Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-07-06-Speech-2-552"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100706.32.2-552"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, when I was first elected in 1999, one of the first debates in which I spoke concerned food safety. We Belgian Members had been elected in the midst of the food crisis there, which involved chickens, PCBs and similar issues. One of the first things the Commission proposed back then was the White Paper on Food Safety, which, I believe, proposed 83 measures to ensure food safety in the European Union. That was 11 years ago, and so many years later, we can be proud of the work accomplished. I believe that approximately 90% of that work has been implemented, and indeed one of the few outstanding issues relates to the European Commission’s announcement back then of its intention to explore how to deal with this kind of product: novel foods, that is. These are foods manufactured using new production techniques, foods that did not exist before 15 May 1997. The original Commission proposal from January 2008 had a number of objectives: ensuring food safety, protecting human health and also securing the functioning of the market for food.
As I see it, over the last three years, rapporteur Mrs Liotard has steered a splendid course and has demonstrated constructive cooperation with the shadow rapporteurs and also within Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. At first reading, she managed to obtain the support of a particularly large majority for her proposals: 658 MEPs supported her work, which is a majority of the kind seldom seen. Therefore, I think it important, Commissioner – and Council, which is unfortunately absent – to bear in mind that this House is united, and is incredibly strong. We believe that foods derived from cloned animals and their offspring should be excluded from the scope of this regulation, and we do indeed want more than just a report, Commissioner; we want the European Commission to table a legislative proposal.
The Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance wants to go even further; we also want a moratorium on these foods. We want the Commission to present a legislative proposal without delay, and we are really pushing for this. I believe it is very clear, including from the words of the previous speakers, that this House is united. The – absent – Council has accepted only a very limited number of amendments from our first reading. It is clear that the Council is taking a very unyielding approach to this dossier; something that I find regrettable. Such an unyielding approach has meant that, despite the efforts of the past weeks and months and the countless informal meetings, we have not in fact progressed a single step and are now forced to go to second reading, to stay strongly united and to ensure that we do make some progress in conciliation with the Council.
Therefore, my whole group supports the rapporteur’s approach, the desire to retain as many of the first reading amendments as possible and also the whole approach to cloned animals and other elements of this proposal. I hope the Council receives this message loud and clear after the vote and that we can then establish honest, constructive dialogue. I hope the Commission does keep its promise to produce not just a report but an actual legislative proposal. I believe this is something the European public really needs and is calling for."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples