Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-24-Speech-3-266"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100324.18.3-266"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I do not propose to go over all the issues raised here, especially since there is going to be a vote tomorrow, but I would nonetheless like to highlight certain points that have been made repeatedly in the speeches.
With regard to the merging of the various geographical indication systems, I fully understand the concern of certain Members. I can assure you that it is not my intention to destroy something that works, that functions, something to which consumers are attached. We just need to make the quality protection system clearer and more consistent, all the more so given that we are trying, by way of international negotiations, to gain recognition for these systems.
Therefore, it is important that these systems already be clear and easy for our partners to understand so that they can be recognised. It is therefore not my intention to merge for the sake of it. The end result will be a system by which we can make simplifications, without touching things that are already easily identifiable by consumers.
As regards the European quality logo, we must also discuss and decide in this Chamber which objectives we want it to achieve. Is the aim simply to reflect compliance with the basic standards that all European farmers meet and that imported goods also meet? Indeed – I wish to point this out – all imported agri-food products must meet minimum food hygiene and safety standards which are met by our own products.
We therefore have to see which is the best way to successfully differentiate our products from the others. Do we need a European Union logo, or should we instead indicate the places of origin, the locations of production? The best mechanism needs to be identified, and we shall, in any case, give consideration to this.
With regard to geographical indications at international level, rest assured that my concern is to ensure that this system is recognised by our partners. We are trying to ensure this in negotiations conducted by the International Labour Organisation, but also whenever we have an opportunity to do so when negotiating bilateral agreements.
We are therefore going to pursue this approach and, moreover, in my mandate, I want to be able to strengthen the policy for communicating and promoting these quality signs internationally, since quality is an asset and, as such, it can give us a greater presence on the international stage.
With regard to the reserved terms ‘mountain’, ‘island’ and so forth, we are looking into the possibility of introducing these kinds of systems. Here too, we need to decide how to proceed so as to ensure that they do not represent an additional cost for those farmers who want to introduce them.
As regards interprofessional organisations and their role in the management of protected designations of origin, or PDOs, it is our intention, particularly as regards milk – since the majority of PDOs and protected geographical indications (PGIs) are concentrated in that sector – to carry out a study to see what impact the ending of quotas will have on the smooth functioning of these quality protection systems, and I hope that, on the basis of this report, we shall see which measures will have to be taken should the need arise."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples