the EU was going to pass lax regulation before this. Yep, I think what the EU have done is going to be a template for the US and eventually the rest. FDA might wait to see how it plays out in law but I suspect they will want to support this by adopting similar regulation. After all they both are getting their advice from the same sources.
  10. SPACKlick

    SPACKlick Senior Member Verified Member

    Google fu is failing me, can someone link me to the contents/effects of the legislation passed?
  11. AgentAnia

    AgentAnia Vaping Master

    Supporting member
  12. sebt

    sebt Senior Member

    Clive Bates is yer man on this subject: MEPs – do you really want to vote for this? « The counterfactual

    That's a kind of executive summary, with only the most hideously nonsensical parts of the TPD emphasised. Look back through his blog history to find more detail on this *&$£(*&!~~#?(*"£!!! piece of legislation than you'll ever want to know. But it's important to know this stuff, if you want to go on vaping.

    Scientists have identified a new shocking risk to health for users of e-cigarettes. Using the controversial devices exposes users to deadly doses of moralistic verbiage, quasi-legal self-contradictory pigswill, bad science, invented science, lies, obfuscation, weapons-grade carcinogenic rhetoric and mutagenic wittering. "Vapers" also risk exposure to levels of infuriating smugness at least 5000% in excess of OSHA limits. "In the end your brain shuts down and you cease to believe the world actually makes any sense at all", said one e-cig user who preferred to remain anonymous.
  13. SPACKlick

    SPACKlick Senior Member Verified Member

    But it's making all e-cigs the same strength you remove my ability to titrate my nicotine levels. Also, by my reading of that summary, it all only applies to nicotine containing devices. So a 0-nic e-cig is not subject to any of those rules, right?
  14. AgentAnia

    AgentAnia Vaping Master

    Supporting member
    Self-congratulatory gloats being tweeted now by EU ANTZ. Disgusting. Shameful.
  15. Anjaffm

    Anjaffm Dragon Lady

    Supporting member
    He has put this very well indeed
  16. makeyourself

    makeyourself Full Member

    Here's a comprehensive list: link
    There might be a summary somewhere on Clive Bate's web site if you have a look
  17. Anjaffm

    Anjaffm Dragon Lady

    Supporting member
    they cannot ban 0 mg ecig liquid. BUT - as much as I know - they can BAN any kind of e-cig DEVICE. Which will then give you nothing were you can use 0 mg ecig liquid. Except for the junk made by BT. And BT will make darn sure that its cigalikes are proprietary and non-refillable.
  18. SPACKlick

    SPACKlick Senior Member Verified Member

    hmm, unless I'm missing some over-arching definition of Electronic cigarette here, an Electronic Cigarette onlyexists if it has nicotine in it. A Battery, Tube, Atomiser and Tank are only e-cigs if they have nicotine in them. Trying to find the relevant definitions now. The law, from the reports I have now found, is fan-drafting-error-tastic for little things which mean not what they should.

    Ok, found it, all devices that are capable are e-cigs, it's the refill containers that do not count unless they have nicotine in. Although note. An e-cig designed for nasal use is not covered by the policy, so we could all just switch, right? :facepalm:
  19. sebt

    sebt Senior Member

    That was actually my take on what it must feel like to be Clive Bates reading through all this EU crap - rather than his actual words!

    (it's bad enough just being a grunt vaper - so this is a kind of appreciation of what Clive Bates has been doing for us!)

    Though I'm sure he's too polite to put it this way, I bet it's how he feels.... :evil:
  20. SmokeyJoe

    SmokeyJoe ECF Founder Senior Moderator Verified Member

    Having been closely involved in this for nearly 4 years now, the behavior of the EU lawmaking process has been utterly shocking.

    There is a monumental democratic deficit in the EU, and it's one we hoped we'd addressed as a community by lobbying MEPs and attempting to present the commission with good, robust scientific data.

    In the end, we were successful on the first count but the other two seats of power (the commission and the council) colluded to roll back most of the gains from the MEPs vote in the October vote.

    So, what had the most influence over this process?

    1. The history of the Tobacco industry and the successful spin created by Tobacco Control (and associated public health groups) which associated the e-cig industry with the tobacco industry. By the time we were able to persuade Public Health groups that this was a half (or quarter, even) truth, it was too late - council and commission had their positions set in stone.

    2. General ignorance about nicotine: this is a huge issue. The addictiveness and toxicity of pure nicotine has been greatly exaggerated over time, and this had led to it's notoriety becoming completely entrenched in public opinion and, by extension, political opinion.

    3. Ignorance of scientific data on e-cigarettes specifically. Children, gateways, safety; all the usual talking points for which there are no evidence have been given a starring role as a function of the (almost univerasally misapplied) Precautionary Principal.

    4. National governments - hard to know exactly what their motivations are, or where the influence comes from. In most cases, probably from tobacco control, but there is certainly a concern about tax revenues which was expressed openly by Italy. In any case, national governments were strongly opposed to ecigs. All lobbying efforts towards the UK government, for example, were met with almost universal dismissal.

    5. Lobbying. Although there was a paucity of lobbying from the pharma sector in the early part of the process, it stepped up at the point at which med regs were removed from article 18 (the October vote). They probably thought they had this one in the bag to begin with, but it's also worth bearing in mind that their lobbying resources are thinly spread currently because of the new rulings on clinical trials. Also, the tobacco industry was lobbying very strongly on other areas of the TPD, and their support for our position (broadly speaking) did not play favourably to us. One could almost suspect that this was done in the full knowledge that their support would be the strongest move they could make against us.

    In the end, scientists' were misrepresented. The commission and the "Rapporteur" (the MEP in charge of the process, Linda McAvan) chose their own sources and disregarded dissenting voices, smearing them as either 'unknowns' or as paid stooges. They were, of course, neither of these.

    I suppose the saddest part of all of this is that the vote itself was a total mess. Watching it online there was obvious confusion as to whether or not voting against article 18 would undermine the whole tpd which, if it were delayed now, would go to the next parliament. The fact is, very few MEPs cared sufficiently about e-cigs to risk the TPD being derailed. The real tragedy of this is that the commission's own estimate is that the TPD as a whole is likely to result in a 2% reduction in smoking prevalence (I.e. 2% of 28% of the adult european population) over 5 years. Year on year, this could not be measured to statistical significance. Compare this with an 8% decline in cigarette sales volume in France over the past year!

    And all of this doesn't even touch on the fact that the travesty of the 20 year ban on Snus never even surfaced as a serious point of debate. Tobacco harm reduction is clearly not on the agenda of the European parliament.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page