Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-04-Speech-4-098"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031204.6.4-098"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
This Commission proposal to amend the regulation on organic farming seeks, primarily, to clarify problems of terminology, at a time when this concept is being used wrongly by supermarket chains and by some multinational agri-food companies. Another of the proposal’s aims is to tighten control over all operators at all stages of production.
The proposal nevertheless fails to meet expectations in this sector, which today accounts for around 150 000 farms and 4% of farmland in the EU. In this context, I agree with the rapporteur when she states that organic farmers, who are the main actors involved in this form of production, must play an active role in this process of amending regulations. I also agree that the labelling must contain no ambiguity over names and for this very reason, existing derogations for some brands, such as Danone, for example, should be immediately revoked. Clearly, labelling and rules must be the same for imported products too.
I am extremely unhappy that the report does not address the set of issues surrounding GMOs, including what is known as ‘coexistence’ or issues of genetic pollution and also overlooks the aid and protection given to organic seeds. Introducing GMOs will call into question the choice of organic farmers, with the economic risks ensuing from this pollution affecting their eligibility for existing aid, and no clear definition of the polluter’s responsibilities is provided.
(
)"@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples