Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-02-Speech-1-061"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010402.5.1-061"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, our group thinks that Mrs Roth-Behrendt has done a very good job. We support all the important parts of the report. When it comes to the main issue of animal experiments, we think that this issue has been dragged out for too long. This decision concerning an effective ban on animal experiments in connection with cosmetics ought to have been taken several years ago. It is indefensible, both ethically and as far as the electorate is concerned, to test cosmetics on animals, which is something of a luxury. Nor is there any doubt about public opinion on this issue.
I also believe that, if we are to force manufacturers to find alternative methods, they have had many years in which to begin applying such methods, they must know that there is a fixed date when the ban comes into force. We know that the methods applied will vary from one area to another and that there are thousands of ingredients to choose between in cases where these methods have not been fully developed. We therefore support a comprehensive ban on these tests. If such a ban is to be effective, it nonetheless needs to be combined with a marketing ban. It is only a combination of marketing and testing bans that can be really effective, which is why we obviously support a marketing ban too.
As a counter-argument, we are told that the WTO might object to a ban. In our view, this is, for one thing, by no means certain; and, secondly, it cannot just be accepted that, by voicing its objection, the WTO can prevent tougher animal and consumer protection regulations from being introduced. That is, of course, what has to be fought for; the right to tougher, more progressive legislation. We believe, then, that this cannot be an argument for not pursuing this issue. On the contrary, the EU’s implementing this ban might also open the way for a worldwide trend whereby more countries follow suit and adopt the legislation we have in place and the methods we have developed for alternative testing procedures.
We also support the other parts of the report. We believe that more account must be taken of people with allergies. Allergies are a major and growing problem which does not only affect those who directly use products but also people in their vicinity, if such people are particularly sensitive. That is why we are in favour of tightening up on the use of allergy-causing substances.
We also think it reasonable that there should be tough rules on content labelling and that both the date of manufacture and the best before date should be stated.
This is my way of saying that we in the Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left will be voting for all the principal points in this report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples