Election 2022. What are the parties' views on harm reduction, e-cigarettes and measures and policies that promote less harmful alternatives to smoking? Who should you vote for? Vejpkollen analyzes.
With a few days to go before the election, it may not be e-cig and harm minimization are at the top of the agenda in the debates. However, the composition of the Parliament obviously influences how issues and proposals affecting e-cigarette users are ultimately handled. In this analysis, Vejpkollen looks at the parties' positions on harm minimization - a central topic for everything related to e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool - but also applies to snus and other smokeless nicotine products.
Rating by engagement and interest
Vejpkollen assigns ratings based on what the parties have done and said on the issue of harm reduction during the years the magazine has covered the issue (2019-2022). The parties have spoken out most clearly on harm reduction when it came to the proposed taste ban on e-cigarettes in spring 2022. But even before that, the issue has been discussed in parliament and in Vejpkollens audits. Just as important as the policies themselves, is how the parties' representatives have managed relations with users and other stakeholders over the years. For users, this is a key issue - and therefore worth including in the rating.
Take your pick and then choose with both your head and your heart.
Moderates (m)
The Moderate Party has become a driving force in making harm reduction part of tobacco policy. The party has repeatedly called for an evidence-based policy on the harmful effects of nicotine and rallied the Riksdag behind a reform of the so-called The ANDTS strategy. The party was at the forefront of those who wanted to stop the government tasting ban.
"Ideally, we would like to see a kind of risk ladder for nicotine products in the future. There should be a difference in how we deal with snus, e-cigarettes and cigarettes in the legislation. The important thing is that we focus on the harmful effects of smoking and how we reduce them. For example, we should not be chasing snus users and vejp users, when we know that smoking is the problem. The Moderates have been working for this for a long time and now the Parliament has also decided that the scientific basis for a new harm-reduction policy will be investigated." Johan Hultberg (m) spokesperson on health issues to Vejpkollen.
The Moderates have also been open to talking to both user other stakeholders on issues such as smoke damage minimization. This bodes well (pun intended) for a brighter future for vejpningen in Sweden, at least until now.
Assessment: (M) stands for harm reduction and is also driving the issue.
Approved - with gold star
Social Democrats (s)
The Socialist government put forward the much talked about proposal to ban flavorings in liquids in early 2022. They made it clear that they consider e-cigarettes, as well as snuff and nicotine pouches, as equivalent to cigarettes. Harm reduction is considered a "fabrication of the tobacco industry", according to party representatives. Minister for Social Affairs Lena Hallengren has on several occasions lifted proposals and taken rhetorical cues directly from political lobby organizations such as Tobacco Facts, A Non Smoking Generation and also American Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, to push for tougher legislation on e-cigarettes.
"By flavoring e-cigarettes with various candy and fruit flavors, tobacco companies are luring children and young people into nicotine addiction. This must stop." wrote Lena Hallengren on Facebook in 2021.
It is clear that (s) currently do not want to deal with harm reduction in the tobacco and nicotine area at all. They have a similar approach to risk reduction in drug policy and many other areas. Zero tolerance is the watchword of the (s) party representatives in the Social Affairs Committee, Yasmine Bladelius, also called the 3000 Swedish e-cigarette users, who approached the Social Affairs Committee ahead of the vote on the taste ban, for "fake votes" and that they "are not real people". In his bill "Tighter rules for new nicotine products" It also said that e-cigarettes do help some people quit smoking, but that it doesn't matter as long as there is a risk of children poaching. This was the basis for the flavor ban - a proposal that was already in the pipeline in 2020.
Assessment:
According to a study that The Snus Commission (s) is currently awaiting an investigation to evaluate the research before taking a further position on harm reduction.
"Our assessment is that there is a need for further documentation regarding the state of knowledge of the harmful effects and health effects of various tobacco and nicotine products. Such documentation is currently being produced, and we await the results of this work before we are prepared to take a position on further measures." writes (s) to the Snus Commission.
It's always something, but unfortunately not enough for a passing grade: A vote for (s) is not a vote for harm reduction.
Not approved - with a hitch
Center Party (c)
The Center Party is basically liberal. But at present, the (c) is leaning towards supporting a Social Democratic government. But that does not mean that the Center Party can have some influence on tobacco and nicotine policy.
Within the Center Party, there is a strong affinity for snus. And with that comes a pretty solid stance on harm reduction. This was evident when the party took a strong stance against the taste ban on e-cigarettesAlthough some party representatives are not entirely convinced that e-cigarettes have a natural place in the fight against smoking-related harm, the more liberal approach to nicotine products seems to be winning in the long run.
That said. The party's MEPs work closely with (s) on many issues and it is hard to know whether (c) will choose to back down on harm reduction in tobacco policy, especially if (s) pushes in the social committee. On the other hand, it is a two-edged sword that can lead to the opposite as well.
Vejpkollen has also noted that the Centers' Youth League is taking a clearer line on more liberal laws than the parent party. The legalization of cannabis, the abolition of the smoking ban in outdoor cafés and a chairman who openly raises debate on the issue pave the way for interesting developments. Youth President Reka Tolnai is open to discuss with both businesses and users. She has also criticized the government-backed Non Smoking Generation for undemocratic methods after the organization threatened politicians to avoid meeting a well-known tobacco company to discuss harm reduction.
Assessment:
The Center Party is ready for damage limitation, which suggests a positive assessment. But much depends on the election results and the party's role in parliament. Anyone who wants to see a left-center government and want to live a little on the hope of damage minimization can put a vote on c and give the party the opportunity to influence s, v and mp on the issue. The more votes c has the more influence of course. But do not hope for too much.
Approved - with modifications
Left Party (v)
The Left Party does not give much to harm minimization to tackle the problems of smoking. At least not on the surface. The party wanted to see a flavor ban on e-cigarettes - albeit with the caveat to closely monitor developments.
"Because if it leads to more smokers, it's not good" said the the motion response.
However, V admitted that e-cigarettes do help some people to quit smoking. And that's a positive attitude, even if it didn't matter in the plenary when it really mattered.
However, the left is a driving force when it comes to harm reduction in drug policy, which often opens the door to conflict with the right. Hopefully, this can also lead to insights into what harm reduction means, including for nicotine users and smokers. It should also be mentioned that party leaders Nooshi Dagdostar actually vejpare and that party members have actually chosen to actively listen to users and stakeholders.
But, a vote for v on Sunday is in practice the same as a vote for (s). And v prefers to vote down proposals that favor harm reduction, especially if it means stopping proposals from (m) or (sd).
Assessment:
The Left Party is not a wise choice for those who want to see more harm reduction and a safer future for vejpningen in Sweden. Not in this election anyway. And certainly not as long as the Left Party cooperates with the Social Democrats.
Not approved - with the possibility of re-evaluation
Christian Democrats (kd)
KD believes that harm reduction should be part of tobacco policy. They voted, after some hesitation and persuasion, no to the taste ban. KD representatives have also on other occasions wanted to see a clear difference in price between cigarettes and snus, which shows that the harm minimization perspective plays a role in the party's view of tobacco and nicotine.
In addition, KD politicians are pushing the issue of harm reduction in the EU Parliament. Sara Skytterdal holds Swedish snus in high regard and often talks about e-cigarettes as important tools to reduce the harm of tobacco smoking.
Assessment:
KD holds the same line as (m) when it comes to harm reduction. It's a bit unclear whether they support e-cigarettes as much as snus, but they still have a clear political stance on the issue. So yes, KD probably deserves a vote, albeit a little uncertain.
Approved - with some hesitation
Sweden Democrats (sd)
SD has, together with the Moderates, been the party that has pushed the issue of evidence-based harm reduction the hardest. When the taste ban was on the table, the SD was clear and based its "no" on evidence and references to major British studies. The party also had a clear consumer perspective both in its motion response and the subsequent debate in the plenary hall.
"Many of my friends and relatives use e-cigarettes to quit smoking. And I hear it often when I talk to people I meet" replied Clara Aranda (sd) when Yasmine Bladelius (s) accused the opposition of being influenced by the "e-cigarette industry" on the issue of the flavor ban.
In the past, big names like Martin Kinnunen, then a vejp user himself, stood in the plenary hall and pleaded for more moderate taxation of e-liquid and nicotine.
Assessment:
With a positive attitude towards harm reduction and obvious knowledge of e-cigarettes, the SD will be a strong voice for vejpning and other alternative nicotine products. Moreover, they are running as part of the coalition: m, kd (and the liberals), parties aiming to introduce a harm reduction perspective in tobacco policy.
Approved with two pluses
Green Party (mp)
MP has been lying low on the issue of harm reduction ever since substitute MP Nicklas Attefjord Attefjord was cautiously skeptical of both snus and e-cigarettes, but still chose to listen to what both entrepreneurs and consumers had to say on the matter. But that was a while ago and the party's official position was eventually to support the government's taste ban in parliament. In response to the Snus Commission's question about their position on harm reduction, the party referred to the Public Health Agency of Sweden's recommendations. The Swedish Public Health Agency has publicly stated that it considers tobacco harm reduction to be a "myth". It is unclear whether this also applies to the Green Party...
Assessment:
For a voter who wants to see better conditions for harm minimization and vejpning in Sweden, MP is not a good choice today.
Not Passed - partly due to absence
Liberals (l)
The Liberals are actually a wild card when it comes to harm reduction in tobacco policy. They voted certainly down the government's taste ban. But only on the grounds that "they were not ready for this yet". What does that mean?
However, the idea of individual self-determination is important to the party and harm minimization is preferable to any ban. Meanwhile, the party's longtime spokesperson on health issues, Barbro Westerholm stepped down and retired. She was part of the faction that believes that all addiction, whether it is the nicotine in cigarettes or in a vejp, is evil. We don't know who her successor will be, but it will likely determine the party's stance on the issue.
Assessment:
So, is a vote for the Liberals good for harm reduction? The answer is as clear as a language test: doubtful but hopefully, yes. What speaks for this is that a vote for the Liberals is also likely to be a vote for the M, DK and SD parties. This means that harm reduction will be a central part of tobacco policy, if the new alliance gets a majority in parliament.
Approved - because of the relationship
Think how tragic it really is with politics. They choose to think to win votes. If I were to make my choice this year because I am vejpare. I would go against so many of my principles and opinions. I will never vote blue. Whether it is for my nicotine intake with flavoring.
Privatization NO THANKS. Take from the poor and give to the rich NO THANKS.
GET SD on the purchase ABSOLUTELY NO THANKS, NEVER IN LIFE.
No, it is certainly not easy when factual issues clash with an overall political stance. The idea of this list is to highlight what positions the parties actually have. Then it's up to everyone to weigh it up in terms of how important it is when they go to vote. Another thing to remember is that the work in the committees is very different from the debate that takes place before an election. Committees are about working together and finding solutions to very complex issues. This also applies to nicotine and tobacco issues. Individual MEPs can play a big role here. And the influence of voters can be very important. So, anyone who wants to see a different policy in "their" party can work for it by contacting their elected members and raising the issue directly. This way, you can actually change from within, without having to give up your ideological convictions. Having said that, we need to know what the party thinks right now - otherwise it doesn't matter 😉
Courtesy of Stefan, Editor
It is in any case good that the bourgeois parties and SD are in the majority regardless of the government, then they can stop any further proposals from the socialists to sabotage vejpning and other smoke-free tobacco and nicotine products.