Department Of Health: E-Cigs Are Not A Tobacco Product With parliament just back from recess, Monmouth MP David Davies is out of the blocks sharpish with a written question whose reply raises questions of its own (emphases mine).
David Davies (Monmouth, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his policy is on the definition of e-cigarettes as tobacco products under the terms of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
Jane Ellison (The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health; Battersea, Conservative)
Electronic cigarettes are not defined as tobacco products under the World Health Organisation (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The regulation of e-cigarettes, is however, scheduled for discussion at the sixth session of the Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control on 13–18 October 2014.
It would appear to be an extremely well worded question from Davies (whose stance on e-cigs I have no clue) which winkles out a fundamental aspect all but forgotten in the debate over EU and WHO pronouncements on e-cigs.
E-cigs are – Jane Ellison confirms – not defined as a tobacco product under the terms of the WHO FCTC which was ratified by the UK government, neither was it defined as a tobacco product when any other of the 160+ countries ratified it. So anything they demand for e-cigs should be ignored entirely.
In fact, the WHO shouldn’t – by its own rules – even be discussing e-cigs until such time as all governments involved have agreed that they should be allowed to.
For a coalition government – led by Conservatives who claim that they want to tackle red tape, intrusions on liberty and unnecessary state interference, and supported by Lib Dems who claim to be supportive of e-cigs – this should be a slam dunk. They can simply tell the WHO that e-cigs are none of their business; that they aren’t defined as tobacco products in the document the UK signed; and that the delegates can wibble on about e-cigs in Moscow as much as they like but nothing they say will apply in the UK.
They won’t, of course, but that’s why politicians of the old parties are widely ridiculed and despised, and why the electorate of Clacton will be returning the first UKIP MP next month. Just sayin’.
Still, the UK will also be represented by a group who purport to being in favour of e-cigs – they’ll most certainly tell the WHO to butt out, won’t they?
@Olddodderer Our CEO will be attending. I’m sure other will too @DHgovuk @PHE_uk
— ASH (@ASH_LDN) September 1, 2014
I won’t hold my breath.
Discover more from The Libertarian Alliance
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Related posts:
The Health and Morality of Coffee with Spices
Why Coffee Is Good for Your Health: History, Evidence, and the Case for a Morning Cup
How should government behave towards the governed?
The Foundations for a Better World
The Case of the Missing Cost-Benefit Analysis
The UN Sustainable Development Goals
Where We Are Today
The Politically Rich versus the Politically Poor
The “Climate and Nature Emergency” Hydra
Powered by YARPP.
Naturally there is a growing “ban e-cigs” movement here as well. Well, I mean, why allow any product (whether of man or Nature: I have seen “Ban Fluorine!”) or activity (swimming, skating, music-making, all physically or morally dangerous) when you can just as well ban it? Would you tell the truth when a lie would do?
Clearly there should be a presumption of guilt regarding all substances, just as regarding all humans.
However, for the perverse among us, I will say that the calls for Banning here have been based on the alleged fact that in fact e-cigs contain more nicotine than regular cigarettes, and thus are even more addictive than the latter.
[Personally, as one who successfully quit twice (resumed smoking 3 years after the first successful quitting, and didn’t miss it in that time; and I understand what happened, never mind) — as well as the usual several “tries” — I’ve never believed all that stuff about nicotine addiction. It seems to me one becomes psychologically, not physically, addicted to smoking.]