Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-18-Speech-1-087"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
dcterms:Is Part Of
lpv:document identification number
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, it was mentioned here that the previous attempt to achieve a wholesale ban on tobacco advertising at European Union level was overturned by the Court of Justice and it is indeed interesting to read that when this decision was given Advocate General Fenelli said that there was good reason to suppose that a ban on advertising would save around 38 000 lives in the European Union every year. We might also say that there are very good grounds for bringing in this directive now, even though it is rather less comprehensive in its legal scope than before. We must proceed in such a way that the Commission’s original proposal is approved in its entirety as far as is possible, and I was very glad that the Commission has shown its support for the cross-party amendment to Recital 1 which we have proposed in this House. Its purpose is to clarify the fact that indirect advertising remains within the competence of the Member States and that they may enact advertising bans in this area. In general we want to protect the national bans on tobacco advertising. It is with great sorrow that it has to be said that the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market have watered the Commission proposal down totally. It is also to be hoped that every single amendment accepted by the Committee on Legal Affairs will be rejected in this House, because they complicate the issue in many ways. They obscure the proposal’s legal basis. They completely rule out the possibility of restricting tobacco advertising in the press and on the radio. They hamper global efforts to achieve a ban on tobacco advertising, and they also allow the possibility of the indirect advertising of tobacco. I would especially like to focus attention on Amendments Nos 17 and 24, which are extremely dangerous. Hopefully, too, the rapporteur will return to his original position and reject these amendments, which were accepted as compromises by the Committee on Legal Affairs, as they are not compromises at all: they just make this directive utterly pointless."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:


The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph