Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-27-Speech-2-047"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050927.5.2-047"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I speak on behalf of all my people. Firstly, on behalf of the wine growers from the Languedoc-Roussillon region who have been making wine for 2 000 years – since the days of the Roman Empire and not for a century like California – and who make wine like people make love, like people cultivate love for what is handsome and what is beautiful. I also speak on behalf of all the wine growers from France, Spain, Rioja, Hungary, Tokay – the wine of kings, the king of wines – Italy, Greece and the entire Mediterranean area, where wine is part of civilisation, an art of the gods.
Yet you, with your agreement, you are reducing the wine that is the product of civilisation to an industrial product for marketing. Your Munich Agreement of the wine industry changes the definition of wine and the nature of wine. It is no longer a natural creation that is the fruit of the fermentation process, but a chemical product. You accept the United States’ chemical – and not wine-making – practices. You accept a Coca Cola-type of wine made with water plus ingredients, sugar, colourings and wood. It is like the United States wanting to change Mrs Fischer Boel into an inauthentic, 7%-dilutable commissioner. You can understand, therefore, why the United States does not want labels: because it obviously does not want the chemical substances to be included on them. Soon, the REACH Directive will be applied to wine.
What is more, you are allowing the theft of 17 designations, on the pretext that they are semi-generic. Champagne, why, that is insignificant; Chablis, that is not at all significant; Sauternes, even less so! You are giving the rubber stamp to fraud and counterfeiting. For five years, the United States will be able to use bogus châteaux and bogus Clos wines in exchange for the peace clause. It is like what happened with the Uruguay Round negotiations, it is like what happened with oleaginous fruits: the thief agrees not to drag the cheated wine growers under the nose of the WTO policeman. This had already been done before for the agreement with South Africa and, at the WTO, of course, the producers of Chilean, Australian and California wine, and of all the wines from the Pacific, are going to revolt and claim this precedent for themselves.
Commissioner, I come from a region that invented the great revolts in the 1950s. Well, the wine growers from the Languedoc region will say ‘no’ to you. They will revolt and they may, for that matter, come to the Commission in Brussels. They have been able to rouse the whole of southern France, and they will have no difficulty in saying ‘no’ to you as violently as is necessary, because you are attacking them and you are attacking a civilisation."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples