Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-11-Speech-2-038"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020611.4.2-038"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I support the rapporteur's position. It is completely unacceptable to torture animals in order to, supposedly, improve ourselves. Contrary to what the cosmetics industry states, it is possible to produce and sell safe products whose ingredients have not been tested on animals. Many companies moved away from these archaic practices years ago and the overwhelming majority of consumers want an immediate ban. It is unfortunate, therefore, that both the Commission and the Council are still taking the side of the cosmetics industry and those responsible for profit-driven torture of animals.
The proposed ban would apply only to products tested in the EU and would allow companies to export testing to other parts of the world. This is unacceptable. We want the practice to stop, not to be relocated.
The Commission's failure to implement a marketing and test ban – which was meant to come into effect in 1998 – is completely unacceptable, and to argue that a marketing ban would face problems in the WTO is nonsense. There is a legal precedent. The adoption of the Dog and Cat Fur Act in the US showed that animal welfare can be a legitimate reason for restrictions.
As far as labelling goes, I am very disappointed that the Council did not adopt Parliament's recommendation in the first reading that "tested on animals" should be clearly stated on the product label. The consumer has a right to know this.
In relation to CMR substances, which are allowed in cosmetics, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy reaffirmed its first reading request to ban CMRs in cosmetics unless evaluated and accepted as safe by the Scientific Committee. In fact, the committee's position on CMR substances has been strengthened in line with the latest position of the Scientific Committee.
In the light of the fact that the Commission recently banned CMRs in its review of chemical directives but has included it as an exemption, it is ridiculous that a substance can be banned from paint and polish but not from something that is put on your body. It is completely hypocritical to argue for the continued torture of animals in the interests of safety, whilst at the same time allowing dangerous products."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples