Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-14-Speech-2-334"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-05-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Foodstuffs2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020514.14.2-334"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-05-14-Speech-2-3352
lpv:speaker	lp:Phillip Whitehead2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, I want to deal briefly with a number of amendments about which concern has been raised. Amendment No 31 deals with products using traditional methods or sited in remote locations. All of us have some examples of this kind. I have seen this in the UK, with people trying to operate our beef assurance scheme. We should defend this amendment because it specifically states that such products should have no demonstrable adverse effect on food hygiene. Similarly the references to HACCP in Amendment No 9 are permissive and not mandatory, and the small business sector can live with that. I now turn to the Goodwill/Bernier Amendment No 18, as Mr Goodwill would expect me to, exempting hunters from these regulations. We accept this for the individual hunter consuming or passing on the game he has shot or caught. But there is a difference between the noble Nordic hunter scaling the utmost peak in pursuit of an individual elk, the picture that Mr Sjöstedt would commend to us, and the syndicates of flabby businessmen turning out on English landed estates, as they turn in a large quota of inexpertly shot birds and animals for the market. In these circumstances, I believe that, if such products go to a retail outlet or a restaurant, there is a difference. The great wit, Oscar Wilde, described the English hunting fraternity as the 'unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable'. I do not mind that but when the 'unspeakable' begin to peddle the 'eatable', they should be open to the hygiene rules, as set down in this regulation. I see no reason whatsoever why we should make an exemption where, what starts off as a little outlet doing no harm, a brace or two of birds here or there, ends up as another supply route. We should protect the hunter's right to hunt but we should not guarantee him an unprotected route into retail outlets."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Labour Party (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Temporary committee on foot and mouth disease (2002-01-17--2002-12-17)3 substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2002-09-23)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Whitehead (PSE )."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph