Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-16-Speech-2-144"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000516.6.2-144"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to join in the congratulations to the rapporteur on her excellent report. The report that we now have before us is an example of the kind of issue which requires of us the ability to demonstrate that the European Parliament places public health before internal market considerations. The EC Treaty – for instance, Article 30 and points 4 and 8 of Article 95 of that Treaty – presents us with both the opportunity and the duty to do so. The priority is to protect consumer health, particularly against diseases like TSE, the mode of infection of which is not adequately known and the testing of which so far is only possible after the symptoms have developed. Secondarily – and this is justified by the notion of the internal market – we must be able to restore consumer confidence in the foods on the market in order to enable the market to function with a minimum of disruption. Both issues are important, but we must be able to show clearly the priority of values; public health comes first.
The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has adopted a position that allows both of these objectives to be met. One important aspect of this view is the whole-herd slaughter on a farm where disease has been discovered. Even without knowledge of whether any of the other animals have become infected, this action is nevertheless justifiable, precisely in order for the above objectives to be met. At the same time, we must, of course, ensure that the breeder receives proper compensation for his livestock. In addition, the internal market must be able to operate in such a way that the spread of the disease is checked, and so that Member States, where no disease has yet occurred, can rely on the Community to protect the animal population of those States. In the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, I prepared a proposal for an amendment on this matter myself, stating as reasons for the issue specifically the above-mentioned prioritisation of values, where public health is the first. This objective has now been met in the Committee report – in a slightly different, but nevertheless satisfactory manner. Extending the period referred to in the Annex to the Regulation (the scrapie-free period) from two years to six, may be an adequate means of ensuring that the imported animals and processed material are risk-free, and of preventing the spread of the disease to countries where it does not yet exist.
Contrary to the Commission’s proposal, the report refers to instant tests, which are being used to detect TSE, by name. This in itself is acceptable, but we must bear in mind that we are dealing with a technology which is continually being developed. Hopefully, better tests than the current ones will soon be available, and when the time comes, it will be important that the currently approved regulations are kept up to date with the advances in technology."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples