Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-201"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.6.3-201"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, it is high time that a total ban were introduced on phthalates in all toys for children under three years of age, as is already the case in Denmark. It is quite unacceptable that we can get into a situation in which we are going to reduce the level of safety for our children. I know that the Commission is very busy, but is it acceptable never to have time to attend to one’s own children? Now, I see that the Commissioner is not listening. Perhaps he does not have time to do that, either. Anyone who did go to the trouble of observing their children would quickly discover, as has already been said a number of times, that children suck away at anything they get their hands on, and not only on things that are intended to be put into their mouths. In Denmark, investigations have been carried out which show that the quality of the semen of young men appearing before army medical boards is 40% poorer than that of the 50 year-olds. It can no longer be taken for granted that people can have children, and suspicions are mounting where phthalates are concerned. It is only four months since the Commission sent out a communication of just under 30 pages concerning the precautionary principle. Is it not only right to put all the fine words into practice now about protecting health and the environment and to make use of this principle in an area we still know very little about? If the precautionary principle is not to be employed in respect of one of the most vulnerable consumer groups – our children – it is very difficult to imagine when, in fact, it is to be employed. I should like to know why the Commission only wants the six phthalates which have been investigated to be banned, instead of them all. I support Mr Arvidsson’s report which – unlike the Commission’s proposal, which is open to criticism – takes our children’s health seriously. I think still further action needs to be taken and a ban imposed with no restriction on age, but I hope at least that Amendment 20 will be adopted."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples