Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-09-Speech-3-417"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-04-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Sweeteners for use in foodstuffs2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030409.10.3-417"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-04-09-Speech-3-4182
lpv:speaker	lp:Pilar Ayuso2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3,3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; AGRI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 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)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to thank the rapporteur. Personally, I find sweeteners a difficult subject. In my opinion, the Commission’s proposal does have the scientific rigour required when dealing with such issues. I shall comment first on the most controversial aspect of the report, namely cyclamates. The Commission’s initial proposal was to set the maximum dose at 350 mg/l, in line with the ruling by the Scientific Committee on Food. The Commission did however change its view regarding the maximum dose. It revised its initial proposal of 350 mg/l and supported the proposal of 250 mg/l. Commissioner, we are all wondering why that was so. We were told that a compromise had been reached in the Council, resulting in agreement on the figure of 250 mg/l. That suggests both political and scientific arguments were invoked. We cannot endorse this figure for political reasons. We must be rigorous and support the Commission’s original figure. I therefore call for Amendments Nos 8 and 9 to be rejected. I believe they lack sound scientific basis. Parliament cannot and must not take political opinions or compromises into account when dealing with as technical a subject as additives. If the Commission really believes that a maximum permitted dose of cyclamates of 250 mg/l is more appropriate it should withdraw its initial proposal. It should then present us with a new one, giving a scientific explanation of why it is now proposing a lower dose. The reasons for reducing the dose still further are inconsistent. Reference is made to a study carried out in Denmark in 2001. This study was based on a particularly small sample of children who consumed sweeteners. Crucially, it had not been designed as a study of the intake of sweeteners. It had been intended as an assessment of the use of sweeteners in soft drinks in Denmark. Simply extrapolating from the results of such a study cannot be a sound basis for reducing the maximum permitted level of cyclamates in soft drinks in the European Union. Furthermore, the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration stated in a press release on the publication of this study that the RDA study was based on safe lifetime intake. It went on to state that consequently there would be no harmful effects on the health of children aged between one and three who might temporarily exceed the RDA."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph