Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-06-Speech-3-380"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-09-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Dangerous substances and preparations (azocolourants)2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000906.16.3-380"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-09-06-Speech-3-3812
lpv:speaker	lp:Emmanouil Bakopoulos2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Dimokratiko Kinoniko Kinima (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (1999-10-13--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Hungary Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-04--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, the proposal for a directive which we are debating today is designed to restrict the marketing and use of azocolourants used in fabric dyes and leather goods. The reason for the restriction is that there is good cause to believe that these substances are carcinogenic. The annex to the directive contains a list of fabric and leather products in which the use of these suspect substances is banned. Several countries have already introduced similar bans in their legislation and most companies established in the European Union fall into precisely this category. However, we need a directive in order to harmonise the internal market and prevent such unilateral regulations. Finally, as is only to be expected, the directive also contains an analytical method for detecting banned azocolourants. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy accepts the principle on which this directive is based. The amendments, which were adopted unanimously, therefore represent an improvement. I should like to refer to just two of them. The Committee on the Environment takes the view that the list of products in which the use of azocolourants is banned, as contained in the annex to the directive, should not be open. It should be a complete, closed, precise list of named products. This will avoid arbitrary interpretation of the directive and, as a result, a wide variety of applications, which would run counter to the principle of the single market, which this directive has been introduced to protect. That is the purpose of Amendment No 3. The second amendment to which I should like to refer is Amendment No 2, which introduces recital 7a, exempting hand-made oriental carpets from the directive. The reason for the exemption is that, because these carpets are hand-made, spot checks are, by definition, impossible, while separate testing of each carpet would seriously damage the product. Especially in cases – and they are not infrequent – of hand-made artefacts and/or works of art. Importers are, however, advised to develop a quality mark. Mrs Roth-Behrendt and Mrs Müller tabled Amendment No 6, on time, rewording the previous recital 7a and proposing that the exemption from the scope of the directive for oriental carpets should expire on 1 January 2006. I think this proposal is sensible and propose that it be accepted. Finally, Mr Ferrer tabled Amendment No 7, again on time, proposing that the list of 21 azocolourants in the annex should include another substance, in addition to the two inserted in Amendment No 4. However, the substance which Mr Ferrer proposes is already included in the annex. Obviously, this is an oversight and I do not therefore propose that it be accepted."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph