Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-19-Speech-4-007"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030619.1.4-007"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as time goes by, we in this Parliament find ourselves passing into law many proposals for legislation introduced by the Commission following on from its White Paper on Food Safety. In so doing, we are making a vital contribution to the improvement of EU law on food and feedingstuffs, while also ensuring that Europe’s consumers recover their confidence – which had been lost –in the safety of their food. This case is no different. Both Parliament and the Council are agreed that the essential significance of this draft regulation is that, from 1 January 2006 onwards, antibiotics will, once and for all, be banned as additives in animal feed. What Parliament has been calling for for years, this regulation is now bringing to pass.
Let me now turn, though, to the specific aspects that have concerned us in the course of second reading. Today’s vote presents us with two alternatives – firstly, the amendments voted on in the committee, and, secondly, the compromise amendments negotiated by the rapporteur with the Council and the Commission, which are intended to make a long and laborious conciliation procedure unnecessary. The Group of the Party of European Socialists has decided to support the compromise, and we did not exactly find that easy, having agreed in the committee that coccidiostats and histomonostats – the fundamental bone of contention between Parliament and the Council – would be permitted only until the end of 2008, which position was not – as is well known – supported by a majority on the Council. These substances are of great importance in poultry farming, and I have to say that I have no interest in banning their use. On the contrary, they must, in future, be removed from the category of additives to feedingstuffs and be categorised as subject to the legislation on veterinary medicines. Only thus can they be administered in a controlled way through prescription by a veterinary surgeon who knows the situation in the farm in question and can respond to it in an appropriate way. Failing that, the generalised prophylactic use of these substances – some of which are antibiotics – may well cover up any hygiene problems that exist on farms and in businesses. It was therefore of primary importance to us that we should today come to a decision in principle on what is to be done about coccidiostats and histomonostats, and, in this, the sequence of events was, ultimately, of only secondary importance.
Compromise Amendment No 16 fixes a date for the cessation of the use of these substances as additives to feedingstuffs, that being December 2012, and, when seen in comparison with the Common Position, that amounts to major progress. We would certainly have liked to see them stop being used at an earlier date, but, even after the compromise has been reached, that is still possible, if – as the same amendment states – we ask the Commission, in January 2008, for a report and a legislative proposal. Should further progress have been made by then on the development of usable alternatives, we will then be able to agree with the Commission and the Council on an earlier date for the cessation of use.
By adopting the compromise and by refraining from a conciliation procedure, Parliament has demonstrated that it is willing to cooperate, and let me make it perfectly clear at this juncture that we expect the same willingness to cooperate from the Commission and the Council at the consultations scheduled for 2008.
The Council has met us halfway as regards another point, namely the labelling of flavourings. In this regard, we take the view that it is necessary to have a rule that is in line with the provisions applicable to flavourings used in the production of food. Why more stringent standards should apply in the area of animal nutrition than do in the field of food production, is incomprehensible. Should there be, though, in future, provisions on food that impose the labelling of all ingredients of flavourings, we will, of course, also have to apply them to feedingstuffs."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples