Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-02-Speech-2-152"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020702.7.2-152"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, this is a little reminiscent of a Greek tragedy: whichever option you take, it always has a bad ending. I think we are facing one such tragedy. The goal, on which we are all agreed, is clear. Consumers must have the choice: either with GMO or without, and the label must guide them in a clear and reliable manner. In that respect, we have to make a judgment to some extent on the basis of evidence on paper. We must develop a system which we can rely on, which does not necessarily involve scientific tests alone.
Our group does not want to label processing aids. We are still in discussion about products from animals that were fed GMOs at some stage. However, if we include these two aspects, then we will have to label just about everything, and I wonder whether we are helping the consumer in this way. Will he still be able to see the wood for the trees? This is why we call for a system of non-GMOs, which is, in fact, already being used as a sales point by a number of distribution chains. The key problem we will be facing in respect of paper evidence will be fraud. In my view, if we do not set up a sound and reliable system – since we are mainly dealing with countries outside of the Union – then we had better brace ourselves for the first scandal.
As for the threshold value, my group will be endorsing 0.5% or lower for accidental presence.
The Eurostat figures clearly show that most consumers want effective labelling. Should we, however, follow the Commission’s system? Does it provide the necessary guarantees for checking paper evidence in a number of products in total trade? Are we then certain that we will have a really good label? My second question is, if we introduce maximum labelling, so including enzymes and animal products, will we not start labelling nearly every single product, and does this benefit the consumer at all? In my view, the best combination is a non-GMO label along with a label which features a GMO for products in which these are present. This system is not watertight either, nor perfect, but I think that my version of the Greek tragedy will claim the least number of victims."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples