Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-15-Speech-3-058"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-01-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Cosmetics2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030115.4.3-058"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-01-15-Speech-3-0592
lpv:speaker	lp:Bob van den Bos2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; ELDR (1999-07-20--2003-03-05)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; PETI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Democraten 66 (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"When viewed solely from the point of view of cosmetics, the outcome of the conciliation can be described as good. The industrial lobby has once again triumphed over the interests of animals who suffer unnecessarily. Europeans will only allow animal testing if it is absolutely necessary. This necessity does not apply to beauty products, so this directive should have implemented an unconditional ban on the sale and testing of these cosmetics. There is no such ban, however. The standpoint taken by our Parliament was already a compromise, but the outcome that has now been achieved makes things even worse. A partial prohibition will not enter into force until 2009, and three tests will be allowed to continue until as late as 2013 and perhaps even after that. It is not the Parliamentary delegation in the conciliation committee who is to blame for this flawed compromise but the Commission and the Council who have unilaterally bowed to pressure from the cosmetics industry. Better information for the consumer will hopefully result in consumers not wanting to become more beautiful by buying ‘ugly’ cosmetics. It is of the greatest importance that governments, science and industry invest in alternative methods. There is nothing at all wrong with a constant stream of new cosmetics coming on to the market; it must just not be at the expense of animals suffering unnecessarily. There are already very many products on the market which contain very many safe ingredients that have been tested on animals, and as far as I am concerned, that is enough now. This directive makes Europe look ugly, so I will not be supporting it."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph