Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-14-Speech-2-336"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041214.18.2-336"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, may I begin by saying what a pleasure it is to be here, and I hope that tomorrow when the vote is taken we will have an agreement. I see Mr Jørgensen is here, and I want to pass some comments about the way this Parliament has worked. Mr Jørgensen came in very late on, because he is a new Member. My Liberal, Socialist and Green colleagues have worked very closely together on this report. I thank them, because it left me in a position of great strength when it came to negotiating with the Council, and that is a position all of us in this august House aim for in order to be able to put our points forward.
What is this report about? The idea was to put in place a central harmonised system for the control of certain types of chemicals and fix levels of MRLs – maximum residue levels – of chemicals in foodstuffs. The one thing that has not escaped me, but may well have escaped other Members, is that this is a forerunner of the REACH Directive, which will be one of the biggest reports to come through Parliament. If they can handle it in the way that we handled it – I say 'we' because all our colleagues, as I said earlier, worked together – then we shall be in an extremely strong position.
What does it mean to consumers, the people who will be affected by this legislation? It means safer food across Europe; it means that if you buy a tomato in Ireland that has come from Spain you can guarantee the quality and safety of that product. It provides a guarantee that British lamb sold – dare I say – to the French is safe. That is extremely important for the consumer.
We have included a number of recommendations where, for instance, food is tested at the point of sale, which we have all agreed on. However, we also agreed that imports need to be of the same level of quality. This is important for people who import into the European Union. The levels of pesticides have to be of the same standard – not that they necessarily were or were not; but it is important that we get that message across for people who come into the European Union.
I shall mention briefly some things we fought over and had great debates about. Good agricultural practices – GAP – was a difficult issue, but we got a definition with the help of the Commission, which I am delighted to see here today. Our colleagues worked closely with the Commission and, as I said, the Council. This is very important in setting a precedent for the future, so that we know exactly what good agricultural practices are.
It was somewhat difficult to get a position on synergistic effects, but we now have a situation where we know exactly where we are going to be with those effects. For those who do not know, synergistic effects are a mixture of chemicals possibly used on a crop, and there is no particular definition of how they are traceable. We have put in place legislation which will work in the future. It has left a position open for future Member States to be able to define exactly what the situation is on synergistic effects.
I am concerned about how governments will implement this – because it is a regulation and therefore has to be implemented. I read recently in a paper that governments tend to gold-plate things. It is important, when we are pushing this through, that governments do not gold-plate it: we want an equal footing.
It is interesting that the British Minister of Agriculture, Mrs Beckett, has said that she will decide when farmers can go into the field, or when it is too wet or has been raining. I wonder exactly how she is going to do that. Nevertheless, it is important that we do not place governments or countries at a disadvantage compared to other Member States. That is why this legislation has been put in place. It is workable, it is a good regulation. Just in case the joint resolutions we have agreed do not go through, the PPE-DE Group has covered itself; but I expect all the joint amendments to be adopted tomorrow. I look forward to seeing Member States implementing and working well with it."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples