Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-02-Speech-3-184"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010502.13.3-184"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, although the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has not treated the rapporteur, Mrs Roth-Behrendt, very gently this time, I would nonetheless like to thank her for the excellent work she has done at the various stages of the report.
The committee adopted the two amendments, the first of which was originally a joint proposal by Professor Trakatellis and myself. Its content, in brief, states that Member States in category 1 maintain their right to demand additional guarantees on animals being brought into their territory. It does not aim to prevent imports of or trade in animals between Member States, but just to stop diseases from spreading to those countries where they have not yet occurred. It is naturally in the interests of the EU as a whole that diseases, including TSEs, are confined to as small an area as possible and prevented from spreading to new areas.
In our examination of individual rules on the prevention and control of TSE, it becomes ever more apparent that the whole common agricultural policy needs to be reformed, which is to say, certain steps need to be taken to amend it. It would be worth seriously considering an arrangement whereby the CAP would set common targets and minimum requirements in such areas as environmental consumer protection and animal welfare, but in which the wisdom of common agricultural aid would be reconsidered. Such a model would permit national aid to be granted mainly to promote food safety, environmental cleanliness and the aims of regional policies. In my opinion this would be one possible way forward, and one that should be taken seriously, from the current system, which is bad for the taxpayer, the consumer and the environment, and particularly bad for the farmer.
When the EU was established, the goal of its agricultural policy, in its simplicity, was to guarantee a sufficient supply of food at a time of shortages in an economy just recovering from the war. Article 33 of the Treaty is still based on this approach, even though the EU achieved self-sufficiency back in the 1960s and production has exceeded demand since the 1970s. We now have to shift the emphasis from quantity to quality."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples