Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-24-Speech-2-035"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020924.3.2-035"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I do not think I will use up the five minutes I am allowed, I will be considerably more brief than that, because the resolution we are debating at the moment and which we will probably vote for tomorrow very clearly describes a situation which only has one possible and correct technical and legal solution: to maintain this Parliament’s request that the Commission withdraw the proposal to postpone the entry into force of the Directive.
As is explained in the resolution and as the rapporteur, Mrs Roth-Behrendt, has already explained, the Commission was empowered by the Council to postpone the entry into force of this measure, which it did by postponing the date of 1 January 1998 to 30 June 2000 and, subsequently, from 30 June 2000 to 30 June 2002. This postponement – as recital 10 of the Directive points out – should have been the last one.
Parliament cannot therefore accept it since, as Mrs Roth-Behrendt has already said, the Commission’s proposal for a new directive postponing the entry into force of this measure – which, furthermore, has been in force since 30 June 2002 – is not legal.
In June, the plenum of the European Parliament approved, on second reading, a modification – the seventh – of this Directive which laid down the prohibition of the marketing of products which have been tested on animals, five years after its entry into force. Currently, as has also been said, the process of modification for this sixth modification is being implemented and we are now on the seventh modification.
It is clear – and the rapporteur knows this because we have talked about it many times and she agrees with it – that an immediate prohibition of the marketing of products tested on animals, which the application – which is already in force, I would remind you – of this sixth modification of the Directive would represent, would at this time involve difficulties in terms of compliance which are practically impossible to overcome. We know this, I believe that is the spirit guiding the conciliation on this Directive: to find a formula for agreement so that the industrial sector – the cosmetics sector – can comply with the new time limit which may be stipulated.
This is how the conciliation debate is developing: finding a final time limit which allows the industry to adapt to the situation without harming competitiveness. However, while it is important to stress that we must find consensus during conciliation which provides a viable solution, this can in no way mean that the Commission is given the freedom to exercise a right which it does not legally have to order a further postponement of the entry into force of the said provision.
Parliament cannot therefore accept the use of such an undemocratic procedure as comitology to deal with a modification that contradicts the decision of this Parliament and of Community legislation itself.
And I also regret, Mrs Wallström, that it has been you who has had to endure this torrent of criticism of the Commission."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples