Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-07-01-Speech-2-309"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030701.11.2-309"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
In response to the questions that have been put to me by Mr Whitehead and Mrs Wallis, let me repeat what I said earlier: I have asked my services to consider the development of standards for meat preparations that would limit the amount of water that could be added to such products and indeed the use of animal proteins for the purpose of bulking. My intention is to analyse the work that has been undertaken by my services, to determine what further work can be done.
I agree, to some extent, that labelling may not be sufficient. I, like you, have also watched that television programme. I found that some of the labelling that was identified in the programme indicated that the particular product was 65% chicken.
It raises a question for the consumer: what is the other 35%? We have spent a great deal of time in this Chamber debating – as we did this afternoon – questions relating to GMOs and the labelling of GMOs. But it requires some degree of vigilance from consumers: they must read these labels and draw appropriate conclusions. Having said that, this does not relieve us from examining the appropriate responses to situations such as this and seeking a more satisfactory response. As I said earlier, in my original answer, I am looking at this. However, I also appeal for some consumer vigilance as a response to the work that we do here in relation to labelling."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples