Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-13-Speech-2-108"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000613.10.2-108"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as a Bavarian delegate I would like to highlight a point in this draft directive which has a crucial bearing on my homeland Bavaria. It is undoubtedly right to make people aware of how damaging cigarettes are to health. The citizens of the EU are entitled to a high level of health protection, as enshrined in the Article on the internal market in the Treaty. However, the present draft fails to differentiate between cigarettes and other tobacco products such as pipe and fine cut tobacco, cigars, cigarillos, mouth and chewing tobacco, as well as the traditional European snuff.
In this connection, I would like to refer to the market shares of the various tobacco products. Cigarettes have a share of approximately 91%. Pipe tobacco, cigars and snuff account for 9%. These products are manufactured by small and medium-sized enterprises. Many types of tobacco reflect the cultural characteristics of the region where they are produced. For example, snuff is a crucial component of the Bavarian culture and way of life. For over 400 years, taking snuff has been the healthiest and most environmentally friendly way to enjoy tobacco. This is precisely what led to the Commission stating, in its explanatory statement in the draft directive, that scientists are no longer insisting on a strict health warning in the case of tobacco products not intended for smoking, snuff for example. Therefore, in comparison with all other tobacco products, snuff is the least harmful to health. This has been scientifically proven beyond doubt. That being the case, it is both unnecessary and factually wrong to apply a health warning, as provided for in current Amendments Nos 48 and 120. For this reason, I would urge you to vote against Amendments Nos 48 and 120 and to accept the original text of the Commission’s proposal as it is."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples