Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-14-Speech-2-064"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-03-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Cocoa and chocolate products2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000314.4.2-064"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-03-14-Speech-2-0652
lpv:speaker	lp:Kathleen Van Brempt2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (2000-02-02--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2000-01-19--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2000-01-19--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Socialistische Partij (2000-01-13--2003-09-28)3 member; PES (2000-01-13--2003-09-28)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the common position on the chocolate directive is about a directive – and I quote the chocolate industry lobby verbatim for the occasion – which creates a truly unified market for chocolate products whilst upholding the national chocolate traditions. The directive also offers comprehensive information to the consumer and safeguards the interests of the developing countries. But is this actually true? I will start with the information for the consumer. The Commission has freely admitted that there is no foolproof detection method. The margin of error is 2%. At 5%, this is even 50% more. This seems to be unacceptable to me. Furthermore, inspection depends on the type of chocolate and the information which the producer wishes to provide. We are not taking ourselves and the consumer, in particular, seriously if we introduce a directive which we cannot monitor adequately. I would now like to comment on the third-world interests. It concerns me greatly that both those for and against the common position keep bringing up the same arguments. Those “for” claim that the common position will benefit the third-world counties while those “against” say that more than 1 million farmers in western Africa stand to suffer from it as a result. Which is it and which will it be? Is it really asking too much to want to check what the effects of this directive will be on, for example, export and the sustainable development of cocoa-producing countries? Finally, ladies and gentlemen, I really need to get something else off my chest. Rightly or wrongly, it is said that this Parliament should not accept any amendments at the risk of jeopardising this delicate compromise. Well, if that is the case and if that is an argument, I suggest we pack our bags and go home now. Each common position always strikes a delicate balance between national interests, environmental conditions and social considerations. The European Parliament must have its input in this dossier and ensure that the common position is amended on a number of points and becomes a directive which benefits the consumer and the third world alike."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph