Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-29-Speech-5-042"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991029.3.5-042"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the embargo on UK meat imposed by France raises, in my opinion, two kinds of issue, both of notable importance and significance for the future of the Union. On the one hand, there is the need to give substance to the very existence of the European Union by implementing in all the Member States the decisions made by the competent bodies on matters relevant to the Community, particularly in cases like the one we are addressing today which are liable to invalidate one of the fundamental premises of the Union itself – the free circulation of goods. On the other hand, there is the requirement to protect consumers, which is one of the absolute priorities and which is so important as to justify even national choices that contrast with Community decisions, provided that they are justified on scientific, health and hygiene grounds.
The appraisal carried out on both of these kinds of issues cannot be reduced to specific for or against positions being taken in Parliament regarding the French decision. It is up to the other institutions to decide on the validity of the legal premises and, in particular, on the health grounds given by the French authorities. In this regard, we are waiting impatiently for Commissioner Byrne’s press conference this afternoon. An in-depth Parliamentary debate leading to a political assessment on someone’s behaviour would be misleading, and, above all, it would not contribute to the overall smooth functioning of the European institutions. On the contrary, what seems appropriate and desirable is for us to use these opportunities as well to continue the work of bonding the Community institutions together. This is something that Parliament, under the mandate conferred on it by all the Europeans it represents, must take responsibility for, incorporating the role performed up until now by the national governments in the construction of the Community. Moreover, Parliament must, with increasing commitment, perform that function of acting as a counterbalance to the Executive, that is, the Commission, which is a characteristic of all modern democracies.
Returning to the case in hand, I believe that Parliament should not ask the Commission to investigate the existence of recommendations made by national agencies responsible for food safety that conflict with Community decisions. Instead, I think that it should ask the Commission and other competent Community institutions to draw up reports on what has been done as regards these decisions, in order to enable Parliament to formulate critical assessments which are a preliminary step towards perfecting the Community legislation in force on this subject."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples