Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-15-Speech-3-184"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001115.9.3-184"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I am glad of the opportunity to update you on the latest developments in the on-going crisis in relation to BSE. I had already anticipated addressing you on the Phillips report released earlier this month by the UK Government. However, events in France over the past week clearly call for an earlier discussion of these events.
We must not allow recent events to undermine this progress. I expect a strong endorsement of the Commission's proposals on the Food Authority from the European Council in Nice – and I note what you, Madam President, said on that issue only very recently. Parliament can equally signal its commitment to the proposal by giving it the highest priority with a view to its adoption in the shortest possible time.
Returning to the issue in hand, the events of the past few weeks already call for a response. The Commission view that targeted testing is essential in establishing a true picture of the real incidence of BSE in the Community has been fully vindicated by the test results in France. However, it is necessary to put in place such tests on a much larger scale.
The public needs reassurance that the controls already in place are effective. Extensive testing now appears to be the most effective means of providing such reassurance. The Commission intends to put proposals to the Agriculture Council on Monday next, which will fully answer public demands in this respect. The European Parliament has been a consistent and strong supporter of such testing and I count on your support for the Commission's approach.
The implications of recent events for the Community measures on meat-and-bone meal are also at issue. Clearly, explanations are necessary for the increased incidence of BSE, not only in France but also in other Member States. Time and again the finger of blame points in the direction of contaminated meat-and-bone meal.
France decided, yesterday, to ban meat-and-bone meal on a provisional basis. I look forward to the forthcoming opinion of AFSSA, the French Food Safety Agency, which will help inform the decision of the French Authorities on whether this provisional measure needs to be continued.
The evidence still strongly suggests that the increased incidence in some Member States has its origin in the period before the introduction of reinforced controls in 1996 and subsequently. And it is certainly the case that the current controls are very strict. For instance: there is a ban on the feeding of mammalian meat-and-bone meal to ruminants, notably cattle. Meat-and-bone meal must be processed, that is, pressure cooked, to very high standards. Specified risk materials must be removed and destroyed. Active surveillance measures, including random testing, are in progress to prevent cases of BSE from entering the food and feed chains.
However, these controls can only be effective if properly implemented. Many inspections by the Commission's Food and Veterinary Office point to weaknesses in the implementation of these controls. In some cases, the follow-up to these reports in Member States is not taken with the seriousness which it deserves. This, frankly, is unacceptable. It is unacceptable on public health grounds. It is also foolhardy, as the alternative to these controls leads towards an outright ban on meat-and-bone meal with the attendant huge financial and environmental consequences.
Public health and financial considerations, therefore, both argue for strict implementation. The Commission, for its part, will continue to impress on Member States the importance of this issue. The Commission's Food and Veterinary Office already affords top priority to Member States' controls in relation to protective measures against BSE.
I am asking the Food and Veterinary Office to carry out once more a fundamental and thorough inspection in the Member States in this respect. For example, the requirement to remove and destroy SRMs only entered into force from 1 October 2000 and I want urgent on-the-ground confirmation that this requirement is being enforced. Parliament's assistance in this respect would also be most welcome in alerting the public in the Member States to the importance of these controls.
Moreover, there is currently a major proposal before Parliament and the Council for a regulation on animal waste. This proposal provides the opportunity for putting in place a comprehensive framework to ensure that all the relevant issues relating to animal waste are addressed. Again, I hope to work with Parliament in putting this proposal on the statute book as a matter of urgency.
Only the dangerously complacent or naïve could assume that we have safely put the BSE crisis behind us. Once more we are reminded that BSE is not an historic event, but a real and present danger. There has been a worrying increase in the number of cases of BSE detected in France over the past year, in part due to the introduction of targeted testing. Moreover, the marketing of beef from a herd found to be harbouring a clinical case of BSE ignited public fears over the adequacy of controls to protect public health.
A number of speakers have raised the issue of a total ban on meat-and-bone meal. Let me add a few comments on what I said earlier in this respect.
In the situation confronting us it is always tempting to look to a magic solution, a solution which can, in one step, both eliminate risk and restore confidence. I have gone on record in stating that I will be fully transparent with consumers. This includes in my view the responsibility not to mislead them into believing that there are magic solutions to a very difficult problem. A total ban on meat-and-bone meal is an example of this.
My only concern in relation to the use of meat-and-bone meal is whether it is safe or not to use in animal feed. I leave it to others to make the economic and environmental case for its continued use. In relation to its safety, let me repeat that there is an extensive range of controls already in place to ensure that MBM does not pose a threat of transmission of BSE. It may be that MBM cannot be fed to ruminants and I have said this already. The scientific advice is that MBM produced under these conditions is not a danger.
This Parliament also accepts that there is a place for meat-and-bone meal produced under safe conditions. Parliament acknowledged that in its report on BSE in 1997 and I quote: "The recycling of carcasses and slaughter waste by the production of meat-and-bone meal for animal feed offers the best alternative on economic, environmental and health policy grounds". As I stated earlier, however, the safe use of meat-and-bone meal is conditional on the required controls being respected and implemented in full. If there is a weakness in the controls, clearly there is a problem. I am insisting, once more, that all Member States accept their responsibilities in this respect.
The Commission's Food and Veterinary Office will redouble its efforts to ensure that Member States respect their obligations. I would add that if the French decision to ban meat-and-bone meal is motivated by fears over the adequacy of their controls it is a decision I fully endorse. I welcome in this respect that Prime Minister Jospin yesterday also announced a substantial strengthening of controls on the food chain including a big increase in staff. I will be asking Member States on Monday if there are concerns that weaknesses in the implementation of controls over the past several years, in contravention of the Community legislation in the matter, are a factor in the current increased incidence of BSE.
Finally, Madam President, I would add that the Commission has recently presented a proposal to Parliament under codecision for a regulation on animal waste. This proposal aims at putting in place a Community framework which will address all relevant issues governing the treatment of animal waste, especially its use in animal feed. It is notable that in the discussions that have taken place already on this proposal with the Member States, a ban on the feeding of meat-and-bone meal to animals has not been suggested as a necessary measure. By that I mean a total ban. Instead, the consensus view is that the Community must ensure that only material from animals fit for human consumption should be used in the production of meat-and-bone meal. It remains to be seen if this changes in the light of current events.
Let me recall, Madam President, in this respect that I succeeded only five months ago in securing the Council's agreement to a ban on the use of specified risk materials in the food and feed chains. Yes, difficult as it may be to believe, it took four years to agree a measure which I consider to be fundamental to public health protection. The obstacles in securing support for a ban on meat-and-bone meal should be viewed in this light. Let me assure you, however, that if and when I consider that a ban on the feeding of meat-and-bone meal to all animals is a necessary measure to protect public health, I will present such a proposal irrespective of the obstacles.
Parliament itself now has its opportunity to shape decisively the future direction of policy towards waste at Community level. All options are open in this proposal on animal waste including a total ban, if thought necessary. I await your report and suggested amendments and assure you of my full cooperation for suggested improvements.
Clearly, we need to look at these developments and draw the appropriate lessons. That process must begin with a look at the facts. The current incidence in France is of the order of 7 cases per million cattle aged over two years. This falls far short of the international criterion of 100 cases per million used to define high incident countries. However, this relatively low incidence is no reason for complacency. The fact is that the incidence is rising in several Member States. In the absence of clear and transparent evidence that the incidence of BSE is falling in all Member States, we must remain extremely vigilant. More importantly, we must learn from this latest experience.
Let me briefly outline my main observations in this respect. First, the increased incidence of BSE in France is, in large part, due to the introduction of random testing by the French authorities. This follows from a Commission decision requiring all Member States to introduce such testing by 1 January 2001. All Member States should follow the French example.
Second, the absolute necessity for the implementation of rigid controls on BSE cannot be over-emphasised. The fact is that there is a battery of controls provided by legislation. If these controls are respected and implemented, the risk to the public is reduced to a minimum. I will return to this point later.
Third, we must have total transparency in our approach towards BSE. The consumer reaction to BSE has been variously described as a psychosis, irrational or driven by panic. A lack of clarity and transparency in addressing the issue has contributed hugely to this unfortunate situation.
Finally, we must not overlook the huge progress in recent years, in the past year in particular, in putting in place a framework to tackle BSE. In the process, we have also begun the task of ensuring that EU systems are in place to avoid similar tragedies in the future.
I was, frankly, disappointed that there was no acknowledgement in Prime Minister Jospin's statement yesterday of the hugely positive role played by the Community in recent years. Inspired by this Parliament, the Commission has been the driving force in pressing for the adoption of measures to eradicate BSE. And this was done notwithstanding the frequent lack of support in Member States.
This work is not complete. Important proposals, for example, on animal waste and on transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, are currently before the Council and Parliament. The proposal adopted by the Commission last week on the establishment of a European Food Authority is an even more significant initiative."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples