Disappointing response to EU vaping regulations petition

Readers will know that I'm not a huge fan of petitions.

Even those that attract hundreds of thousands of signatures are usually ignored by decision-makers and very few have any impact beyond highlighting the issue concerned.

That is not, in itself, a bad thing but expectations have to be managed.

I speak with experience having been been involved in several petitions myself.

The most successful was the Hands Off Our Packs petition against plain packaging of tobacco. In just 16 weeks we generated over 260,000 signatures that were submitted to the Department of Health in response to a consultation on plain packs.

In that instance I'm pretty sure the petition did have some effect on government because it took the DH almost eleven months (rather than the usual three) to publish its report on the consultation, following which the government kicked the idea to one side (albeit temporarily).

When David Cameron resuscitated the idea six months later we responded by launching a further petition that generated 95,000 signatures (and 50,000 letters) in just four weeks.

Ultimately they failed to prevent the introduction of plain packaging but we gave it our best shot and I don't think we could have done much more.

It's worth noting however how hard we had to work for those signatures. Very few were generated online. The overwhelming majority were collected via street canvassers in towns and cities up and down the country.

The only other petitions Forest has instigated were an online petition against the EU's Tobacco Products Directive (1600 signatures in ten days) and a petition to amend the smoking ban to allow designated smoking rooms (approx 5,000 signatures).

Neither made much impact although the latter – which was supported by TV chef Antony Worrall Thompson – did get a bit of press coverage.

Which brings me to a petition (closing date February 20, 2020) that sits, seemingly gathering dust, on the EU's European Citizens' Initiative website.

The ECI ('Design, Engage, Impact!') is described as a ‘unique way for you to help shape the EU by calling on the European Commission to propose new laws. Once an initiative has reached one million signatures, the Commission will decide on what action to take.'

Even across 28 (now 27) member states one million signatures is a tough target but the EU doesn't stop there because another stumbling block is the fact that for the Commission to even consider taking action the petition has to reach a set threshold of signatories in six or seven member states (based, presumably, on population size).

A year ago a campaign was launched called Vaping Is Not Tobacco. Supported by vaping companies and associations, it proposed a citizens' initiative entitled 'Let's demand smarter vaping regulation!' that called for vaping products to be taken out of the Tobacco Products Directive on the not unreasonable grounds that vaping products do not contain tobacco.

Sadly however, almost twelve months after it was registered as an ECI, fewer than 50,000 people have supported the initiative, far short of the one million required.

No member state has come even close to meeting the threshold for signatories. The initiative has been most successful in Germany which is currently responsible for 22,637 signatories, 31.44% of the 72,000 required.

The only other countries where the percentage of signatories in relation to the threshold is in double figures are Italy (21.47%) and Hungary (19.47%).

It's too late for UK citizens to sign the petition because the UK is no longer a member state. Nevertheless, vapers have had the best part of a year to support it yet the total number of UK signatories is a just 391 (0.71% of the UK threshold of 54,750).

I have several ideas why the initiative has failed to take off and I'd be happy to discuss them privately, but it's hugely disappointing.

Although the bar has been set very high (and there's no guarantee the EC will take action even if an ECI does meet the various thresholds), it's a difficult but not impossible task.

To date, of the 96 requests to register an initiative, 71 (including the vaping petition) have been registered by the EC, and five have been successful.

To be successful I would imagine that an ECI requires the support of a lot of organisations including companies, associations and consumer groups.

Unfortunately, when it comes to vaping, everyone seems to be fighting their own battles and I see little or no attempt to coordinate the type of campaign that might make a difference.

With a new Tobacco Products Directive (TPD3) coming down the track, the vaping lobby needs to get its act together. The 'Let's demand smarter vaping regulation!' initiative was a good idea but a wasted opportunity.

Update: I wasn't aware of this until today but when the government relaunched its e-petitions website in 2011 I was one of several people quoted on the BBC website (Will e-petitions bring in a new era of debate?):

Below: home page of Forest's No Thank EU campaign website

Comments

[Pat Nurse]

When Vaping petitions use anti smoking messages to push their cause, they turn away thousands of smokers who would help to fight their battle if it was not at the expense of our own.

Until they are prepared to fight for choice and not their own self interest, Vaping causes will never have a voice loud enough to make a difference while at the same time encouraging a healthy amount of enemies on both sides trying to undermine the negligible protest they make at present.

To win sme ground back, both smokers' organisations and vaping organisations must unite. Smokers are not the ones turning up their nose at the thought of such a potentially powerful union.

Ce Sera sera.