Decision Maker

European Commission


Does European Commission have the power to decide or influence something you want to change? Start a petition to this decision maker.Start a petition
Petitioning Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Parliament, Ban Ki-moon (Secretary-General of the United Nations), United Nations

Premio Nobel de la Paz para Jordi Sànchez y Jordi Cuixart

Jordi Sànchez y Jordi Cuixart fueron los primeros presos políticos encerrados por el procés de Catalunya. Fueron acusados de un supuesto delito de sedición y enviados a la cárcel de Soto del Real en octubre de 2017. Están en prisión por sus ideas políticas y por ejercer sus derechos de expresión y participación política sin haber usado jamás la violencia. Que estén privados de libertad precisamente por estas causas es una vulneración del derecho internacional. Por eso pedimos el Premio Nobel de la Paz para Jordi Sànchez y Jordi Cuixart. Firma aquí para que le den este reconocimiento a su labor por expresar la voluntad de un pueblo. Durante estos meses, los Jordis han permanecido en una prisión del Estado español y sus únicas vías de contacto con el mundo exterior son el correo postal y alguna visita ocasional. “Nuestras instituciones han recibido un ataque sin precedentes, pero la respuesta también lo está siendo: más serenos que nunca, más cívicos y pacíficos que nunca, pero con todo el coraje y la determinación”, dijo Jordi Cuixart poco después de su ingreso en prisión. Firma si tú también crees que ambos merecen el Premio Nobel de la Paz, que se otorga a personas que han contribuido notablemente a la sociedad. [English version]

Rita Bocca
148,999 supporters
Petitioning European Commission

Für ein EU-weites Verbot von Wildtieren im Zirkus

Am Ostermontag kam es in Spanien zu einem Verkehrsunfall mit fünf Zirkuselefanten. Der Unfall führte zum Tod eines Elefanten und zwei weitere wurden schwer verletzt. Nur durch Zufall wurden keine Menschen verletzt. Diese Tragödie hätte verhindert werden können - deshalb fordere ich ein Verbot des Einsatzes von Wildtieren in Zirkussen in der Europäischen Union. Aktuelle Berichte belegen schockierende Zwischenfälle mit der Bevölkerung und wilden Tieren in Zirkussen in ganz Europa. Nicht selten sind dabei  Zirkusunternehmen  und deren Tiere beteiligt, welche auf dem ganzen Kontinent unterwegs sind und so die Gesundheit sowie Sicherheit der europäischen Bürger gefährden. So ist in Spanien vor einigen Wochen bereits zum fünften Mal in Folge der Ausbruch eines Flußpferds dokumentiert worden. Die Elefanten, die bei dem jüngsten Unfall beteiligt waren, waren auf dem Weg zu ihrem nächsten Aufführungsort mit dem spanischen Circus Gottani. Die Tiere wurden vor Jahren illegal  aus Deutschland geschmuggelt und in der Folge u.a. durch Frankreich, Lettland, Litauen, Irland und schließlich Spanien transportiert. Die Familie, der die Elefanten gehören, ist in der Vergangenheit schon durch fahrlässiges Verhalten aufgefallen, welches zu mehreren Vorkommnissen geführt hat. Die große Mehrheit der EU-Mitgliedstaaten hat den Einsatz von Wildtieren in Zirkussen bereits verboten oder stark eingeschränkt. Die Europäische Tierärztevereinigung  hat die europäischen wie auch die zuständigen Behörden der Mitgliedsstaaten bereits aufgefordert, den Einsatz von Säugetieren wild lebender Arten in Wanderzirkussen zu verbieten. Auch ich fordere das Ende dieser Praxis. Es ist an der Zeit, dass die Europäische Union handelt. Nur so können die physischen und psychischen Leiden von Wildtieren in Zirkussen beendet und die damit verbundenen Risiken für die öffentliche Sicherheit verringert werden. Bitte unterschreiben und teilen.

Infocircos .org
668,136 supporters
Petitioning Karmenu Vella, European Commission, Antonio Tajani, Sergio Costa

Garantire il diritto alla riparabilità nel pacchetto sull'economia circolare in Europa

Per il Diritto alla Riparazione Rischiamo di perdere un’occasione unica per trasformare la nostra attuale economia “usa e getta”: c’è il rischio concreto che i paesi membri dell’Unione Europea diluiscano o votino contro alcune misure chiave del Pacchetto sull’Economia Circolare, che stipula prodotti più riparabili e più longevi. L’Italia e’ tra i paesi che stanno bloccando il voto. L’Italia deve pubblicamente cessare di opporsi al voto. Perché questo è fondamentale? Non c’è mai stata così tanta sensibilità tra la gente e così tanto supporto per la lotta contro gli sprechi, con la crisi della plastica nel mare e lo spreco alimentare che hanno visto una mobilizzazione di massa attraverso l’Europa e nel mondo durante quest’ultimo anno. E oltre il cibo e il packaging, il pubblico vuole che tutti i prodotti siano migliori. Un’inchiesta realizzata da Eurobarometer rivela che il 77% dei cittadini europei è a favore di prodotti più riparabili. **A livello globale, questo è l’anno in cui, secondo le stime, produrremo circa 50 milioni di tonnellate di rifiuti elettronici, l’equivalente di quasi 1000 Titanic** La Commissione Europea ha lavorato per anni sul Pacchetto sull’economia circolare con politiche per governare le risorse ed i rifiuti, che fissano obiettivi per il riciclo più ambiziosi e nuove misure che renderanno elettrodomestici e prodotti elettronici più riparabili e longevi garantendo: l’accesso ai pezzi di ricambio la documentazione per la riparazione la facilità di smontaggio Non sono solo gli euroscettici che stanno cercando di bloccare questi nuovi standard trasformativi. Fabbricanti e lobbisti al soldo delle multinazionali stanno lavorando dietro le quinte per far naufragare le misure più innovative e più pro-pianeta che siano mai state avanzate. É arrivato il momento per l’Italia di intervenire affinché l’Europa difenda gli interessi della maggioranza dei suoi cittadini. Come la grande maggioranza dei cittadini europei, anche noi in Italia siamo stanchi dell’obsolescenza prematura dei prodotti che compriamo. E l’anno scorso, il Parlamento Europeo ha preso posizione votando in favore di prodotti elettronici più riparabili. L’Italia deve sostenere il Diritto alla Riparazione, che allo stesso tempo aiuterà i nostri portafogli, e salverà il pianeta. Come sarà consegnata Se riusciamo a raccogliere un numero sufficiente di firme, consegneremo la petizione al governo italiano a Roma e alla delegazione italiana presso l’Unione Europea, a Bruxelles.

Restarters Milano-GiacimentiUrbani
79,277 supporters
Petitioning European Parliament, European Commission, Council of the European Union

Respect, promote and protect freedom of informed vaccination consent throughout Europe

Français  Italiano  Español  Deutsch  Polskie   Hrvatski  Português  Norsk  Slovene   Svenska  Magyar  Česky  Slovensky  Lietuviška. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states clearly: ‘Free and informed consent must be respected in the fields of medicine and biology’[1].   Approximately 40% of EU citizens[2] do not however have this basic right when faced with the medical act of vaccination.  This is a breach of our Universal Human Rights.  In 2011, the US Supreme Court ruled that vaccines are ‘unavoidably unsafe’[3], so mandatory vaccination as imposed on these citizens is not medically or ethically acceptable, especially where medical, religious or philosophical exemptions are not allowed. The EFVV (http://www.efvv.eu), a group representing some 20 European countries (both EU member states and non-EU members) is therefore demanding: 1.     That compulsory vaccination be abolished throughout Europe as it is a breach of our Universal Human Rights, 2.   That mandatory vaccination never be introduced in any country where vaccines are only recommended at present. 3.     That the Precautionary Principle be applied in the case of vaccination in Europe, 4.     That European citizens benefit from freedom of fully informed vaccination choice and consent, 5.     That an effective, independent European Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting (VAER) system be established to monitor vaccine safety. Whatever your own government’s policy, please unite by signing and then sharing this petition far and wide. In 2016, it is estimated that nearly 400 million Europeans in EU member countries enjoy freedom of informed vaccination choice but approximately 258 million do not [4].  Vaccinations are mandatory in Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia[5] and potentially other countries if new members, e.g. Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia or others join the European Union.  We therefore call on all Europeans to stand together in a demand for a united vaccination policy based on freedom of informed choice and consent.  We also demand the formation of an independent and effective vaccino-vigilance unit with transparency and public availability of results.  We believe that mandatory vaccination must be abolished and an effective Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting (VAER) system established because: Any involuntary or enforced medical treatment is a breach of:        o   the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights,       o   the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,       o   the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child,       o   the European Council’s Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine,       o   the European Charter of Patients’ Rights,       o   the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,        o   and even the Nuremberg Code (a set of research ethics principles for medical experimentation on humans set as a result of the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials at the end of the Second World War). In detail: The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states clearly: ‘Everyone has the right to respect for his or her physical and mental integrity’[6].  It also states: ‘Free and informed consent must be respected in the fields of medicine and biology’[7] and lastly: ‘The prohibition of eugenic practices and of making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain must be respected’[8].The European Council’s Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine states clearly: ‘The interests and welfare of the human being shall prevail over the sole interest of society or science’[9].  It also states: ‘An intervention in the health field may only be carried out after the person concerned has given free and informed consent to it.  This person shall beforehand be given appropriate information as to the purpose and nature of the intervention as well as on its consequences and risks.  The person concerned may freely withdraw consent at any time.’[10]The European Charter of Patients’ Rights states clearly: ‘Every individual has the right of access to all information that might enable him or her to actively participate in the decisions regarding his or her health; this information is a prerequisite for any procedure and treatment, including the participation in scientific research (4 – Right to Consent)[11]’.  It also states:  ‘Each individual has the right to freely choose from among different treatment procedures and providers on the basis of adequate information (5 – Right to Free Choice)’[12] and also ‘Each individual has the right to be free from harm caused by the poor functioning of health services, medical malpractice and errors, and the right of access to health services and treatments that meet high safety standards (9 – Right to Safety)’[13].The UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child states clearly: ‘Parents … have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern’[14].The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states clearly: ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes… freedom … to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance’[15].The Nuremberg Code states clearly: ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.’[16]Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), which would include Vaccine Adverse Effects (VAEs), are reported to be the fifth-leading cause of hospital death in the EU[17] but this could be even higher since there is gross under-reporting of these events, as acknowledged by David Kessler, head of the FDA during most of the 90s[18], and in the case of vaccines, failure to acknowledge a causal link is a further problem.The US Supreme Court has ruled that vaccines are ‘unavoidably unsafe’[19].According to the German Criminal Code [20], vaccination is an invasive medical act causing bodily harm and as such, it requires the informed consent of either the individual being vaccinated or his/her carers.  It has however been acknowledged officially that there are still enormous gaps in current scientific knowledge regarding vaccination, so the provision of full and comprehensive prior information is simply not possible.  Vaccine package inserts[21] list many possible adverse effects, sometimes including death.  As long as there is risk involved in a medical procedure, if safety cannot be guaranteed and if comprehensive prior information cannot be given, the Precautionary Principle must be applied.It has been shown in regions with freedom of informed vaccination choice that high WHO-recommended levels of vaccine uptake are achieved without mandatory vaccination [22].Each European country sees legal responsibility for vaccine damage differently but in the main, medical and political authorities as well as the vaccine manufacturers are not fully accountable, leaving victims with no compensation or support.No significant research has yet been done to compare the health of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children but there are an increasing number of studies suggesting that unvaccinated children enjoy far greater health than their vaccinated peers[23].  This is an area where further research is needed. Given all of the above, we demand: 1.  That mandatory vaccination be abolished in all European countries, 2.  That mandatory vaccination never be introduced in any country where vaccines are only recommended at present, 3.  That the Precautionary Principle be applied in the case of vaccination in Europe, 4.  That European citizens benefit from freedom of fully informed vaccination choice and consent, a universal human right, 5.  And that an independent vaccino-vigilance unit be established where Vaccine Adverse Effects (VAEs) will be reported and the number and severity of VAEs in Europe will be easily accessible to all.  Footnotes: [1] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9 [2] Calculated using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_population and http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V17N22/DAncona_tab1.jpg [3] Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 131 S. Ct. 1068, 179 L.Ed.2d 1 (2011), http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf [4] Calculated using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_population and http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V17N22/DAncona_tab1.jpg[5] http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V17N22/DAncona_tab1.jpg[6] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9[7] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9[8] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf, Article 3, page 9.[9] http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/164.htm, Article 2 – Primacy of the Human Being[10] http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/164.htm, Article 5 – General Rule[11]http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_overview/co_operation/mobility/docs/health_services_co108_en.pdf, page 5[12]http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_overview/co_operation/mobility/docs/health_services_co108_en.pdf, page 5[13]http://ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_overview/co_operation/mobility/docs/health_services_co108_en.pdf, page 6[14] http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx, Article 18[15] https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20999/volume-999-I-14668-English.pdf, Article 18, page 8.[16] http://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/nuremberg.pdf, Item 1, page 1[17] Arlett, Dr. Peter, Setting the Scene: New European Union Pharmacovigilance Legislation, November 2012, slide 6 - (http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Presentation/2013/01/WC500137839.pdf) and also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4412588/ [18] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16689555 [19] Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 131 S. Ct. 1068, 179 L.Ed.2d 1 (2011), http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf [20]http://www.impfkritik.de/upload/pdf/Koerperverletzung/Koerperverletzung-IfSG-Erdle.pdf: §§ 20-22 (§ 223 in the German Criminal Code)[21] http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm [22] For example, uptake is at 97% in Scotland: http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/Child-Health/publications/index.asp [23] http://www.vaxchoicevt.com/science/studies-comparing-vaccinated-to-unvaccinated-populations/, http://www.efi-online.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/VaccineFreeChildrenHealthier.pdf,  http://www.rescuepost.com/files/mawson-et-al-2017-vax-unvax-jnl-translational-science.pdf and  http://vaccineinjury.info/survey/comparison-of-the-state-of-health-of-unvaccinated-and-vaccinated-children.html

Secretary European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance (EFVV)
203,098 supporters
Petitioning European Commission, Council of the European Union, European Parliament

Act now to stop the EU vape tax

The European Commission is holding a public consultation into the taxation of tobacco and vaping products, ending on 3rd September (1). Consumer associations and tobacco harm reduction organizations are issuing an urgent call for mobilization. Answer the questionnaire >> Public consultation on excise duties applied to manufactured tobacco and the possible taxation of novel products. Vaping has enabled more than 7.5 million Europeans to stop smoking and helped a further 9 million to reduce their cigarette consumption (2). Sin taxes (excise duties) are not justifiable on consumer products which are not tobacco products and which are far less harmful to health than combustible tobacco. Any harmonization project should instead look to prohibiting the levy of excise duty on vaping products in the European Union. Vaping products do not contain tobacco and are not combustible. Vaping does not therefore produce smoke, carbon monoxide or tar, and vaping is at least 95% less harmful to health than smoking combustible cigarettes (3). Vaping products are not tobacco products and the users of vaping products should not have to suffer a punitive and unjustified tax. Taxation on vaping products ultimately protects smoking, as is shown by the effects in the population in countries which have already introduced a taxation: Italy, Portugal, Greece, Estonia and Hungary. The results in these countries show that punitive taxation would undermine the measures introduced by the European Tobacco Directive (TPD), which was designed to protect people’s health (4). In a recent similar consultation, in 2016, 89.88% of respondents rejected the suggestion of taxing vaping products. That should suffice! We call on those concerned about public health, those concerned about the right of access to reduced risk products, including for the most disadvantaged, and those who want the right to protect their own health, to respond to the Commission's public consultation on the taxation of tobacco products and vaping. The consultation is available in the various languages. We are accompanying this appeal with an online petition to defend the right of access to tax-free vaping throughout Europe. Acvoda (Netherlands)Aiduce (France)Anesvape (Spain)ANPVU (Italy)Cyprus Vaping Association (Cyprus)DADAFO (Denmark)IG-ED (Germany)Initiativ Fräien Damp Lëtzebuerg (Luxembourg)La vape du Coeur (France)NNA Suitsuvaba Eesti (Estonia)NNA Sweden (Sweden)NNA UK (United Kingdom)ÖDC (Austria)Sovape (France)UBV-BDB (Belgium)Villanypára Egyesület (Hungary) References: (1) Public consultation on excise duties applied to manufactured tobacco and the possible taxation of novel products : https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-excise-duties-applied-manufactured-tobacco- and-possible-taxation-novel-products_en(2) According to Eurobarometer 458, conducted in March 2017.(3) Nicotine without smoke, Royal College of Physicians UK, 2016(4) DIRECTIVE 2014/40/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and tobacco-related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC   DEUTSCH Nein zu einer „Tabaksteuer“ auf E-Dampfprodukte. Lasst uns die EU zur Vernunft bringen Die Europäische Kommission hält derzeit eine öffentliche Konsultation zum Thema Besteuerung von Tabak und E-Dampfprodukten ab, die am 3. September enden wird. Verbrauchervereinigungen und Organisationen zur Minimierung der Gesundheitsschäden durch Tabakgenuss („Harm Reduction“) rufen dringend rufen dringend dazu auf, ihre Mitglieder und Nutzer zu mobilisieren. Das E-Dampfen hat  inzwischen mehr als 7,5 Millionen Europäern ermöglicht, mit dem Rauchen aufzuhören und mehr als weiteren 9 Millionen geholfen, ihren Zigarettenkonsum zu reduzieren (2). Sündensteuern (Verbrauchsabgaben) sind keinesfalls für normale Konsumgüter zu rechtfertigen, die keine Tabakprodukte und obendrein noch weitaus weniger gesundheitsschädlich als verbrannter Tabak sind. . Eine harmonisierte neue Steuerrichtlinie sollte stattdessen danach trachten, die Erhebung von Verbrauchsteuern auf E-Dampfprodukte in der EU zu verbieten. E-Dampfprodukte enthalten keinen Tabak, und es wird nichts verbrannt(3). E-Dampfen erzeugt daher weder Rauch, noch Kohlenmonoxid oder Teer und es ist mindestens 95% weniger gesundheitsschädlich als konventionelle Zigaretten. E-Dampfprodukte sind normale Konsumgüter und keine Tabakprodukte, daher sollten die Nutzer nicht mit einer unberechtigten Steuer bestraft werden. Die Besteuerung von E-Dampfprodukten fördert letztendlich das Rauchen, wie die Effekte in Ländern zeigen, die bereits eine solche Maßnahme eingeführt haben: Italien, Portugal, Griechenland und Ungarn. Die Ergebnisse in diesen Ländern zeigen, dass Strafsteuern die Maßnahmen unterlaufen, die mit der Europäischen Tabakverordnung (TPD) zum Schutz der Volksgesundheit eingeführt wurden(4). In einer ähnlichen Konsultation in 2016 lehnten 89,88% der Befragten die Forderung nach einer Besteuerung von E-Dampfprodukten ab. Das sollte reichen! Wir fordern alle (Bürger und Organisationen) auf, die öffentliche Konsultation zur Besteuerung von Tabak und E-Dampfprodukten zu beantworten. Insbesondere diejenigen, die sich für: - die Verbesserung der öffentlichen Gesundheit - das Recht auf Zugang zu einem Produkt mit verringertem Risiko - das Recht die eigene Gesundheit zu schützen einsetzen. Die Konsultation liegt in mehreren Sprachen vor. Wir begleiten diesen Appell mit einer Onlinepetition, um das Recht auf Zugang zum steuerfreien E-Dampfen überall in Europa zu verteidigen. 1 Öffentliche Konsultation zu Verbrauchsteuern auf Tabakwaren und zur möglichen Besteuerung neuartiger Tabakerzeugnisse - https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-excise-duties-applied-manufactured-tobacco-and-possible-taxation-novel-products_de 2 Entsprechend dem Eurobarometer 458, durchgeführt im März 2017 3 Nikotin ohne Rauch, Royal College of Physicians UK, 2016 4 RICHTLINIE 2014/40/EU DES EUROPÄISCHEN PARLAMENTS UND DES RATES vom 3. April 2014 zur Angleichung der Rechts- und Verwaltungsvorschriften der Mitgliedstaaten über die Herstellung, die Aufmachung und den Verkauf von Tabakerzeugnissen und verwandten Erzeugnissen und zur Aufhebung der Richtlinie 2001/37/EG   EESTI Anna oma vastuhääl Euroopa Liidu veipimise maksule Euroopa Komisjon kuulutas kuni 3. septembrini välja avaliku konsultatsiooni tubakatoodete ja veipimistoodete maksustamise osas (1). Tarbijate organisatsioonid ja tubakakahjude vähendamise organisatsioonid kutsuvad üles reageerima. Veipimine on aidanud rohkem kui 7,5 miljonil eurooplasel loobuda suitsetamisest ning lisaks 9 miljonil eurooplasel vähendada sigarettide suitsetamist (2). Pahede maksustamine (aktsiiside näol) ei ole põhjendatud nende toodete puhul, mis ei ole tubakatooted ning mis on tervisele oluliselt vähem kahjulikumad kui põletatav tubakas. Euroopa Liidu ühtlustamise plaanid peaksid hoopis keelama aktsiisi kehtestamist veipimisele. Veipimiseks mõeldud tooted ei sisalda tubakat ning nendes ei põletata tubakat. Seetõttu ei teki veipimisel suitsu ning need tooted ei sisalda vingugaasi ega tõrva. Veipimine on vähemalt 95 protsenti vähem kahjulikum kui sigarettide suitsetamine (3). Veipimiseks mõeldud tooted ei ole tubakatooted ning nende kasutajad ei pea kannatama karistava ja põhjendamatu maksu pärast. Veipimise maksustamisega kaitstakse lõpuks suitsetamist nagu on näha riikides, kus veipimisele on kehtestatud maks: Itaalia, Portugal, Kreeka, Eesti ja Ungari. Tulemus on, et nendes riikides on karistava maksu tõttu läbi kukkumas Euroopa Tubakadirektiivi meetmed, mille eesmärgiks oli kaitsta inimeste tervist (4). 2016. aastal toimus sarnasel teemal Euroopa Komisjoni konsultatsioon, kus 89,88 protsenti vastanutest olid vastu veipimise maksustamisele. See peaks olema piisav! Kutsume üles inimesi, kes on mures rahva tervise ja vähemkahjulikumate toodete kättesaadavuse pärast ning kes tahavad õigust kaitsta iseenda tervist, vastama Euroopa Komisjoni avalikule küsitlusele tubakatoodete ja veipimise maksustamise osas. Anna oma allkiri käesolevale petitsioonile ning vasta Euroopa Liidu küsitlusele, mis on kättesaadav erinevates keeltes, et kaitsta inimeste õigust juurdepääsuks maksuvabale veipimisele üle Euroopa.   ESPAÑOL No a un "impuesto del tabaco" a los productos de vapeo. Hagamos que la Unión Europea entre en razón La Comisión Europea está llevando a cabo una consulta pública sobre la tributación de los productos de tabaco y vapeo, que finaliza el 3 de septiembre (1). Las asociaciones de consumidores y las organizaciones pro reducción de  daños por Tabaquismo hacemos un llamamiento urgente a la movilización. El vapeo ha permitido a más de 7,5 millones de europeos dejar de fumar y ha ayudado a otros 9 millones a reducir su consumo de cigarrillos (2). Los impuestos especiales no se justifican en los productos de consumo que no son productos de tabaco y que son mucho menos perjudiciales para la salud que el tabaco de combustión. Por lo tanto, cualquier proyecto de armonización debe tratar de prohibir el impuesto especial sobre los productos de vapeo en la Unión Europea. Los productos de vapeo no contienen tabaco y no hay combustión. Por lo tanto, el vaporizador personal no produce humo, monóxido de carbono o alquitrán, y el vapeo es, como mínimo, un 95% menos nocivo para la salud que fumar cigarrillos tradicionales (3). Los productos de vapeo no son productos de tabaco y los usuarios de productos de vapeo no deberían tener que sufrir un impuesto punitivo e injustificado. Los impuestos a los productos de vapeo protegen fundamentalmente al tabaquismo, como así ha quedado demostrado entre la población de los países que ya han introducido dicho impuesto: Italia, Portugal, Grecia y Hungría. Los resultados en estos países demuestran que la imposición de un impuesto punitivo socavaría las medidas introducidas por la Directiva Europea del Tabaco (TPD), que fue diseñada para proteger la salud de las personas (4). En una consulta similar reciente, en 2016, el 89.88% de los encuestados rechazaron la sugerencia de imponer impuestos a los productos vapeo. ¡Eso debería ser más que suficiente! Hacemos un llamamiento a aquellas personas a las que les preocupa la salud pública, a aquellas personas a las que les importa su derecho a poder acceder a productos de riesgo reducido, incluidas las más desfavorecidas y a aquellas personas que ansían su derecho a proteger su propia salud, a responder a la consulta pública de la Comisión sobre la tributación de los productos del tabaco y del vapeo. La consulta está disponible en varios idiomas. Acompañamos este llamamiento con una petición en línea para defender el derecho de acceso a los productos de vapeo libres de impuestos en toda Europa. Referencias 1. Consulta en línea https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-excise-duties-applied-manufactured-tobacco-and-possible-taxation-novel-products_en 2 Según el Eurobarómetro 458, realizado en marzo de 2017. 3 Nicotina sin humo, Royal College of Physicians UK, 2016 4.DIRECTIVA 2014/40 / UE DEL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO Y DEL CONSEJO de 3 de abril de 2014 relativa a la aproximación de las disposiciones legales, reglamentarias y administrativas de los Estados miembros sobre la fabricación, presentación y venta de tabaco y productos relacionados con el tabaco y por la que se deroga la Directiva 2001/37 / CE   FRANÇAIS Pour une vape sans taxe tabac, faisons entendre raison à l’Union Européenne La Commission Européenne a lancé une consultation publique sur la taxation du tabac et de la vape ouverte jusqu’au 3 septembre (1). Associations d’usagers et de défense de la réduction des risques face aux dommages du tabagisme lancent un appel urgent à la mobilisation. Répondez aussi à la consultation, c’est très important ! Pour vous aider à répondre : https://www.sovape.fr/petition-taxes-vape-consultation-europeenne/ La vape a permis à plus de 7,5 millions d’européens de se libérer du tabagisme et à 9 millions de réduire leur consommation de cigarettes (2). Aucune surtaxe punitive n’est justifiable contre un produit de consommation courante qui n’est pas un produit du tabac et qui réduit massivement les dommages à la santé par rapport au tabac fumé. Le projet d’harmonisation devrait envisager de bannir toute accise sur le vapotage dans l’Union Européenne. La vape ne contient pas de tabac et surtout ne se consume pas. Le vapotage ne produit pas de fumée, pas de monoxyde de carbone, pas de goudrons ; vapoter réduit d’au moins 95 % les dommages à la santé par rapport à fumer des cigarettes (3). Les produits de vapotage ne sont pas des produits du tabac, ses usagers ne doivent pas subir de taxe punitive injustifiée. La fiscalité anti-vape protège in fine le tabagisme, comme le montrent les effets sur la population des pays ayant déjà mis en place une telle taxe : Italie, Portugal, Grèce, Estonie et Hongrie.  Ces pays montrent qu’une taxation punitive fait voler en éclat les dispositifs mis en œuvre par la directive tabac européenne (TPD) destinés à protéger les populations (4). 89,88 % des participants ont déjà rejeté la proposition de taxe punitive contre les produits de vapotage lors de la précédente consultation de la Commission européenne Taxud en 2016. Ça suffit ! Nous appelons toutes les personnes soucieuses de santé publique, du droit à l’accès aux outils de réduction des risques, y compris pour les plus défavorisés, et celles qui tiennent au droit de protéger leur propre santé, à répondre à la consultation publique de la Commission sur la taxation des produits du tabac et du vapotage. Cette consultation est disponible dans les différentes langues. Nous accompagnons cet appel d’une pétition en ligne pour défendre le droit à l’accès au vapotage sans taxe tabac partout en Europe.   ITALIANO Per uno svapo senza tassa sul tabacco, facciamo sentire le nostre ragioni all'Unione Europea La Commissione Europea ha avviato una consultazione pubblica sulla tassazione del fumo e dello svapo aperta fino al 3 settembre (1). Le Associazioni di Consumatori di e-cig e le Associazioni che difendono la riduzione dei rischi di fronte ai danni causati dal fumo richiedono una mobilitazione. Lo svapo ha permesso a oltre 7,5 milioni di europei di liberarsi dal fumo e a 9 milioni di persone di ridurre il consumo di sigarette (2). Non è giustificabile alcuna sovrimposta punitiva che riduca l'accesso e la libertà degli utenti nei confronti di un prodotto di consumo che non è un prodotto a base di tabacco e che riduce in modo significativo i danni alla salute rispetto al tabacco fumato. Il progetto di armonizzazione dovrebbe vietare tutte le accise sullo svapo nell'Unione Europea. Lo svapo non contiene tabacco, né foglie o filtro, e soprattutto non si consuma come una sigaretta (3). Lo svapo non produce fumo, né monossido di carbonio o catrame. Inoltre, è un prodotto di consumo per il quale gli utenti non devono essere sottoposti a un'ingiustificata imposta punitiva. In definitiva, la tassa anti-svapo protegge il fumo, come dimostrano gli esempi dei paesi che hanno introdotto tale tassa (Italia, Portogallo, Grecia, Ungheria, Estonia...). La tassazione punitiva infrangerebbe le misure attuate dalla direttiva europea sul tabacco (DET) intesa per proteggere le persone (4). L'89,88% dei partecipanti ha già respinto un progetto di imposta punitiva contro gli svapatori e la riduzione dei rischi nella precedente consultazione analoga della Commissione europea Taxud nel 2016. Adesso basta! Chiediamo a tutti coloro che si preoccupano per la salute pubblica, per il mantenimento del diritto di accesso agli strumenti di riduzione del rischio, anche per i più svantaggiati, e per il diritto di proteggere la propria salute, di rispondere alla consultazione pubblica della Commissione sulla tassazione dei prodotti di fumo e di svapo disponibile nelle varie lingue. Accompagniamo questo appello con una petizione online per difendere il diritto di accesso allo svapo esente da imposte in tutta Europa.        

Collective of EU Vapers Associations
50,668 supporters
Petitioning United Nations, United Nations Environment Program, European Commission, European Parliament

For the sake of our children: stop mass extinction!

DE / EN Giant whales are dying in the hundreds, insects and birds disappearing, species going extinct. In the seas and on land, even in the Earth’s most remote regions, the loss of living animals and plants is real, dramatic and irreversible. In just the last forty years, two thirds of large animals and birds have vanished. This global biological crisis not only threatens life on Earth - it endangers human wellbeing and survival also, through the collapse of the very systems which support us. Burning forests, dying coral reefs, poisoned environments everywhere and now, climate change on top. Humans are responsible for the worst mass extinction event in the last 65 million years, when dinosaurs and other life were wiped out by an asteroid. Earth is our only Planet. If we ruin it, we have nowhere else to live. Just like in James Cameron’s film ‘Avatar’: if we kill nature, then nature kills us. Stop species loss now! Protecting animals, habitats, ecosystems and our climate must become top priority work for all humans – for governments, children, parents, companies and scientists. It‘s really very simple: Biodiversity first! Scientists estimated there are between 7-10 million animal, plant and protist species living on Earth today. This is up to 5 times the number of species already known to science. We may be losing more than 100 species per day, most of them unknown. Explore and save the diversity of life now, while it still exists! Humanity urgently needs data on how many and which species occur where, and what they are doing there. We can only protect what we know and what we understand. Like us, living species need faces, names and histories – identities! Our aim thus is a huge international, collaborative effort to inventory and save all global animal, plant and protist species, called the “Inventory of Life”. - As an immediate response, we ask for 100 additional positions for professional taxonomists in each of the G20 nations. - We also propose a World Council of Life similar to the world climate council, to provide international reports on the state of life on our planet and what can be done to sustain it. We urge you to support the Inventory of Life and the World Council of Life. Remember, you too can make a personal difference to the world your children and grandchildren will inherit. Please act now – before it is too late. Michael and Vreni P.S.: Dr. Vreni Häussermann, winner of the prestigious Rolex Awards 2016, and Prof. Michael Schrödl are biologists supposed to explore and help protecting life. What we see wherever we go, however, is destruction, depletion and loss of life! This means ‚no future‘ for all kinds of life including ours, yours and that of your children, and this we cannot tolerate silently anymore! Therefore, we started a petition. From our own money we are sending our German book ‘BiodiversiTOT’ (www.bioDIEversity.org) to Angela Merkel, to parliamentarians, decision makers and billionaires, asking for support and substantial funding of the inventory and protection of animal diversity, as long as it exists. We are going international with this English version; other languages will follow.

Michael Schrödl
107,693 supporters