Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-15-Speech-3-104"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000315.3.3-104"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Firstly I must congratulate the rapporteur on his tenacity in this ‘chocolate’ issue.
I support these demands which are contained in the amendments tabled by the rapporteur. I myself am a consumer who is concerned about the quality and taste of traditional chocolate. I also believe that consumer protection policy, elevated to the rank of a Community policy, does not just involve food safety and the protection of health. It must aim to promote quality food which is part of a more general philosophy of quality of life!
Next I will sketch the broad outlines of this issue. In 1996, the European Commission proposed amending the 1973 directive which authorised the United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark to derogate from the applicable rules by replacing part of the cocoa butter in chocolate with other vegetable fats up to a maximum of 5% of the total weight. With the accession of new Member States, the number of countries authorising vegetable fats other than cocoa butter increased to seven with the addition of Finland – which authorises 10% – Austria, Portugal and Sweden. The eight other Member States – Germany, Belgium, Spain, France, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands – ban vegetable fats. The current proposal therefore aims to give Member States the option of authorising the addition of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter to chocolate products up to a maximum of 5% of the total weight of the finished product.
This has clearly succeeded in causing some occasionally stormy debates and has particularly revived legitimate concerns among consumers. The latter felt particularly threatened some years ago when Europe, through certain harmonisation directives, tried to impose ‘Euro-products’ on us and they have demonstrated their desire to defend their culinary traditions. A campaign has subsequently developed to promote food quality at the same time as food diversity.
In this case, although it is indisputable that Member States using vegetable fats instead of cocoa butter should be entitled to market their products, the question is whether these can be legitimately marketed under the name ‘chocolate’. The replacement of cocoa butter with other vegetable fats raises a question about protecting the very nature of chocolate. Adequate guarantees must therefore be provided for both consumers and cocoa producers. We must demand the following:
a method of analysis allowing the exact content of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter to be determined. This requirement was not specified by the European Commission and has unfortunately not been included in the Council’s common position. However, I still believe that this is an essential condition to ensure respect for the 5% rule;
very explicit wording intended for consumers so that they can buy chocolate in full knowledge of the facts;
the reservation of the name ‘quality chocolate’ for products which contain cocoa butter;
the restriction of alternative vegetable fats to tropical fats not obtained using enzymatic production processes and not originating from genetic engineering;
a study into the impact of such a measure on the export of cocoa by developing countries."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples