Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-15-Speech-1-096"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060515.16.1-096"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking both rapporteurs, Mrs Poli Bortone and Mrs Scheele, for their excellent work and cooperation with my services in working out this compromise. I also wish to thank the shadow rapporteurs for their contribution.
On the regulation concerning the addition of vitamins and minerals, again we have reached a good compromise. On the basis of this compromise, I should like to make the following statement:
‘Further to its statement accompanying the adoption of the common position, the Commission has the intention to present, as soon as possible and in any case within two years of the adoption of the regulation, a proposal for the revision of Directive 90/496/EEC on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs. In that context, the Commission has the intention to consider the review of the rule concerning the meaning of ‘significant amount’ as mentioned in the Annex to that directive.’
I very much hope that Parliament will support this compromise package, which regulates the composition aspects of foods and ensures the safety of the product. It also introduces appropriate specific rules on labelling, presentation and advertising, and at the same time provides the basis for scrutinising and if necessary regulating the addition of certain other substances, as already mentioned by the rapporteur.
That will ensure a very high level of protection for public health and consumer protection and at the same time allow the industry to have a stable, concise, clear regulatory environment that will allow for innovation and the need to remain competitive at Community and international level.
In conclusion, may I again thank the two rapporteurs and everyone else who has cooperated in achieving this compromise. I am looking forward to an interesting debate.
It is true that it was not an easy task. You will remember the great differences that separated the views of the three institutions on this issue. However, I believe – and the rapporteurs have rightly said – that we have managed to reach a good compromise. That is a fact. However, as with any compromise, it leaves a little to be desired by all sides, so each side would have preferred to go a bit further in one direction or another. Nevertheless, these compromises on both documents have managed to balance the interests of all involved: consumers, industry and economic operators. But this is a delicate and sensitive balance and I believe that the two documents should be adopted as agreed in the compromise, because anything else would upset this balance and would definitely upset the compromise.
These two regulations state that, if economic operators voluntarily use claims or other marketing tools to sell their products, they have to be truthful and accurate and the claims must be scientifically based. This means that it is the consumer’s choice – it is ultimately for the consumer to decide – but the consumer has to be presented with correct, accurate and scientifically-based information in order to make this informed choice. I agree with the rapporteur that this is a very important step in the long-term struggle that has just begun for the health and nutrition of European citizens.
The health claims regulation will prevent consumers from being misled by unsubstantiated or misleading claims. At the same time, it will provide harmonised rules allowing products to circulate freely in the internal market. It will also create a clear legal environment, a level playing field for economic operators to ensure fair competition, and it will encourage investment in innovative food practices. For example, in addition to the list of permitted nutritional claims or the list of physiological function claims, it will now allow, through an authorisation procedure, claims related to the reduction of a disease risk, something that until now has been prohibited.
So, these harmonised rules will be of great interest to the European food industry but, through the process we have adopted in the legislation, we also guarantee consumer protection. Also, for health claims based on newly developed data, the compromise now provides for a simpler and faster procedure in order to boost innovation in the area of food. I am sure Parliament recognises the effort that both the Commission and the Council have made on that point.
On the nutrient profiles, which have already been described, these are products that, on the basis of the claims, are made to appear better to consumers, encouraging more consumption. We therefore need proper criteria in this respect. The nutrient profile is one good criterion that could be used and the proposed compromise introduces flexibility in order to facilitate the application and use of these claims.
In the context of this compromise, I should like to make the following statement:
‘In establishing the nutrient profiles referred to in Article 4(1) through the Regulatory Committee procedure, the Commission undertakes to accompany the proposed Commission measures, submitted to the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, with an explanatory note outlining the criteria that will be taken into account for the establishment of the nutrient profiles.’
As I have said, I believe that this is a good compromise which covers the interests of all the key stakeholders."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples