Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-226"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.7.3-226"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, once again, having done so on 16 December 1999, we are addressing the problem of identifying cattle and the problem of labelling. And all because, for the past 14 years and, officially, for the past 4 years, there has been a zoonosis, i.e. a disease which can be transmitted from cows, in this case British cows, to humans.
Not knowing how to cure this disease and not having had the will to prevent it when we could have done so from 1989 onwards, we are now reduced to bidding to reassure the consumer. Just as the Americans invented happy pills in the 1950s, we have invented consumer sedatives, i.e. labels. As soon as consumers are worried, anxious or afraid, we give them a label. We put labels on tobacco for them, we put labels on chocolate for them, and when they are upset because they no longer have any cocoa, we put labels on GMOs for them, not that this prevents genetically engineered soya, cotton and tomatoes from arriving by the boatload. We put labels on wine for them, not that this prevents bogus port from South Africa from landing in our ports and, finally, we put labels on beef for them!
I must admit, Commissioner Fischler, that you have slammed on all the brakes – if I may put it thus – both skilfully and in bad faith in order to delay labelling. But unable to delay it all the time, you decided to drown it and the draft regulation has overloaded the label to the point at which it is illegible. You have even arranged to add the approval numbers of the slaughterhouse and cutting plant, all of which is incomprehensible to the consumer, of course, who does not have the equipment to read the barcode. And in the case of kebabs, stews, sautés and ready meals, pieces of meat may come from the whole of France or the whole of Europe. So with a calf born in France, fattened in Italy and slaughtered in Ireland, the label will be a real geography lesson!
As a result, the meat wholesalers, the SMEs referred to by Mr Souchet, have denounced the increased costs and, at the same time, compulsory labelling has given us an insight into the curiosities of the meat market: 40% of beef derives from animals which have done the rounds of Europe; when you buy a steak at the butcher's, little do you know that it has travelled 3000 kilometres, taking in 4 countries on the way: the country in which it was born, the country in which it was raised, the country in which it was slaughtered and the country in which it is consumed. In my country, 1.5 million animals a year take a trip via Italy and Spain.
So in that case, what do you put on the label? The whole itinerary? Or just ‘Origin: European Union’? But if we put ‘Origin: European Union’, that conceals the fact that the meat may derive from an English cow, riddled from top to bottom with a prion courtesy of their gracious ultraliberal majesties, Adam Smith and David Ricardo.
So, today, we are offered a compromise. We are told that labels will state the origin of the animal and the category: is it a calf, a heifer, a cow or a bull? But what we want is a compromise which will make life easier for SMEs, for small companies, not that any of this need prevent us, Commissioner, fellow members, from taking brief stock.
It all started with milk quotas back in 1984. In order to increase their yield, the British stuffed their cows with bonemeal. To save money, they lowered the cooking temperature of the bonemeal and the prion survived and contaminated their cattle. Without free movement, it would have stopped there, but with no frontiers, they contaminated Portuguese and French cattle and we have known about it, even here, since 1986.
José Happart, a Socialist, and I have been warning of the risk of a zoonosis since 1989. But the Maastricht Treaty had to be ratified, so nothing was said and the truth was hidden. A committee of inquiry chaired by Mr Böge was set up, but the Amsterdam Treaty had to be ratified and nothing was said. The Commission was not held to account, Mr Fischler, and for 14 years, nothing was done. When five German Länder wanted to protect their consumers, you instituted infringement proceedings against them. The moral of this tale, quite apart from the labelling saga, is that it is the nation states that have protected their consumers. For its part, the Commission has protected free movement. Real subsidiarity means ensuring that consumers, with the help of their country, can each protect themselves.
The label only comes along when the fork is poised; but the best solution would be to label when the pitchfork is poised. The intermediate solution lies between fork and pitchfork, i.e. at the frontier, the only place where animals can be protected against unreasonable transport and consumers can be protected."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples