NEWS
objectives to reduce non-communicable
diseases. ‘E-cigarettes and other safer
nicotine products are part of the solution,
not part of the problem,’ they said.
Why does it matter if e-cigarettes are
treated the same way as tobacco
products? It matters a lot because it
would mean higher taxes, no advertising,
large health warnings etc, all of which
are intended to reduce attractiveness,
acceptability and accessibility. It would
stifle the incentive to innovate and
could see technological advances in
what is currently a rapidly growing
category come to grinding halt. Behind
Closed Doors
Contributing to the debate at COP or
even listening to the debate is easier
said than done. As already mentioned,
the public and media were not allowed
to observe discussions on e-cigarettes
or indeed much of the proceedings
at the last COP.
And what about vapers? Where do
they fit in this debate? There are
already millions of vapers in the UK
alone. Martin Cullip, spokesperson for
Freedom to Vape argues that they must
be allowed into the debate. He says: ‘It
would appear incongruous that there
is no facility whereby the FCTC would
allow representation by any of the 2.8
million vapers that Action on Smoking
and Health (ASH) have identified as
existing in the UK to contribute to the
debate in India.’
That the public and media were excluded
from FCTC COP proceedings is
completely at odds with the proceedings
34 ISSUE 07 VAPOUROUND MAGAZINE
of other UN meetings. Take for example,
the Sustainable Innovation Forum
(COP21) on climate change in Paris
this year. There were 3,000 accredited
journalists. Political and business
leaders participated, there was live
streaming and the event was
sponsored by business.
Take also the last COP (2015) of the
Framework Convention on Climate
Change (FCCC). Nearly 2000 NGOs
were granted observer status of which
41% were environmental NGOs, 14%
were business NGOs and 25% were
‘research and independent’ NGOs.
There were 479 NGO observers at
the FCCC COP- 6.
Contrast this with only 26 NGOs being
granted observer status for FCTC COP6.
None of these were business NGOs and
so business did not have a voice. And
neither did vapers!
The media were also conspicuous by
their absence. Drew Johnson of the
Washington Times said of
his experience:
“I joined dozens of other members of the
media from around the globe in Moscow
last October to cover a tobacco-control
meeting held by the U.N.’s public health
arm, the World Health Organization
(WHO). Journalists were told the
conference would be open to the media
– as it should have been, since the body
was discussing matters of public health,
international business regulations and
global tax law at great expense to the
global taxpayers who helped to fund
the event
Moments before discussions concerning
a controversial proposed international
tobacco tax began, however, journalists
– including me – were threatened and
physically removed from a meeting
room so we could not report on the
proceedings. The next day, the WHO
banned journalists from the conference
completely. Discussions proceeded in
secret, behind closed doors, with no
oversight and no accountability.”
He also said:
‘While a core function of the U.N. is to
promote and protect press freedom
worldwide, the United Nations is one of
the most serious threats to a free press
in the world today. The organization
blacklists journalists, bans reporters from
its events and tries to silence the media,
all while urging countries throughout the
world to embrace freedom of the
press.Simply put, the U.N. is
despicably hypocritical on the
issue of press freedom.’
But Cullip is hopeful that vapers, at
least those in the UK, can depend on
representation by ASH. He says: ‘ASH
will be present at COP7 and have often
emphasised that they are supportive
of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation
tool; vaping consumers will hope that
they make this support visible with the
backing of the UK’s Department of
Health representatives who should be
heeding the advice of their own public
health institutions.’