{"id":13069,"date":"2024-09-23T13:04:16","date_gmt":"2024-09-23T13:04:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/exclusive-eu-commission-did-not-disclose-lobbying-meetings-with-ensp-to-the-eu-ombudsman-investigation-into-conflicts-of-interest\/"},"modified":"2025-01-07T12:08:24","modified_gmt":"2025-01-07T12:08:24","slug":"exclusive-eu-commission-did-not-disclose-lobbying-meetings-with-ensp-to-the-eu-ombudsman-investigation-into-conflicts-of-interest","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/post\/exclusive-eu-commission-did-not-disclose-lobbying-meetings-with-ensp-to-the-eu-ombudsman-investigation-into-conflicts-of-interest\/","title":{"rendered":"EXCLUSIVE: EU Commission did not disclose lobbying meetings with ENSP to the EU Ombudsman investigation into conflicts of interest"},"content":{"rendered":"

The European Commission did not disclose meetings it had with the European Network on Smoking Prevention (ENSP) to the European Ombudsman.<\/strong> The Ombudsman is currently investigating the Commission for mishandling conflicts of interest when it awarded ENSP a lucrative contract to help it revise EU rules on vaping.<\/p>\n

Documents obtained by Clearing the Air show that ENSP had a closed-door meeting with DG SANTE – the part of the EU Commission that handles tobacco control – less than three months after ENSP was awarded the contract. According to the Ombudsman\u2019s website, neither the fact that such a meeting occurred, nor the minutes of it, were disclosed to the Ombudsman. (see download link<\/em>)<\/p>\n

The fact that the meeting happened, and its content, show that despite claiming that ENSP had no conflicts of interest, and was able to provide objective and neutral advice on revising the EU\u2019s laws on vaping and safer nicotine products, ENSP lobbied SANTE on precisely those issues just weeks after the contract was awarded.<\/p>\n

Clearing the Air has emailed the Ombudsman to draw its attention to this new information.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The minutes of the meeting are short, but it seems that the meeting was not intended to discuss the work that ENSP had agreed to undertake for the Commission.<\/p>\n

During the meeting, which took place in April 2023, ENSP talked about \u201clessons learned from the previous revision of the Tobacco Products Directive\u201d and \u201coutlined current challenges of their work illustrated by numerous examples both at the EU and national level\u201d. The Commission, in turn, \u201cpresented the ongoing work on smoke and aerosol free environments and the update on the revision of the tobacco products directive\u201d. <\/p>\n

However, the Commission told the EU Ombudsman in June 2024 that ENSP\u2019s role was limited to providing \u201caccess to a network of experts \u2026which will provide it with technical, scientific and factual data in relation to tobacco use\u201d. The Commission also claimed in its meeting with the Ombudsman that \u201cnone of the members of the consortium, including the ENSP, will be involved in any policy determination\u201d. <\/p>\n

The fact that ENSP lobbied the Commission on the Tobacco Products Directive just weeks after it took on this role, raises questions as to whether what the Commission told the Ombudsman is accurate. <\/strong><\/p>\n

ENSP\u2019s work for the Commission is designed to \u201chelp the Commission in the outreach for the consultation stages. As far as we are aware, and despite various requests, no independent consumer groups have been approached by the EU Commission, or ENSP, for input to date. It seems that ENSP\u2019s \u201cnetwork of experts\u201d will not include anyone directly affected by vape bans.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The European Commission did not disclose meetings it had with the European Network on Smoking Prevention (ENSP) to the European Ombudsman.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":990003,"featured_media":13079,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[258,257],"tags":[],"slider":[],"class_list":["post-13069","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legislation","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13069","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/990003"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13069"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13069\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19176,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13069\/revisions\/19176"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13079"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13069"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13069"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13069"},{"taxonomy":"slider","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/clearingtheair.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/slider?post=13069"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}