Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-07-22-Speech-4-025"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19990722.2.4-025"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, given the history of the United Kingdom in relation to the BSE crisis, some delegates may consider that the UK is disqualified from giving an objective view. However, such a view would be wrong. It must be remembered that this was not our only crisis. We also had salmonella in eggs and listeria, giving us unparalleled experience in dealing with food safety crises.
On the matter of listeria, this crisis came to a head in 1989 when over 200 babies and young children had been killed in preceding years, far more than died of new variant CJD. What fellow Members may not know is that the main source of the disease was contaminated paté sold from three Belgian plants. Only when UK health officials intervened was the problem finally resolved. What this says is that it is not just the UK that has food safety problems. But what we have learned from our incidents is that precipitate reaction can often do more damage than the initial crises. Action needs to be carefully considered and based on good science.
In response to the dioxin incident, we see the Commission launching once again into frenzied legislative action. This is damaging British interests, in particular a company called Spalding Nutrition which is threatened by an entirely unnecessary ban. Thus, we would say: by all means have an enquiry, but first let us have a wide-ranging review of all Member States' systems for dealing with food and health scares, starting with an evaluation of the British system."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Farage (EDD)"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples