Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-05-13-Speech-2-130"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030513.6.2-130"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to thank the minister for his explanation. The Council meeting naturally took place at a time when rumours and speculation about SARS were taking on huge proportions. The risk of confusion and misunderstandings about this highly infectious disease is therefore also increasing at an alarming rate. At the moment, however, we are still seeing different Member States giving conflicting travel advice about the so-called infected areas. It is the European Union’s duty to try to avoid this kind of confusion and misunderstandings. My country, for example, only issues negative travel advice on Beijing, Hong Kong and the Guangdong province. Other Member States are doing so for all infected areas. Why is there no clear European line on this point? The European Union, not only the Member States, should be taking action in this regard. That is not enough, however. SARS is pre-eminently a problem that does not respect national borders, and reminds us that problems such as these may also arise with other infectious diseases. When we see how quickly SARS has spread – perhaps not yet in Europe but certainly elsewhere – we must learn lessons from this, and not only now in respect of SARS.
The Council of 6 May called on the Commission to continue to coordinate the EU’s action in respect of SARS and to consider developing a plan concerning a general preparedness for transmittable diseases and public health threats. The European Centre has once again been mentioned. Perhaps this is enough at this point. Perhaps SARS is indeed something that has not spread so far that more stringent measures are needed.
What would we have done, however, if something like this had got out of hand? That might have happened. That could already have happened. Take the situation in Toronto – hardly a developing country, but a city with top-quality medical facilities that was suddenly gripped by SARS. That could have happened to us. What would we have done? Would we have asked the European Commission to do some consulting and coordinating? Would we have convened a meeting to see what we could do about it? No, what is lacking is the possibility of the European Commission implementing crisis management measures at such a time. I think that the European Commission should develop an emergency plan for this kind of situation, a plan which enables us to take concrete action in response to emergencies and then take measures such as those our American and Canadian colleagues are taking: quarantining people suspected of having the infection, providing additional funds for preventing the spread of the virus and support for people who are in voluntary or enforced quarantine.
The problems are broader than this. It is not just about SARS. Commissioner Byrne informed Parliament on 7 April about the possibility that the SARS virus was transferred to humans from animals. Take the Hong Kong flu last century, the Spanish flu last century, viruses that mutate, the fowl pest in the Netherlands at the moment, about which the World Health Organisation has expressed its concern. What should we do about these?
The European Commission needs to be able to implement practical crisis-management measures quickly for these kinds of situations in particular. I also welcome what the minister has said about this. The role of public health in the Treaty really must be laid down and reinforced now."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples