Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-09-Speech-3-411"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030409.10.3-411"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, representatives of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I should like to thank my colleagues and the secretariat of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, and also the staff of the appropriate Directorate-General, for their excellent cooperation.
Moreover, this greater reduction is also necessary because it takes more account of the switch from a temporary ADI to a lower permanent ADI adopted by the Scientific Committee. On this basis, your rapporteur supports Amendment No 9, tabled by Mrs Schörling.
Before I finish, I should like to mention the issue of fine bakery products. Two amendments have been proposed. I shall not attempt to conceal my preference for the one that I and my political group have proposed, because it is the result of collective work and because I believe that consumers ought to know what ingredients or products the foods that are sold to them contain. However, I am also prepared to accept Amendment No 12, with an oral amendment which will be proposed tomorrow. It enables us to find a solution as far as this category of foods is concerned, and I believe that these two amendments propose an acceptable solution. I hope, therefore, that Members will vote in such a way as to enable us to propose a solution on this point to the Council.
Having spoken about the technical aspects of my report, I shall now conclude my presentation of that report by referring, in broader terms, to the question of consumer protection, which in this case is linked to public-health issues.
I am well aware, of course, that sweeteners can bring some comfort to people whose state of health requires them to follow a special diet. However, the existence of products containing such sweeteners must not be allowed to hide the very serious public-health problem of obesity. This public-health issue is of course linked to that of eating habits, and of nutritional and health education. It is also linked, therefore, to new kinds of consumption and to the presence on the market of increasingly sweetened products, consumed in excessive quantities by children, which are often the subject of false advertising. This is why I am anxious to draw the Commission’s attention to this problem once again, although I know that Mr Byrne has already confirmed that he is very much aware of it.
Before other speakers take the floor, I just want to say that I very much hope that we shall reach an agreement with the Council at second reading, and I hope that tomorrow’s vote will enable us to do this.
As the Commissioner has just explained, the European Parliament is being asked to vote on the second amendment to the ‘sweeteners’ directive since its adoption in 1994. The Directorate-General responsible is therefore proposing that two new sweeteners, namely sucralose and salt of aspartame-acesulfame, should be added to the positive list of sweeteners already approved in the European Union. This proposal follows the favourable opinion on these two sweeteners issued in the year 2000 by the Scientific Committee for Food.
As part of this second revision of the sweeteners directive, the European Commission has also proposed that the use of a third sweetener be revised, namely cyclamic acid. Following a re-evaluation of this sweetener by the Scientific Committee, the Commission proposes that the cyclamate thresholds contained in certain foods and drinks should be reduced. Studies, in particular those carried out in Denmark, have shown that a child weighing fifteen kilos or less might very rapidly reach the threshold of the acceptable daily intake (ADI), which could involve a risk to that child’s health. New studies being carried out in several Member States would seem to confirm this opinion.
Finally, the last amendment proposed for this directive by DG Health and Consumer Protection is concerned with the committee procedure. The Commission, as you have just reminded us, wants to be given the power to decide whether a substance falls within the ‘sweeteners’ category, without going through the process of approval by the European Parliament.
On this point, the vote in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy showed a very clear refusal to transfer that power to the Commission alone. Even though Members of the European Parliament are aware of the technical nature of this type of decision, your rapporteur believes that the European Parliament’s prerogative should be retained, since scientific expertise may be subject to controversy.
Moreover, this amendment will be proposed again when the framework directive covering sweeteners is revised. Your rapporteur would prefer to wait for this more general revision. In any case, the absence of amendments on this point would seem to indicate that Members of the European Parliament would also prefer to put it off until the forthcoming general legislative revision.
The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy voted in favour of the request for the authorisation of the placing on the market of the two new sweeteners, but it also voted in favour of the adoption of an amendment requiring a re-evaluation of these two substances three years after the entry into force of the revised directive. Your rapporteur is aware of the provisions of the directive, particularly as regards the monitoring system, but I would prefer to remind the European Commission and the Member States of their obligations regarding the monitoring of sweeteners and the collection of data. The collection of information on real consumption in the European Union and on the possible effects of the consumption of sweeteners on human health must be organised as soon as the products containing those sweeteners are placed on the market, so as to enable a re-evaluation of existing information to be carried out within the time limits laid down.
It has to be admitted, however, that Member States are not doing enough to collect this information, and the European Commission does not always have the means to ensure that Member States observe the provisions contained in the directive, particularly with regard to reporting to the Commission. Your rapporteur is well aware of the gap which exists between the adoption of legislation and its implementation, and I believe that the work of Parliament also includes reminding those responsible of the need to apply the law.
As far as cyclamates are concerned, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy voted in favour of adopting a stronger position than the one recommended by DG Health and Consumer Protection. In effect, the committee is proposing to reduce cyclamate levels to 250 mg and to extend this provision to cover all drinks. This extension is necessary because drinks containing cyclamates may easily be served to small children, owing to the very nature of those drinks."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples