Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-16-Speech-2-347"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060516.38.2-347"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, warmest congratulations to Mrs Roth-Behrendt, best wishes for her recovery and many thanks for her excellent report and the good negotiations with Council and Commission. I am very confident that we will reach agreement here with the first reading.
It affords an excellent guarantee of consumer protection. We fully support the stricter measures the rapporteur calls for. We consider the rules provided by Parliament, namely TSE checks for cattle over 30 months slaughtered for human consumption and for all cattle over 24 months that have died or been sent for emergency slaughter, to be sufficient and correct. This measure will save the small
of Schleswig-Holstein alone 4 to 5 million euros a year without prejudicing the safety of consumers.
The adaptation to the World Organisation for Animal Health’s three risk categories is also logical and necessary. The definition of active and passive surveillance categories safeguards epidemiological monitoring and preserves its quality. I believe the limited ban on feeding animal proteins to ruminants is correct, even if not totally adequate. Nature did not envisage ruminants eating animal proteins, except for calves in the form of mother’s milk. The argument that cleaned proteins from fishmeal are no different may well have a scientific basis, but in my opinion it is not correct. From an ethical point of view, I find the feeding of fishmeal problematical and undesirable.
Periods of up to eight years in doubtful cases are sufficient for the ban on the sale of animals from third countries. The abolition of zero tolerance for the presence of animal proteins in feed as a result of accidental contamination is a quite crucial and logical step forward. In my country, zero tolerance resulted in tens of thousands of tonnes of sugar beet having to be destroyed because animal protein was found in it when it was delivered. The up to 0.5% protein admixtures that will now be tolerated come predominantly from small animals that were killed in the process of harvesting or had died in the fields long before and are certainly free from TSE. The new limit here is a real step forward towards sensible legislation.
I agree to the proposal, but cannot refrain from making one small remark in conclusion, namely that life for Parliament would surely be even better and even more democratic if there were less or no comitology."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples