Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-23-Speech-1-128"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-10-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vegetative propagation of the vine2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001023.11.1-128"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-10-23-Speech-1-1292
lpv:speaker	lp:Marie Anne Isler Béguin2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Les Verts-Europe-Ecologie (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2000-10-05--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees for relations with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the reason we wished to defer this report was that we wanted to ensure consistency in the work of the European Parliament as it influenced the course of European policy. The revision of GMO Directive No 90/220 is at the conciliation stage right now. It would be completely inconsistent not to wait until the end of this procedure before including references to GMOs in our directives and regulations. That is why, at the proposal of the draftsman of the opinion, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has unanimously voted to do away with all the references to GMOs in this report. And please do not tell us that we are barking up the wrong tree, and that this revision does not have any implications concerning GMOs, since a regulation of this type already exists for forestry. At the moment, we consume wine, but we do not yet feed on the wood of our forests. Contrary to what the executive committee and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development would have us believe, this revision slyly but irremediably introduces genetically modified vines. This is a clear indication that the European Parliament would, indirectly, give the green light to GMO experiments in the field of vine propagation or improvement. Why the rush? It is not at the request of the winegrowers or wine merchants or vineyard owners. On 5 July, some of these issued the Beaune declaration, expressing their great concern at the introduction of GMOs into their sector. We have received a reply from the confederation of producers of registered designation of origin (AOC) wine, saying, “We support the position of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, as it offers the guarantee that European regulations are not going to permit the implementation of procedures to authorise the sale of genetically modified wine-growing materials which may be harmful to the brand image of wine growing.” Just who is going to benefit from this amended regulation which includes GMOs? The question – and the answer, of course – will have to come from the Commission, who must also tell us whether it is intending to continue to pave the way for us to end up with GMOs on our plates, and now in our glasses too. This is something that they are achieving, unfortunately, with the assistance of the French Presidency, in a way that is completely out of step with the way European consumers feel."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph