Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-29-Speech-5-024"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991029.3.5-024"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, first of all I would like to thank Commissioner Fischer for his statement, and say to him that on Wednesday of next week we want either President Prodi or Commissioner Byrne to come to Parliament to make a clear statement on what measures the Commission intends to take following the publication of the scientific conclusions later today.
Let me conclude on one final point. The one issue that has been highlighted by this dispute is the fact that we now need a European Food Agency in place as a matter of urgency. I would say to Commissioner Fischler that, when the College meets next Wednesday, please come forward more rapidly with a proposal to establish a European Food Agency because in my view, if that had been in place today, this dispute would never have arisen.
This new Commission must be seen to be acting decisively and if public confidence is not to be eroded we need action within days, not within weeks or months. Therefore I say to Commissioner Fischler that when you have discussions with your colleagues over the weekend, when you look at the scientific conclusions – when you meet as a College on Wednesday – we cannot have prevarication or fudge. We have to have decisive action based on a clear decision that would be taken at the scientific committee later today. Perhaps Mr Parish could send a copy of his speech to his own party leader because sadly in Britain his own party leader has been advocating a ban on French products in the United Kingdom. What we want here, President, is the scientific evidence to prove or disprove the French case and we want an immediate resolution.
We do not want the xenophobia and the jingoism that we have heard on both sides of the English Channel in the last couple of weeks. We want to make sure that farmers and their families are taken care of. We want to make sure that the British beef ban is lifted.
All of the evidence demonstrates that British beef is now the safest in Europe and, we believe, the safest in the world. It was this House, through its special committee of inquiry into BSE, together with the European Commission, that recommended the measures that have now been taken to guarantee the safety throughout the European Union of those who consume British products and British beef.
It is for the future of the European Union, it is for the future of our unity in the World Trade talks in November when we go to Seattle, that we need to have two of Europe’s major trading partners resolve this dispute. Can anyone imagine what it will be like when we open the World Trade talks, if there is still a dispute between the French and the British on such a fundamental issue? It will be used by our opponents to divide the European Union in these crucial talks.
I would pay tribute, President, to the National Farmers’s Union and to British farmers. This week we had the Vice-President of the National Farmers’s Union, Tim Bennett, here. He met my French colleagues from the Socialist Group and he put forward a compelling argument as to why the British beef ban should be lifted. He did not use the gimmicks that we have seen recently: the Liberal Democrat dragging a sack of British beef through the airport, hoping that some hapless customs officer would arrest her for a photo opportunity, or the Tories storming the Bastille two weeks ago in Paris, again for a photo opportunity.
The National Farmers’ Union came here to meet Parliamentarians and to meet representatives of the Commission because they have a compelling argument. I want to thank those colleagues from Parliament who met representatives and British farmers and listened to that compelling case.
But I say to the Commission that the responsibility being shown by the National Farmers’ Union can only last for so long. If the Commission does not act next week, if this drags on for more than a few more days, then the argument in Britain will shift. Those people who at the moment have been asking for calm and for no retaliatory action will not be listened to. Inevitably, this issue will escalate and I think it will do permanent damage to British and French relations.
I say to the Commission and I say to this House that over the next few days, we need calm: we do not want a trade war, we do not want an escalating trade ban. We want common sense and we want to base our decision on science because in the disputes that occur in the future – and there will be many on food safety because consumers are so concerned now about the food that they eat – the scientists, the objectivity and the independence of the scientists is absolutely critical. Who knows what issue we will need to refer to that Scientific Committee. It is critical that we base our decisions on the scientific evidence and if there is a clear majority today by the scientists to lift the British beef ban we expect the French authorities to act within days, and we expect the Commission to take the appropriate legal action if that does not happen."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples