Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-19-Speech-4-012"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030619.1.4-012"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Byrne, ladies and gentlemen, overall, I approve the recommendations of our rapporteur, Mrs Keppelhoff-Wiechert, on the subject of additives in animal nutrition. It is obvious that we must move towards eliminating these antibiotics, coyly referred to as ‘growth promoters’ and systematically added to certain animal feeds. If the use of these antibiotics becomes commonplace, there is a risk that resistance to antibiotics will develop, and this would be undesirable and dangerous to human health. On the other hand, it does not appear to be necessary to ban coccidiostats, which remain essential in poultry farming, and on this point I support the latest provisions proposed by our rapporteur.
As for the issues raised regarding labelling, I am of the opinion that they cannot be resolved merely by regulation, and that the crucial factor is the trust that exists between the manufacturer of the feeds and the livestock farmer who uses them.
I should like to use this debate on additives in animal nutrition as an opportunity to remind the House that the feeding of farm animals using compound feeds produced industrially is not, fortunately, the norm. Ruminants, such as sheep, dairy cows and suckler cows, are for the most part fed on the products of the farm itself. In the case of laying hens, over 25% of their feed is produced on the farm. It is only in the case of table poultry and pigs that, in some regions, feeding is now almost totally dependent on outsourced industrial products.
I think we ought to ask ourselves whether this development is advisable. Obviously it is in the interests of a powerful industry, but is it in the interests of the consumer? Is it in the interests of the farmer? Is it in the interests of the environment? Is it in the interests of society as a whole, and is it in the interests of animal welfare? It seems to me that in all five cases the answer is ‘no’, and that, on the contrary, common sense tells us that it is preferable for farm animals to eat farm-produced products. For consumers it would be more reassuring to know that they are eating animal products, such as milk, meat and eggs, which come from animals fed on farm products rather than industrial products. It is a question of image, of taste, of traceability and, of course, of food safety too, because farmers would never, of their own volition, have fed their cows on meat meals.
For the farmer, it would be a way of obtaining more added value for his product and of avoiding two lots of transactions, namely the sale of his plant products and the purchase of his compound feeds. It would also enable him to improve his image and go up-market. Our environment would benefit from the obvious saving in terms of transport: the lorry that comes to the farm to collect the maize or forage peas being sold, and the one that comes to deliver the compound feed.
As for society as a whole, the great advantage that we could expect would be a reduction in that huge deficit in vegetable proteins which threatens our food safety, by the replacement of imported soya by locally-produced oil and protein crops. I would also add that, if agri-environmental aid were granted to farms producing such crops for consumption by their own animals, it should be easy to gain acceptance for such a measure under the ‘Green Box’ so dear to Mr Fischler’s heart. Finally, from the point of view of animal welfare, it would mean the animals spending more time out at pasture, and a fresher, healthier and more varied diet.
It would perhaps be a good idea then, Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, without, of course, denying the usefulness of adopting legislation on additives in animal nutrition, for the European Union and the Member States to expend more energy on encouraging the feeding of animals on farm-produced feeds than on regulating and controlling the production of industrially manufactured feeds."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples