Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-10-Speech-1-110"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-04-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Food additives other than colours and sweeteners2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000410.7.1-110"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-04-10-Speech-1-1112
lpv:speaker	lp:Samuli Pohjamo2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; ELDR (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees and delegations for relations with Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Suomen Keskusta (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to thank the rapporteur for his thorough work but, in my opinion, the preparatory work has been carried out far too meticulously, with too much weight given to the precautionary principle. I would like to draw your attention to some of the issues that have been raised in this opinion of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy. The Committee found that the proposal for a directive does not follow the procedure specified for the basic directive on additives. The amendments in the Commission’s proposal are based on the needs expressed by a Member State, and the Scientific Committee for Food has delivered a favourable opinion on the amendments in question. Now we are talking about allowing the use of a few new additives. The rapporteur and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy have, however, treated the proposal heavy-handedly and are proposing that the use of most of the new additives mentioned in the Commission’s proposal be rejected. This raises a few questions. The Scientific Committee for Food has delivered a favourable report on proposals by Member States concerning additives. Has it not shown itself capable of the task in question or has the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy indeed gone too far in its interpretation of the precautionary principle? To what extent has the point of view of industry been taken into account in the report? Should not the question of innovations and the use of better additives, as well as competitiveness of the European food industry, be given greater consideration? We might also ask how Parliament in future will manage its enormous task if it tackles issues so meticulously. Should Parliament not decide on goals and procedures whereby matters such as the safe introduction of new additives can be assured? If the report is adopted in the form in which it has been presented, could not the adoption procedure regarding new additives be reformed once and for all and the whole additives list revised? I would ask the rapporteur in question, and the representative of the Commission also, to reply to these questions."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph