EU Planning to re-allow the sales of snus in 2014 !

[ESjonne]

Hello forum!

I read some happy news from the internet that EU are planning to re-allow snus! What i've heard that the decision would be made in 2013 and each countries goverment would vote for the acceptance.
They are reasoning it like this: "Since health consequences of snus are 60/90/99 % smaller than consequences of smoking and snus is more effective than medical products made for quitting smoking." (translated poorly from finnish, sorry )
Of course it would mean that the price of snus would be pretty high in EU since the taxes but it would be a lot easier to buy it from local stores.
Opinions?

By the way got the information from Finnish version of v2 tobaccos site (http://fi.v2tobacco.com) and some other Finnish sites about snus!

[Fazer]

You're talking about the tobacco directive in 2014 ... Don't Hold Your Breath ... Pink Pigs Might Fly First

[Skell18]

I have my fingers crossed in hope!

[pris]

Don't hold your breath mate. It's all about taxes, cigarretes and big pharama :-/

I have my fingers crossed in hope!

[Skell18]

Don't hold your breath mate. It's all about taxes, cigarretes and big pharama :-/

I know but it being legal means we can then buy the full range from northerner etc, if its treated like snuff then we have no fear here in the UK where tax is concerned (snuff isn;t taxed only VAT )

[Frosted]

Snuff isn't taxed due to the health benefits. Hopefully snus will be the same.

But pigs do fly - Martin McGuinness is going to shake hands with the Queen.

[Skell18]

Snuff isn't taxed due to the health benefits. Hopefully snus will be the same.

But pigs do fly - Martin McGuinness is going to shake hands with the Queen.

If that can happen then I live in hope for snus. Snuff isn't taxed as there is no study that proves it can cause cancer of any form, chewing tobacco can yet still isn't taxed as its not that bad, snus falls into that category so again I live in hope!

[Fazer]

Its not going to happen, like pris says, "It's all about taxes, cigarretes and big pharama". Governments don't give a flying F**K if you die from smoking related diseases, or have side effects from pharmaceutical drugs like NRT. Snus doesn't generate enough income for them. Big pharmaceutical and cigarette companies are buying the policy change to keep them in business and keep the cash coming in for governments

[Fazer]

Snuff isn't taxed due to the health benefits. Hopefully snus will be the same.

But pigs do fly - Martin McGuinness is going to shake hands with the Queen.

I said "PINK" pigs

[ESjonne]

Well, it happens or not i'm happy with current laws since i live only 100 kilometers from the border of sweden where the snus is dead cheap ;p

[Jean]

Many decision-makers don't want snus to be legal in the EU. In theory, they could get their way.
Problem is, in order to keep the ban in place, they had to voluntarily ignore a lot of information about the health effects of snus, so that keeping the ban has become a bit dangerous from a legal standpoint. C. Snowdon shows very clearly in "The Art of Suppression" how the Commission edited a report about snus. More recently they got in trouble with the consultation about the coming directive.
So basically, they acted about the same way as tobacco companies during the 70's. Since non-use of snus means use of cigarettes for a lot of people, their behaviour could be attacked on similar basis in the future.
So I suppose they may be considering that possibility, but it's only a supposition.

Another notable aspect of all this is how opaque the whole process is. You can run as many google searches as you want, it's almost impossible to find out what is going on with this directive. Absolutely everything seems to be kept from the public's eye, which tells a lot about the democratic character of the EU. So that's all suppositions.

I'd like to see the article.

[jagmanss]

Its not going to happen, like pris says, "It's all about taxes, cigarretes and big pharama". Governments don't give a flying F**K if you die from smoking related diseases, or have side effects from pharmaceutical drugs like NRT. Snus doesn't generate enough income for them. Big pharmaceutical and cigarette companies are buying the policy change to keep them in business and keep the cash coming in for governments

This is a really good point here.... The thing here guys is that the same thing is happening here in the US except they are doing it one State at a time here and being very sneeky about it instead of a full out ban on snus, Here in the US they don't want to bring attention to an alternative to smoking.... And the same is true here in the US...

"It's all about taxes, cigarretes and big pharama". Governments don't give a flying F**K if you die from smoking related diseases, or have side effects from pharmaceutical drugs like NRT. Snus doesn't generate enough income for them.

Our Government here in the US is just being sneeky about it so as not to bring attention to a safe way to stop smoking....

[Skell18]

If its cheaper than ciggys, and available here, I don't give a **** what they do, just as long as I can buy snus here or at least have whatever brand I want delivered.

[Mordred]

Problem is, in order to keep the ban in place, they had to voluntarily ignore a lot of information about the health effects of snus, so that keeping the ban has become a bit dangerous from a legal standpoint.

Bah, they've been doing that for the past 20 years, why stop now?

[Jean]

Bah, they've been doing that for the past 20 years, why stop now?

Maybe it started to get noticed a bit too much.
The ban was confirmed in 2004 by the European court based on a documentation that was more limited as it is now.
For the directive revision process, they have to make decision based on a much more compelling documentation. If they voluntarily disregard the pro-snus evidence, they may be accused of deliberately exposing the public to smoking-related disease. If I was in their place, I would certainly take that risk into account, and if I was a Swedish government official or a SM lawyer, I suppose I would raise the question one way or another.
What makes me think something like that may be going on is the fact that there is absolutely no information circulating about the revision process regarding snus. Legal threats are more effective when they are made discreetly, so I wouldn't be surprised if something like that was going on.
But that is pure guess.