Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-06-Speech-4-157"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000706.6.4-157"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
(
) Only after the mad cow scandal did we realise the need to improve the traceability and labelling of foodstuffs. Europe was very slow to react and was left far behind in terms of beef. Today, on the basis of a unanimous agreement within the Council, we finally have the opportunity to show a little determination.
Europe must give consumers back their confidence, as they have been avoiding beef since the mad cow scandal. The implications are significant for the agro-food sector overall, which has been struck squarely by this crisis.
These two types of information are not in competition; they are complementary and contribute, each at their own level, to restoring the confidence of European consumers.
The confidence of our consumers cannot be decreed, it must be won.
Indeed, the common position submitted to us includes a large number of the amendments adopted by this House at first reading. Concerning the mandatory statements, indication of origin, implementation dates, minced meat and the optional system, I believe that Parliament should be satisfied: the Council has listened to us.
This is why I wholeheartedly supported this common position as it stood and did not vote for any amendments.
The debate has focused on a few specific points and in particular on the indication of the category of animal on the label. Certain fellow Members have explained, in good faith, that this statement does nothing to contribute to tracing beef. They are correct.
However, after the series of food scandals, which this House has always vigorously denounced, how could we today omit to take account of the colossal role played by the consumer? Specifically mentioning the category is a response to a demand. It contributes to restoring consumer confidence.
Two types of information must be distinguished:
information making it possible to improve traceability, but that is not directly intended to inform the end consumer. As it is too specific, it can really only be read by professionals. It fulfils a health function. It is on the basis of these statements that controls can be carried out. We are therefore talking about setting up identification and traceability systems;
the second type of information is directly intended for citizens like you and me, who buy their meat every day. What do they want to know? They want to be sure that the product they are to consume is safe: the traceability and identification system will make it possible to guarantee the safety and quality of beef. But the citizen would also like to know what type of meat it is. This type of indication on the label is addressed directly to the end consumer and gives him intelligible information. It is a mistake to say that this is pointless.
On the contrary, this labelling is just as important as establishing health guarantees."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"FR"1
"Grossetête (PPE-DE ),"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples