Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-25-Speech-3-205"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-05-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Nutrition and health claims in labelling2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050525.21.3-205"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-05-25-Speech-3-2062
lpv:speaker	lp:Angelika Niebler2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; IMCO (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 member; ITRE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-11-14--2009-07-13)3 member; FEMM (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Gulf States, including Yemen (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, I should like to thank the rapporteur and all of the shadow rapporteurs. What is this regulation about? It is about regulating food advertising. The Commission’s view is that everything should be regulated: nutrition claims (such as fat content, high energy, low energy); health claims (such as ‘a food strengthens the body’s defences’, ‘a food helps concentration’, and so on) and pure ‘feel good’ claims (such as ‘a food keeps you fit, gives you a boost, gives you energy’, and so on). ‘Feel good’ claims are to be banned completely and health claims will in future have to be authorised by the European Food Safety Authority. How this proposal for a regulation is supposed to be compatible with the Lisbon strategy, heaven knows. Neither is there any justification for these provisions, with the exception of those harmonising nutrition claims. In all of the discussions in the various different committees we have heard people say time and again that we in Europe have to do something to combat widespread child obesity. That is of course true, but we will not achieve this by banning advertising claims! If people want to take action against child obesity, they need to see to it that eating habits are changed, that our children do more sport and that they spend less time in front of the television and the computer. Incidentally, why should mood and fitness related claims be banned, when they express an individual feeling and are easily recognisable as advertising? I believe that the approach that the Commission has adopted here is wrong. What we have here is the philosophy of ‘Everything is banned unless it is allowed’, and the Commissioner argued for it when he said that consumers expect every label to have first been checked by the authority. If you will forgive my saying so, this is not only about labels: it is about advertising claims. I do not think that this is a good approach, and I am grateful that the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy has also given it as its opinion that Articles 4 and 11, in particular, should be deleted. I hope that we will also achieve this result at tomorrow’s vote: the modification of Article 11 and the deletion of Article 4."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph