Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-13-Speech-2-282"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010213.12.2-282"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we are discussing a very important directive today. The market for food supplements is developing apace. This has to do with people’s lifestyles and eating habits. It also has to do with consumers’ insecurity about their own health. People’s health is a matter of the utmost concern. Food supplements can be an aid to health, so those who can afford it will gladly buy themselves good health. But we must also be aware that it is easy to talk people who are insecure into feeling that they must buy themselves good health, and that quality is not always guaranteed. We must therefore separate the wheat from the chaff. The consumer is entitled to safe products and sound information.
There are major industrial interests at stake when it comes to food supplements. There is no internal market but there are numerous rules at national level. This is inconvenient, but as the PSE Group sees it, consumer protection must take precedence at the end of the day. Divergent national provisions, uncertainty as to the safety of products and a growing market clearly demonstrate the urgent need for a European directive on food supplements. That is why the Commission's proposal is so important. The Commission has established a clear basis for determining safe upper limits of vitamins and minerals. I am pleased to compliment Mrs Müller on her consistent, professional and serious approach.
On behalf of the PSE Group, I would like to broach three subjects. Firstly, the scope of the directive. The Commission has proposed that only vitamins and minerals should be brought within the scope of application of the proposal. That is understandable but it fails to take into account how the industry has grown. Herbal extracts, amino acids, and essential fatty acids are used in food supplements too. I personally think it is important to define the scope as broadly as possible, thus including substances with a nutritional and a physiological function alike. The advantage of this broad definition is that it creates legal certainty for producers and gives consumers a wide choice of safe products.
The second point I would like to address is the need for scientific testing. Far and away the most important aspect of this proposal is the principle that only ingredients that have been scientifically tested are permissible. The maximum permitted quantities are determined according to the basic principles laid down in Article 5. That is the basis for consumer confidence. Naturally, any country may decide for itself whether or not to permit untested ingredients. The directive does not detract from this in any way. But it is unacceptable, to my mind, for them to enter into circulation in the internal market without so much as a by your leave. Scientific research and approval are required for that to happen.
Lastly, a few words about labelling. It is very important for the information to be correct and to include a warning about exceeding the dosage. A good diet is crucial and is an aid to good health. No consumer should be put to great expense as a result of misrepresentation and no consumer should feel obliged to buy good health.
All in all, I think it is a marvellous proposal. Once again, my sincere thanks to the rapporteur. We support this report wholeheartedly, subject to guarantees that ingredients are scientifically tested."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples