The EPRS says its mission is, “to provide Members of the European Parliament, and where appropriate parliamentary committees, with independent, objective and authoritative analysis of, and research on, policy issues relating to the European Union, in order to assist them in their parliamentary work.”
It explains the purpose of the Beating Cancer plan in its briefing(1): “The plan consists of 10 flagship initiatives and 32 supporting actions, to be rolled out over the coming years. Implementation will be monitored by means of a roadmap and progress indicators, and the Commission will establish an EU cancer plan implementation group. With a €4 billion budget, the plan will make use of all available funding instruments, including the new EU4Health programme, Horizon Europe, and the Digital Europe programme.”
Initially, The European Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (ETHRA) called the plan “perverse”(2), the World Vapers’ Alliance (WVA) said “the European Commission is allowing ideology to get in the way of science”(3), and The Independent European Vape Alliance (IEVA) said it needed “to consider all means available to reduce the burden of cancer related risk”(4).
The positive aspect of EPRS’ briefing is that it has included a snapshot of the negative feedback to balance the positive.
The Consumer Choice Centre, “a global consumer advocacy group, declares itself to be 'deeply concerned' by the Commission's decision to equate conventional smoking with vaping and introduce restrictions that 'don't stand up to scrutiny and disregard consumer choice'. The statement notes that, 'despite consistent calls from activist groups, including the CCC, and scientific evidence at hand, the Commission has chosen to pursue the path of paternalism as opposed to innovation and freedom'.”
