Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-03-Speech-3-048"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991103.5.3-048"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, throughout the crisis of the last few days, the Commission has, on several occasions, adopted a position in favour of a European food safety agency. As far as this agency is concerned, it could take one of two forms. The one that I find quite positive would consist of creating an authority formed by a group of European experts without detracting from the decision-making power of national states on the fundamental issues which are the closest to citizens’ concerns. There is quite another concept which I feel is much more negative and this consists of establishing an additional feature which would take away a nation’s right to safeguard themselves, a right which is nevertheless inalienable. This form would, because the Commission seems unable to act in any other way, immediately prioritise the free movement of goods over consumers’ health, as we have just seen in the business of the ban on British beef and veal where, Madam President, we should really wait until the tests are available. Furthermore, this leads us to the following extraordinary conclusion that the precautionary principle is not being applied within the European Union, when we are trying to make it prevail in relations with third countries, particularly with the United States.
Well, Commissioner, what form would you choose for the food agency; one which takes a flexible and liberal approach towards countries, or one which takes an authoritarian approach towards countries?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples