Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-12-10-Speech-1-072"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011210.4.1-072"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance will, in effect, vote in favour of the Whitehead report. The European Food Safety Authority, an essential food safety mechanism serving the consumers and the political authorities of Europe alike, is essential to the performance of the functions that it will be assigned.
Its first task is to investigate all the failings that led to the recent food safety crises, both the crises in the food business, such as chicken dioxins, food and mouth disease, trafficking in veterinary products, the excessive use of vaccines and tranquillisers on animals and also the original BSE crisis. I would point out that even Finland now has its first case of mad cow disease. That is the first point I would like to make. My second point is that it is the agency that must also stop the uncontrolled spread of contaminating transgenic products that are even infesting traditional cereal crops, since consumers are rejecting transgenic crops, whose only virtues are commercial. Therefore, this agency must also, other than resolving all those problems, ensure food safety from the farm to the fork. In order to do so, the Food Safety Authority must apply, from the beginning of 2002, the principles of transparency and monitoring that my fellow Members have already mentioned. The failings in the area of hygiene as being the sole criterion, which has been highlighted in the many crises that we have listed, particularly in animal feed, shows that the agency must give advice on good practice, on labelling, on products that have been produced locally, that contain dairy products, instead of dealing with industrial standards alone, which do not prevent salmonella, listeria or any of the more distressing epidemics.
Its main function is therefore to coordinate the national agencies, and to do so, the agency must be independent and transparent.
On the other hand, I have doubts regarding Amendment No 34, which deals with the appointment procedure to the Management Board, a process that seems hazy at best, since it refers to the meritocracy of the Management Board. So what exactly does meritocracy mean in an agency that should be composed of experts in the relevant scientific fields? The Management Board has a political and managerial role. I very much fear that this meritocracy is simply a way of masking the pressure exerted by large food corporations. I hope that the Commissioner will be able to reassure me on this point.
As for where the agency will be based, we believe this is a side issue…"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples