Parliamentary Questions on Electronic Cigarettes

[freakindahouse]

At last, the MPs seem to be talking some sense... well some of them!

"
[h=1]Electronic Cigarettes
Health[/h]Diane Abbott (Hackney North and Stoke Newington, Labour)
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information his Department holds on the number of people who smoked electronic cigarettes in each of the last five years; what assessment his Department has made of the potential health effects compared to smoking; and what requirements govern the smoking of electronic cigarettes in enclosed public places.


Simon Burns (Minister of State (Health), Health; Chelmsford, Conservative)
Available data from a recent (2012) survey carried out by Action on Smoking and Health suggest that up to 650,000 smokers are currently using electronic cigarettes, with perhaps as many as 2,000,000 United Kingdom smokers having tried them on at least one occasion.
Electronic cigarettes are caught by the provisions of the General Product Safety Directive and associated regulations. Some electronic cigarettes have been tested by local authority trading standards departments and have been found to pose a potential danger to consumers. The available data suggest that there can be great variability in the content of electronic cigarettes, both in the amount of nicotine present and also in relation to other potentially toxic substances.
Electronic cigarettes are not currently regulated as medicines, which are required to meet appropriate standards of safety, quality and efficacy. In March 2011, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) published the outcome of a public consultation on whether to bring all nicotine containing products within the medicines licensing regime. The response to consultation suggested there was strong support for MHRA regulation. The response to consultation also highlighted the need for further information to inform a decision and the MHRA is coordinating further scientific and market research with a view to a final decision on the application of medicines regulation in spring 2013.
The smoke-free legislation governing smoking in public places applies to tobacco or other lit products. If an e-cigarette does not involve combustion, smoke-free legislation is not applicable."

Electronic Cigarettes: 10 Jul 2012: Hansard Written Answers and Statements - TheyWorkForYou

So far, not really so great, since there are still glaring inaccuracies in the response above, but it gets better here, in another parliamentary question and response:

"

[h=1]Electronic Cigarettes: Trading Standards
Business, Innovation and Skills[/h]Tracey Crouch (Chatham and Aylesford, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills pursuant to the answer of 13 June 2012, Official Report, column 511W, on electronic cigarettes, if he will consider issuing guidance to local trading standards officers on the sale of electronic cigarettes and the evidence of illegal sales from other markets such as China.


Norman Lamb (Assistant Whip, House of Commons; North Norfolk, Liberal Democrat)
BIS has recently established a Product Safety Focus Group with regional representatives of Trading Standards product safety groups. This group of safety experts share information on current trends in the market and on product safety concerns. We are aware that e-cigarettes are a concern to some local authorities and that Trading Standards have also been working with the industry association to develop an industry code of practice. Should Trading Standards need additional guidance on a particular product such as e-cigarettes then we have established a mechanism to facilitate this."

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2012-06-21a.112822.h&s=electronic+cigarettes


Now there are a couple of particularly interesting points about these parliamentary questions. Firstly, notice which departments ask and answer. Then notice the differences in emphasis.

Happy vaping, one and all,

Katherine Devlin
ECITA (EU) Ltd

 

[freakindahouse]

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-statement-totally-wicked-16.html#post6648123

From this thread, I checked out Chris's blog on ECCA, which is excellent as always. However, one small point: I reckon the "testing by local authorities" relates all the way back to LACORS getting its maths wrong in 2009!!! (Remember that debacle?!) For those who don't know, at that time, Trading Standards (then headed by LACORS) tested some ecigs for nicotine content, then published a press release stating that the cartridge they tested (holding approx 1.1ml of eliquid) contained 20% nicotine!!! Out by a factor of ten!

Keep up the good work, ECCA!

Katherine Devlin

 

[rolygate]

Thanks Katherine.

As you say the DBIS is on the ball and supportive. The DoH (aka pharma's government sockpuppets) are, as can be expected, whiny, negative, and all but condemnatory. As negative as a government department can be, without divulging the fact they work to someone else's commercial agenda.

Good point about the nicotine variability question. I'll adjust the blog to point out that a government agency's incompetence was probably the source of the nic strength issue.

 

[freakindahouse]

It's entirely possible that they are STILL unable to do GCSE level maths, Roly, so you may well be right, but I'd thought I'd just drop in the reminder....

The DoH was NEVER going to get this right. As you have frequently said (so eloquently!), they are simply too conflicted. However, despite what the MHRA told us, they are NOT the whole government, and clearly other departments (with entirely separate conflicts which need not affect us) are able to see the issues a little more clearly.

We shall continue to work with Trading Standards across the UK, and hopefully there will continue to be good progress. Fortunately, the various activities of the various groups can achieve great things. We may yet win!

 

[Tetsab]

May I just suggest that worse things could happen than for both Katherine and Roly to contact each of the MPs who have expressed an interest in this subject? Either of you could provide these people with far more informative answers than they have been given so far.

At the very least, Ms Abbott could be provided with the useful nugget that as electronic cigarettes are NOT medical devices it is very questionable to be taking information from the MHRA at all - and even pointed in the direction of the slapping they received over their "efforts" with regard to consultation from the oversight group whose name now eludes me.

Are either of you aware of what "evidence of illegal sales" the Member for Chatham & Aylesford may be alluding to? I was under the impression there is nothing whatsoever to prevent me from ordering direct from China if I wish to do so. If there is, they'd better think about closing down eBay next week!!

 

[freakindahouse]

We shall certainly be doing so, Tetsab, although of course I can't speak for Roly.

These parliamentary questions have put more impetus into our UK-based activities. We have been focussing more at the European level because the UK government was leaving it entirely in the hands of the DoH - the WRONG department, if all they are going to do is hand it to the MHRA!! (I think you'll find it was the Regulatory Policy Committee who rapped the MHRA's knuckles over their consultation. I blogged about it, available on the ECITA website if you're interested.) Fortunately, BIS IS now involved. They have not been willing to engage prior to this point - despite our efforts.

We'll keep you posted via our blog.

As for the "evidence of illegal sales", I imagine they are referring to the dodgy chargers recently seized in York, and/or to the National Measurement Office's recent activities in removing non-RoHS compliant products from the market place. These are indeed illegal sales, and we are aware that they have been particularly active in enforcing this.

There is a huge difference in regulatory law concerning personal purchases from overseas for personal use, and importing quantities of goods from outside the EU to sell to consumers within the EU. Crucially, the importer takes on the legal obligations of the manufacturer, so is required to ensure legal compliance. If you buy for your own use, you just have to caveat emptor.

I hope that helps, and thanks for your post.

Happy vaping,

Katherine