Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-03-Speech-3-087"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020703.3.3-087"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The Trakatellis and Scheele reports relate to two interlinked proposals that overlap in their treatment of matters concerning the authorisation, traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms.
It would seem that the way these proposals have been presented, which makes the subject even more difficult to understand, is entirely due to portfolio rivalries within the Commission. To the general public, who already find it difficult to make sense of Europe, this way of working is intolerable, and that alone should have been enough to justify our rejecting these documents. Since the European Parliament did not possess the self-respect to do so, it has been reduced to voting on them amidst a fair deal of confusion.
Essentially, the idea is to give certain guarantees regarding the rigour of the procedure for authorising and labelling GM foods. In general terms, I supported those amendments that tend to toughen the wording of the proposals, and these have frequently been adopted, so the result seems not too bad in this respect.
Regrettably, the Commission has inserted into both of the draft regulations a voting and decision-making method that will sweep aside national freedom of choice. I shall expound that view in my explanation of vote on the Scheele report. This restriction was the reason for my abstention from voting on these two reports."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples