Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-02-Speech-1-047"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010402.5.1-047"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the Commission's proposal for a ban on the testing of cosmetics on animals – but only within the European Union – is totally inadequate. I agree entirely with the rapporteur. It will allow us to pretend that we are doing something to prevent animal cruelty, but while maintaining the same testing requirements not one fewer animal would suffer. By contrast, the rapporteur and the Committee, in calling for a sales and marketing ban, are maintaining the previous signal and the moral guidance about the relationship between humans and animals: that we do not accept that cruelty should be practised on animals for no better purpose than to develop products which are essentially frivolous and designed to flatter our vanity.
The Committee has addressed some spurious issues put up by the industry, such as that of the possible health benefits from new products, which they said could be reclassified as pharmaceuticals. Our emphasis is on saying that the industry should spend a little less on marketing and a lot more on developing alternative testing methods. Despite the vociferous objections of the industry, with 8 000 products already on the market, with the shop shelves heaving with deodorants and shampoos, make-up and hair gels etc., it hardly seems likely that a great many people are going to lose out if a marketing ban is introduced.
At the heart of this debate lies the problem of the World Trade Organisation. The truth is we do not know whether possible objections can be sustained. If they can, then change is needed. Whether it be this issue or the environment or the application of the precautionary principle, we must have the democratic freedom to be able to insist on some minimum standards acceptable to the majority of our citizens. It is totally unacceptable that those who seek to bring about improvements in animal welfare should be told by the Commission to put up the white flag and run away from the battlefield even before we know whether the enemy is armed. That would not indicate wise judgment, but abject cowardice demonstrating a total want of real leadership."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples