Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-17-Speech-2-284"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021217.9.2-284"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Madam President, in 1966 the Community first established a comprehensive system to monitor and control the presence of residues in food of animal origin from the Member States and from third countries. This system involves the setting up of a residue monitoring plan as well as a legal framework to allow for official controls and a practical infrastructure for laboratory testing. This legislation requires Member States and third countries exporting to the EU to submit annually a monitoring plan for residues in products of animal origin.
In other cases, it has not been necessary to ban imports, as the third countries concerned have initiated extensive action plans to resolve the problems – in particular the testing of all consignments exported to the European Union and suspension of the offending establishments.
These measures taken in third countries are complemented by strict, mandatory import controls to provide sufficient guarantees. This is the case for both Thailand and Brazil. The Commission will ensure the maintenance of the necessary level of scrutiny on imported products to ensure a consistent approach to consumer safety. The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed is the tool to disseminate all relevant information between Member States and the Commission, as well as to third countries.
Let me say that it is not just in relation to third country imports that the Commission has identified problems of residues in food. Indeed, residues monitoring plans carried out by Member States also enabled the identification of contamination cases in food produced in the European Union.
Some concerns have been raised – and the issue has been raised and the question sent to the Commission by Parliament – about the cancellation of FVO inspection missions to the third countries from which contaminated products have been identified. Perhaps I should explain the background to this.
Indeed the Commission has postponed a number of planned missions in respect of residues. These include missions to Brazil and Thailand. It is considered that such missions would be a waste of valuable resources at this moment as 100% testing is in place for poultrymeat from Brazil and Thailand and for shrimps from Thailand. Consignments which test positive are destroyed.
These measures are necessary because there are serious failings in residue controls in the countries concerned. It is not necessary to send a mission team to establish what is already known. In the case of China there is already a comprehensive ban in place on exports to the European Union on a range of products and increased testing is in place for other products. It is premature to carry out a mission now, as the Commission is not convinced that the necessary preparatory measures have been put in place. Instead it is considered best to await concrete evidence of progress in the form of regulatory controls, such as legislation and so on.
However, in the coming months, FVO missions could be deemed necessary to assess the implementation of actions and the changes introduced by the third countries concerned in the area of residue monitoring. The FVO programme of inspection for 2003 mentions such missions.
That is the position in regard to the issues that have been raised in the questions. I am happy to outline that for Parliament.
Monitoring should be targeted at detecting illegal treatment of animals and at controlling compliance with the maximum residue limits for veterinary medicinal products, the maximum levels for pesticides and the maximum levels set in relevant legislation covering environmental contaminants.
The residue plans are subject to an extensive evaluation procedure. Only those third countries that have submitted satisfactory residue monitoring plans are allowed to export to the European Union and be included in the appropriate list.
This list is kept under constant review in order to take into account the results of the evaluation of the annual updates of residue monitoring plans.
However, this approach must be complemented by measures on the ground.
First, import controls must be carried out by the Member States at the external borders of the Union.
Secondly, the Food and Veterinary Office verifies how the residue plans are implemented in the Member States and third countries.
Over the last year, we have been particularly concerned about discoveries of banned veterinary medicinal products – namely chloramphenicol and nitrofurans – in food of animal origin. These substances are banned for use in food-producing animals in the European Union because it has not been possible to set a safe level of residues due to their toxic effects on human beings.
The Commission has not hesitated to take measures whenever this problem has arisen. For example, imports from China of all products derived from farmed animals, including aquaculture, have been banned on the basis of the conclusions of an FVO mission, underpinned by discoveries of contaminated food."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples