Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-193"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.6.3-193"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I cannot deny that this issue is extremely tricky for the Liberal Group. The problem of phthalates in children’s toys is receiving wide public attention and the campaign which focuses on this problem, largely in the hands of Greenpeace, can be termed extremely successful. This is only natural and right, of course, because children are helpless and are entitled to protection.
We know that phthalates in animal trials – in itself not a very pleasant thought – proved harmful, and we can therefore assume that they will be harmful to people, too. But we do not know to what extent they would be harmful, or in what dosage. Neither do we know for which application they are harmful or whether there are alternatives, and how harmful these would be and in what form.
As there is no usable test, the question arises as to the basis on which we pursue our policy? As far as this is concerned, we cannot shake off the impression that this decision is premature in a way. But anyway, it is now before us. Phthalates are intended to soften PVC toys, but the substances leach out, certainly if the toys are chewed, as they in fact are by small children, of course. As far as we know, not many alternatives appear viable either.
We value the assertive course which our rapporteur has taken and we therefore back the thrust of his proposal, that is to say we endorse a ban on this type of toy for children under the age of three, provided it is extensive. If we go for this option, then we should at least be consistent. In our view, therefore, this ban should apply to all toys, not just those intended for sucking and chewing.
We also believe that we should look into toys for older children, although we should still have this option available once the test methods are there. I am interested to see what the European Commission’s opinion would be on this. What do you think of these test methods and what is your view on revising these regulations once they are there?
We are in favour of a ban on the six tested phthalates, but are as yet unable to ban all the other phthalates and softeners, which may indeed be harmful. This may well be possible at the time when we have more data available that demonstrates that they are actually harmful. We have insufficient data available at this stage to establish this.
On a final note, how far do we take the precautionary principle at the end of the day? As far as we are concerned, the principle should not mean that we simply reject everything we are not completely sure about at the moment."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples