Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-13-Speech-2-091"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-06-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000613.10.2-091"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-06-13-Speech-2-0922
lpv:speaker	lp:Konstantinos Alyssandrakis2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Kommounistiko Komma Elladas (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, one cannot fail to notice the confusion – we hope not deliberate confusion – in the report by the Committee on the Environment, which is turning the campaign against smoking into a campaign against tobacco producers. We do not dispute the fact that smoking damages your health and we therefore agree with the spirit of the directive proposed by the European Commission. However, we must not forget that very little, in fact just under 30%, of the tobacco consumed in the European Union is produced in the European Union. Most of it is imported. Consequently, measures to reduce tobacco production will do nothing to reduce consumption; they will merely boost imports. We need to take measures against imports and, once consumption has fallen to production levels, we shall have no objection to discussing production cut-backs. I should like to concentrate on three separate points: first, we are categorically opposed to Amendment No 17 by the Committee on the Environment, which recommends a gradual reduction in production aids for tobacco. This would spell financial disaster for hundreds of thousands of tobacco producers in Greece and other southern countries of the European Union, at no benefit to public health, for the reasons already stated. Secondly, we are also categorically opposed to Amendment No 21 in the report, which abolishes the European Commission’s proposal to extend the date of application for tar yields by Greece to the end of 2006. This extension was proposed because of the special nature of certain varieties of tobacco cultivated in Greece and abolishing it will hit tobacco production in Greece extremely hard. Thirdly, we agree with the view that reductions in the amounts of harmful substances should apply both to cigarettes consumed in the European Union and to cigarettes produced for export. It would be absurd to maintain that people from countries outside the European Union have greater resistance to harmful substances."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph