Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-25-Speech-3-198"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050525.20.3-198"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, first I should like to say that, in order to keep the procedure brief and save time, I have put at Parliament's disposal a full list with the Commission's position on all the proposed amendments, with the request that it be included in the Minutes of this part
session.
The proposal which exists today basically covers three issues. Firstly, it regulates the composition of foods by creating a list of acceptable vitamins and minerals with upper and lower limits, in order to ensure, of course, that products are safe. There are provisions relating to labelling, advertising and the presentation of fortified foods which provide a basis for analysis and, where judged necessary, for regulating the addition of certain other substances.
As far as food supplements are concerned, I would reiterate that they are foods; other relevant legislation only regulates their vitamin and mineral content, but not other substances which they may contain. That is why they should not be completely excluded from this proposal.
As far as the question of vitamins and minerals is concerned, the proposal is aiming for their full harmonisation and I think that this covers the question of better regulation, because better regulation does not mean no regulation. This is something which is dealt with precisely by having Community legislation. I agree on this point with Mrs Belohorská, who said that uniform Community legislation helps both industry and consumers in the most effective way possible and we do not have 25 different, fragmented sets of rules at various levels.
As far as other substances are concerned, there is limited harmonisation here in order precisely to take account of the peculiarities of these elements. However, Annex III to the proposal provides the possibility, if and where needed, for a rapid response if, of course, it is considered that the consumption of these substances in such quantities might be a health risk.
That is why I could accept amendments which clarify the question of other substances, but not excessive additions to the number of substances examined and I believe that this approach, as set out in the proposal for Annex III, which will include substances which are considered to be a risk to human health, is the best approach, instead of having a positive list, and I am delighted that the majority tends in this direction.
Finally, I wish to say that, for me, the recommendation on better information for industry and, of course, for consumers through increased notifications to the Commission, which will also be published, is a good thing. However, we need to find the most correct and effective way of achieving this without creating an excessive administrative burden."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples