Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-10-22-Speech-1-092"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2007-10-22"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Framework directive on the sustainable use of pesticides - Thematic strategy on the sustainable use of pesticides - The placing of plant protection products on the market (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20071022.14.1-092"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2007-10-22-Speech-1-0932
lpv:speaker	lp:Marie Anne Isler Béguin2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 chair; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2004-09-21--2009-07-13)3 member; G/EFA (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AFET (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Les Verts-Europe-Ecologie (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; ENVI (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2004-09-22--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, Commissioners, whilst I should like to congratulate Ms Breyer on the excellent outcome she has achieved, I cannot support those who defend the use of pesticides, because it is absolutely vital that we rid our environment and our bodies of these dangerous substances. I hope that the European Parliament may in future support the most forward-looking positions on this question, instead of yielding to the latest siren calls from manufacturers representing a deadly industry. Eliminating carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic pesticides, and substances that weaken our nervous and endocrine systems and damage our immune systems, is an entirely healthy aim. We should also welcome our fellow Members’ efforts to ensure transparency in the provision of information for consumers, who are the ‘innocent victims’ of these dangerous substances. Surely, Commissioners, it is high time that action was taken? Never before have insecticides, fungicides and herbicides of various types been used as systematically as they are used today. To look no further than France, a situation that can only be described as ‘joint management’ of public policy on pesticides by the state and the chemical industry has succeeded thus far in marginalising ordinary people’s expectations about public and environmental health, regardless of research findings on environmental toxicity and at the expense of statistical studies if they establish links between chemical substances and pathological conditions: all this despite recent warnings from the medical profession, via the Paris Appeal for example, and the Grenelle Forum on Environment in France. The industry is doing its utmost to play down the impact of pesticides. Thus, after the pollution of water courses by the herbicide Atrazine, which everyone has heard about, and the decimation of bee populations, the chemical industry is trying to draw a veil over the fact that France remains the European Union’s number one pesticide user. Every year, between 70 000 and 80 000 tonnes of pesticides are poured into our environment in France. So, in relation to the ‘pesticides package’ – unlike the REACH directive – the Members of this House will not allow themselves to be discredited. Ordinary people expect no less of us: that is clear from the mass of correspondence we receive, calling for swift and strong action. We hear, for example, from people highlighting the dangers of inhaling pesticides that are sprayed by vegetable growers in the south of France, and from others concerned about heavy use of herbicides in public parks and gardens, prompting some to call for pesticide-free zones."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph