Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-26-Speech-4-166"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050526.33.4-166"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I thought I ought to vote in favour of Amendment 29 which abolishes the nutrient profiles proposed by the Commission. I can understand Mr Maaten’s dissenting position since, in his capacity of shadow rapporteur of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, he is supposed to promote the group position that has been agreed upon.
When making nutrition and health claims on foods, the guiding principle should be that there is no such thing as good or bad foods, only good or bad diets. Claims on foods must be scientifically underpinned and need not fit into a profile imposed by the government. Moreover, uniform food profiles are at odds with the variety of living and eating habits in the EU Member States. Consequently, the introduction of nutrient profiles as a condition for foodstuffs being able to display nutrition and health claims infringes the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Another objection to the concept of nutrient profiles is the disproportionate administrative burden that this entails for the small and medium-sized enterprises which are, indeed, strongly represented in the foodstuffs industry."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples