Brussels, 21/06/2013 (Agence Europe) - The Health Council, meeting in Luxembourg on Friday 21 June, had no difficulty in agreeing a general approach on a revised draft EU tobacco directive.
There was much at stake as, without an agreement, the directive could not have been adopted under the current legislature of the European Parliament, which would have meant that entry into force of updated and stricter legislation would have been deferred till an even later date. Discussions with the European Parliament may now begin under the Lithuanian Presidency of the EU Council with a view to likely adoption of the new directive by May 2014. If all goes well, this should take effect within three to three and a half years.
European Health Commissioner Tonio Borg welcomed the attitude taken by the member states, which managed to override national interests to reach consensus. “Today”, the commissioner said, “health ministers have managed to look clearly to the future without taking account of elements other than health”. He nonetheless denied that the directive would have an adverse effect on certain economic sectors, the objective set being to reduce the number of smokers by 2% over five years (i.e. 2.4 million smokers fewer each year).
Four member states in particular found it extremely difficult to accept the compromise drafted by the Irish Presidency upstream of the meeting, as they felt the proposals were over-restrictive. Those countries were Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic, which have considerable revenue from the production, marketing and sale of tobacco products. Other member states (Belgium, France, Finland, the Netherlands and Luxembourg) wanted, on the other hand, to go still further but, in a desire for consensus, they agreed to the compromise put forward. Sweden repeated that “snus” (smokeless, chewing tobacco) would continue to be marketed in Sweden (only).
After the public discussion, five member states blocked the compromise proposed by the Irish Presidency: Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Denmark. The latter had still questions that it wished to raise on the subject of menthol cigarettes, flavours in tobacco products without combustion, delegated acts, stickers for advertisements and the maximum authorised content in tobacco pouches. The Irish minister for health, James Reilly, said after the first round-the-table discussion that they must act in their capacity as health ministers and not as ministers for the economy which must defend the interests of tobacco producers. Reilly asked whether they should meet the expectations of the tobacco industry or those of the people, adding that they must not jeopardise their children's interests. His comment was shared by Borg who argued that they were not there to protect the tobacco sector but to bring down the number of smokers within the EU. Economic interests should not be a part of these discussions, he said.
The initial compromise text from the Presidency proposed four clauses: 1) reduce from 75% to 70% the surface dedicated to combined warnkings (text plus picture); 2) give up, for now, banning slim cigarettes and ask the Commission to report on market developments for this kind of cigarette; 3) ban additives that give cigarettes a characteristic flavour or which increase addiction or toxicity; and 4) invite the Commission to establish a positive list of ingredients that enter into the composition of tobacco products. After bilateral talks and the final proposals from the Irish Presidency, member states were able to agree on a reduction to 65% for warnings on cigarette packets. This compromise, however, does not extend to the pictograms and it will be necessary to return to this later, the commissioner said. On the subject of characteristic flavours, the spirit of the text proposed by the Commission remains the same (tobacco must have the taste of tobacco) and flavours remain banned other than for certain niche markets. Such markets only account for 0.3% of total EU production, the commissioner said. In addition to pictograms, discussions should still continue on neutral packaging, and on electronic cigarettes (and the threshold of nicotine authorised in those products).
It is now up to the European Parliament to take a stance. The relevant committees will do this on 10 July and the EP will vote in plenary in September. The agriculture committee rejected in a non-binding opinion (adopted on 19 June) the ban on “slim” or menthol cigarettes in the EU, but agreed to the ban on cross-border and online sales of tobacco products. The committee considers that the new rules proposed by the Commission must not bring about a decline in the tobacco crop sector in the EU. The committee on agriculture considers that health warnings should cover 50% of the surface of both sides of the package (and not 75% as the Commission suggested). The Commission is requested to establish a list of additives that are not essential to the manufacture of tobacco products. For oral tobacco (“snus”), the committee rejects the proposal aimed at keeping the ban in place. It considers that the use of snus must be regulated at national level rather than prohibited. (IL/transl.jl)