Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-24-Speech-2-113"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020924.7.2-113"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We have just received the enormous document (approximately 200 pages) of the draft regulation laying down health rules concerning products intended for animal feed. In terms of content, the text is rather good, and we supported it, since it introduces strict rules, it bans the use, in animal feed, of substances that have been declared unfit for human consumption, and it bans ‘animal cannibalism’.
It is, instead, the form of the text that is to be criticised; it is a regulation, to be directly applied in all Member States. It is also extremely detailed. And, lastly, it is forced to allow certain exemptions which further complicate its provisions, for example, for feeding animals with kitchen waste in Germany and in Austria.
We think that it would be wiser, in these cases, to provide – at European level only – framework texts laying down objectives, even if it means presenting, at the same time, an example model for a regulation that the Member States could transpose by amending it according to their specific national characteristics. This formula would be much more flexible, and would leave the Member States much more room for manoeuvre. It would probably please everyone, except for unification fanatics."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples