Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-02-Speech-2-147"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-07-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Food and feed safety2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020702.7.2-147"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-07-02-Speech-2-1482
lpv:speaker	lp:Esko Seppänen2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 unknown; Vasemmistoliitto (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (1999-10-13--2004-07-19)3 substitute; BUDG (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, we are dealing with a very complicated matter. Although the opinion of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy submitted to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy would appear to be fairly unanimous, several points were resolved by just one vote. We could say the Committee was divided into two, with those in the minority able to see, to their immense satisfaction, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy represent their position more closely than the opinion of their own Committee. The manipulation of genes results in species and varieties which do not occur naturally. Nobody can know what will happen when genetically modified organisms are introduced into the natural environment. They might hybridise with natural varieties, or something may be produced that was not intended when the genes were manipulated. One has to exercise excessive caution. It is only reasonable to insist that all genetically manipulated organisms must be able to be traced retrospectively to an adequate extent. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety required the identity of GMOs to be specified. The Committee on Industry voices more the views of the producers and does not want this. It is furthermore in the interests of consumers that they should be allowed to choose the food they eat, and they have a right to do so. For that reason we are proposing that it should be compulsory to label GMO products as such. On that basis consumers can avoid products they do not wish to use. When the Committee on Industry voted, a position that differs from the Commission’s original proposal won by a narrow margin. It is the Committee’s opinion that labelling should be carried out in such a way that a product is labelled when it is GM-free and not when it contains genetically modified organisms. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has adopted a different position on this from the Committee on Industry, and its views are probably a better response to the need for an increase in consumer choice."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph