Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-25-Speech-4-129"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030925.10.4-129"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I have been well aware of your commitment to this subject for a long time, Mrs Lulling, and of your competence and strength of feeling. In addressing me, you said these concerns were also felt in the country of which I am still a citizen. It so happens that in my previous positions – I have not forgotten – I had to dialogue and act with the people responsible for beekeeping, often in the way you desire. I do also understand, from the words you used, your dissatisfaction and your expectations. Nevertheless, that is a long way from saying that we are trying to sidestep the issue, that we are turning a deaf ear or that we have lost the plot. So I am going to try and give a serious and lucid answer to your three questions.
Turning first to Parliament’s decisions about taking account of the effects on bees and public health of persistent systemic insecticides, we have indeed noted those decisions. However, the Commission wishes to stress that any such effect is already taken into account in the evaluation of insecticides required under the directive on the placing of plant protection products on the market. Member States are not allowed to authorise a plant protection product if it has an unacceptable effect on non-target organisms such as bees.
Moreover, an assessment of any possible effect of residues on public health is a prior condition for setting maximum levels of pesticide residues in food.
The Commission notes that most of the concerns expressed in this regard relate to two insecticides that are currently being evaluated, Mrs Lulling. Pending the outcome of those evaluations, no decision concerning those substances has yet been taken at Community level, but the Commission is aware of risk management measures being applied in at least one Member State.
Regarding investigations into this subject, the directive does not require the studies to be conducted by the Commission itself. On the other hand, the Commission is fully informed of the studies necessary in order to demonstrate the acceptability of particular substances. It has been provided with information on the decline in bee populations in some Member States, as you yourself have solemnly emphasised. At present, we are told, there is no scientific proof that this decline is due to a single factor such as pesticide use.
The Commission is also informed of research currently being undertaken by the Member States, by industry and by scientific associations under the watchful eye of the associations. The Commission is itself following the matter very closely. It will, of course, continue to monitor developments and will take appropriate measures in due course should that appear necessary.
Finally, Mrs Lulling, on the matter of aids under Council Regulation No 1221/97, the Commission cofinanced national programmes to improve the production and marketing of honey to the tune of 50% during the 1999/2000 marketing year. The French programme, for example, included a study of the effects of plant protection products on bees. The programmes for the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 marketing years also provide aids for the reconstitution of bee stocks. Finally, I would like to point out that if a Member State wishes, the Commission is, of course, willing to look at the possibility of increasing the amounts allocated to this within the overall budget, but that is, of course, up to the national authorities whose responsibility it is to make such a request.
Those are the most definite and most precise answers I can give you on the three points raised in your oral question."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples