Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-25-Speech-2-349"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051025.26.2-349"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, manufacturers respond to ever greater demand by steadily developing new food products. Their variegation is achieved mostly by adding additives. At the same time, the awareness of consumers is growing. Additives are increasingly assessed on the basis of their necessity. The main motive of this directive, amending two current directives, was the revision of the use of salts of nitrates and nitrites, that is, preservatives permitted for use in meat products, cheese and certain fish products.
In spite of some outstanding issues, differences between the Council and Parliament were not insurmountable. With the substantial contribution of the Commission, the first-reading deal was therefore within reach. All political groups have announced their interest in reaching that deal, so negotiations continued and today we can present an overall compromise package co-signed by the majority of political groups in Parliament and agreed by the Permanent Representatives Committee of the Council.
I wish to thank all shadow rapporteurs of the political groups, representatives of the British Presidency of the Council and the Commission for their cooperation and the political advisors of all three institutions for their contribution, which was substantial in reaching an agreement.
The Commission took account of the ruling of the European Court of Justice, according to which the level of nitrosamines must be kept at the lowest possible level, and of the opinion of EFSA in that regard. However, the derogations granted to the UK as to the permitted residual levels of nitrates and nitrites in traditional meat products have opened broader debate on the subject, particularly on the definition of traditionally-manufactured products.
The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety agreed that the derogations are acceptable in special cases but must not distort the final aim of the revised directive. The rule of lowering the levels of nitrosamines must be maintained and exceptions must be permitted only when the traditional products are adequately specified and identified.
The second major issue was the maximum level of sulphur dioxide and sulphites permitted in food. They probably have a hazardous potential for asthmatics and should therefore be kept at the lowest possible level. The Environment Committee agreed with the Commission that the aim should be to limit in general the use of sulphur dioxide. The exemptions must be carefully evaluated.
As rapporteur, I welcome the statement by the Council in the annex to this directive regarding the need for an examination of all additive uses of sulphites as soon as possible, to ensure that acceptable daily intake is not exceeded.
Another problem was the evaluation of intensive sweeteners in general, some of them in particular. Are intensive, non-caloric sweeteners recommendable if consumed in significant amounts and for a long period of time? What relation is there between intensive sweeteners and sports food? Some aspects of this theme could not be dealt with on this occasion. They demand a broader scientific debate.
I welcome the statement by the Commission that, in the context of the work on the specific directive relating to sports foods, including sports drinks, the question of sweeteners will also be addressed.
Most of the aforementioned issues were confirmed in committee, yet three amendments that addressed special concerns have been defeated by a very narrow margin. That was the case in dealing with EU strategy to combat the threat posed by anti-microbial resistance, that is, with the authorisation of antibiotics – nicin and natamicin – and aspartame, a widely-used intensive sweetener.
The Scientific Committee on Food updated the information on the safety of aspartame two years ago and found that there was no evidence to suggest that the outcome of the earlier risk should be revised. As for nicin and natamicin, the risk assessment by EFSA is under way or will begin soon. However, new evidence on the safety of aspartame might bring about a further update as regards its safety. I am therefore pleased that, in a letter to the Chair of the Environment Committee, Mr Kyprianou has given his assurance that the Commission will make full use of its competence to adopt emergency measures if the European Food Safety Authority advises that food additives are not safe for the consumer. That form of assurance regards the prolonged intake of aspartame as well as the intake of antibiotics – nicin and natamicin."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Mojca Drčar Murko (ALDE ),"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples