Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-05-Speech-4-049"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080605.3.4-049"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, today we are talking about a project which serves as a pilot for one of the largest and most important policy programmes initiated by this Commission, namely freeing small and medium-sized enterprises in Europe from unnecessary administrative burdens. In other words, it is about cutting red tape. We are not talking about problems of veterinary law today; let me just make that clear. If we were, I would not be here.
This is about reducing administrative burdens in a way which will strengthen the European economy and thus make a contribution to creating jobs. The Commission is fully aware that cutting administrative costs must never result in less safety for our citizens, so this is not about lowering standards. It is about enforcing standards in such a way that unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles are removed for our companies. We will be very strict on enforcing this fundamental principle in this case as well.
Let me emphasise that the Commission has not the slightest intention of changing the substance of the rules on the hygiene of foodstuffs. The identification of hazards and the designation of procedural steps in the production process so that hazards can be eliminated remain our central concern. We are not lowering existing standards of food hygiene in any way; instead, we want to establish more clarity. We would like to ensure that the existing flexible provisions on record-keeping can be applied more effectively. This will not entail greater complexity for the relevant authorities in the Member States, for already the responsibility for compliance with the regulations lies with the food producers, not with the authorities.
We want to establish a rule for micro-enterprises which exempts them from certain requirements of the existing Regulation. We are talking about the very small family firms: bakeries, small food stores, market stalls, cafes and bars, shops at petrol stations and mini-markets. Why, you might well ask, do we require these small family firms, none which has anything to do with the internal market, to undergo the same bureaucratic procedures as the major supermarket chains? That is a good question, and it is the question that we are here to discuss.
Let me emphasise that the rules apply to all food producers and companies involved in the production, processing and sale of foods, irrespective of size. The rules do not apply to foods designed for private household consumption, and they do not apply to the producers of small quantities of unprocessed products for local retailers, such as farming, hunting and fishing. The current flexible rules on record-keeping make no distinction between the various sizes of companies. For the purposes of clarity, let me explain: the small corner shop where you can buy your food here in Brussels at 10 o'clock at night must comply with precisely the same regulations as the giant supermarket chains. My question is this: can that possibly be fair?
Due to the nature of their business operations, it goes without saying that these very complex and comprehensive provisions are easy for major companies to cope with, but that is not the case for micro-enterprises. For the formal application of the HACCP system, food producers must undertake a hazard analysis. This can be a complex and burdensome task requiring expert input. In order to reduce the burdens associated with this type of analysis, the Regulation already allows small food producers to make use of good practice guidelines which have been drawn up for the relevant sector. They already exist for bakeries, breweries, butchers' shops and restaurants in various Member States, but they do not exist everywhere.
One objective of the Commission proposal is to ensure that the rules on possible exemptions, which are already established in principle in the Regulation and the accompanying guidelines, are being used efficiently. What does this mean in practice? Well this brings us to the heart of the matter. If, during the first stage of the HACCP process, a food business operator can prove that either there are no hazards that must be prevented, eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels, or that identified hazards are sufficiently and regularly controlled through the implementation of general and specific food hygiene requirements, then the operator should be exempt from all the other requirements of the HACCP Directive. Let me put it in straightforward terms: this flexibility is already available under the current Directive, but it is not being applied by all the Member States. The Commission's proposal is therefore presented as a fast track action within the framework of our Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the European Union. The proposal has met with some resistance in the Council and in some Member States. I am aware of that. These Member States do not appear to attach as much importance to reducing administrative burdens and cutting the costs of red tape – especially for their SMEs – as the Commission and the European Parliament do.
The impression which we have gained, however, is that this debate has so far been conducted only between civil servants in the Member States; it would seem that their politicians have not yet addressed the issue. In my view, the politicians in the Member States whose civil servants have shown such resistance to the proposal cannot possibly justify to the public why their country is resisting a Commission proposal which could make life easier for hundreds of thousands of their micro-enterprises and small businesses. At that moment, the frequent agitation against Brussels – this 'bureaucratic monster' which is supposedly determined to regulate and restrict every aspect of people's lives – would be revealed as mere propaganda and would collapse, and it would become apparent who is actually responsible for the excessive red tape.
From the Commission's perspective, this opposition is regrettable, as this proposal constitutes an important, substantive and symbolic element of our Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the European Union. I am very grateful to Mr Schnellhardt for his report and his active support. I would urge you all to give it your backing, for I am convinced that a clear political message from Parliament of the kind that could be sent out today will create the necessary political momentum in the Council, too, to get this proposal through."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples