Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-16-Speech-1-091"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021216.8.1-091"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Breyer, for her report which responds to the question put forward by the Commission. The question was which foods should be allowed to be irradiated in the European Union?
The Commission put this question to Parliament and the Council following a consultation of industry and consumer organisations and other interested parties. The consultation received a polarised response. Stakeholders were either totally against this technology or in favour of it. There would seem to be no common ground between these two camps.
Currently, the European Union-wide positive list of products authorised for irradiation treatment contains only dried aromatic herbs, spices and vegetable seasonings. For the completion of this list, the Commission presented three options for discussion. The first option proposed allowing the irradiation of shrimps and frogs’ legs, as these foods are often imported from subtropical and tropical countries and a certain microbe content can hardly be avoided.
The second option proposed to allow the irradiation of a number of foods in addition to shrimps and frogs’ legs, all of which have been, and continue to be, irradiated in the Member States in substantial amounts. Such foods include dried fruits, cereals, chicken, offal, egg white and gum arabic. The third option proposed that the current positive list should be regarded as complete, which would mean that only dried aromatic herbs, spices and vegetable seasonings could be irradiated in the European Union.
The report adopted by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy provides the possibility of adding further products to the current positive list if the safety of these products can be proven. The adoption of Amendments Nos 2 and 3 tabled by the rapporteur and other Members of Parliament would, however, result in the third option, which is the most restrictive one. The Commission will take note of Parliament's conclusions but must await the reaction of the Council before making any formal proposal.
However, I would like, on behalf of my colleague, Mr Byrne, to take this opportunity to clarify a few points. First, I would like clearly to reiterate that the Scientific Committee on Food has concluded that irradiated foods are safe. This opinion is based on many scientific studies and is shared by the World Health Organisation and scientific bodies. Therefore, additional toxicology studies are not required, as the views of the scientific community are very clear on this issue.
There are many misconceptions about this technique. I would stress that not all foods can or will be irradiated. This is a similar situation to cooking and freezing: not all foods are cooked and not all foods are put in the refrigerator. Irradiation is just one method of food preservation. For some foods it is better than other techniques, for others it is not. The European Union has very strict labelling rules for irradiated foods. Even if a compound food contains only small amounts of irradiated ingredients, this fact has to be clearly indicated.
We also have the technical tools to enforce correct labelling. The Commission has financed the development and standardisation of methods for the detection of irradiated foods. These methods are used by the food control authorities to check foods on the market. The first report of the Commission on food irradiation, published recently, shows that the overwhelming majority of foods on the market are correctly labelled. This means that consumers can choose freely between irradiated and non-irradiated products. I would also like to reiterate that current legislation already requests Member States to report the results of their checks on irradiation facilities and on food products. If products are detected by the food control authorities which do not comply with legal requirements, they have to be removed from the market.
Finally, I note that the report stigmatises third countries, in particular the United States and Brazil, for using this technique. I consider this to be inappropriate as our own Scientific Committee considers irradiated foods to be safe."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples