Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-05-Speech-4-045"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030605.2.4-045"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the key point in food safety is official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption, which is the subject of the Schnellhardt report that we are considering today. The four annexes to the regulation concern fresh meat, molluscs, fisheries and milk and milk products. I will just mention the few points that I see as most important.
Also, regarding the formation of gas in the gastro-intestinal tract, you will be aware that hunters eviscerate the game immediately as a food safety precaution and I do not see how the inspecting or official vet can therefore monitor the presence of gas in the gastro-intestinal tract.
Regarding the presence of the listed parasites that are dangerous to health, I think that it would be good to attach the list as an annex, in order to prevent difficulties with interpretation.
First of all, regarding primary production, an exception should be entered in the regulation. I think that primary production of foodstuffs for private use, and the direct supply by the producer of small quantities to the final consumer or local shops and restaurants should be considered as traditional food production which should have specific sales rules. I therefore support Amendments Nos 11 and 12 by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. Moreover, the competent authorities within each Member State are, in my view, best placed to assess the situation and decide on the restrictions that will best protect consumers.
I also feel it is essential to include the notion of small, traditional establishments in the regulation, allowing sufficient flexibility without endangering or diminishing food safety for consumers. This notion of the small establishment will ensure the survival of the small abattoirs spread evenly across the territory. Let us not, therefore, move towards regulations that are too strict and too difficult to implement, which will lead to the closure of local abattoirs. Maintaining these abattoirs would simplify matters as there would be no need to legislate on maximum distances and times for transporting livestock heads by lorry. Let us be honest: the only way we are going to make progress is by shortening the food chain.
With this in mind, it is important to compensate the producers and farmers who achieve better results when assessed by granting them a reduction in the costs arising from official controls. This should not, of course, be done to the detriment of food safety.
The approval of establishments is another difficult question. Who should be responsible for it? Should it be at Community level or national level? Where does subsidiarity fit in? I prefer the option of dual responsibility, which would oblige the Member States to keep an up to date list of approved establishments, while putting forward their own national regulations on controls. However, I think it would be counter-productive for the Commission to oblige the Member States to provide the names of the establishments in a single electronic format. It is sufficient for the Member States to exchange lists. There is also no justification for administrative sanctions for failures to comply with the hygiene principles. Administrative closures of abattoirs and publishing sanctions are solely the responsibility of the Member States.
The thorny issue of imports of products of animal origin from third countries is effectively dealt with. The Member States will have a list of approved, inspected and certified establishments, taking into account the hygiene, production and storage rules applied in the third countries.
I am, however, more concerned regarding animal welfare, which should not come before food safety, and regarding the pre-eminent role of the inspecting vet. I think that official assistant vets should be able to take part in ante mortem inspections in abattoirs. This is already the case in France and I do not see why this should be questioned.
I support the rapporteur on Amendments Nos 111 to 114 on game, which propose the analysis of residues not resulting from the actual hunting process.
Still on the subject of game, I do, however, have reservations regarding the Commission’s proposal, and in particular the presence of aged open fractures. In principle, if they are aged, these fractures are no longer open, and are therefore healed. There are no longer any risks in terms of food."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples