Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-14-Speech-4-048-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120614.6.4-048-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I am pleased to know that the House shares similar views with the Commission on the importance of protecting the most vulnerable groups within the population. Let me make some comments on three issues which were raised during this debate.
With respect to the issue of specific rules for growing-up milks, I have to acknowledge that different views exist on whether or not these products are needed to satisfy the nutritional requirements of young children. I thus see a need to consult EFSA to clarify the nutritional needs of young children. I can thus support the preparation of a report on this issue. I am also willing to look into the issues of advertising as raised by Mrs Willmott and others.
On pesticides, the relevant legislation has recently been reviewed and already takes into account vulnerable groups, including children. I agree totally that the use of pesticides in products intended for infants and young children should be restricted as far as possible. Indeed, the existing specific legislation on products intended for infants and young children already sets extremely low levels for pesticides – so low that they are de facto prohibitive. On this point, we can accept such amendments to the basic act as are consistent with existing rules.
I have to make one point: we have to make a difference between the application and the presence of pesticides. If we restrict ourselves to prohibiting application of pesticides, we will be trying to avoid the presence of pesticides on green fields from now on without really covering the contaminated fields which already exist and on which food intended for infants can be cultivated. Therefore, our concentration should be on the presence of pesticides in food, rather than the application of pesticides, because this will also cover any food grown on fields which has been contaminated in the past.
On the issue of gluten-free foods, I believe that we have to remove the perception that our proposal in any way reduces protection for coeliacs. On the contrary, we are increasing protection for coeliacs by maintaining the compositional and labelling rules as they are and transferring those rules to a more appropriate legal text on food information for consumers, which will protect coeliacs in relation to both non-packed and packed foods.
In addition, this constitutes better regulation and simplification, as a transfer to the Food Information for Consumers (FIC) Regulation would ensure that all information related to gluten is covered by the same piece of legislation, since the FIC Regulation already covers the labelling of the presence of gluten in the list of ingredients.
Therefore, I believe that broadening the scope of the food on which the gluten element is to be indicated will be more beneficial to coeliacs than if restricted to packed foods."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples