Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-06-08-Speech-3-282-750"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110608.20.3-282-750"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I voted for the resolution but against Amendment 10 which supports the ban on importing seal products imposed by the EU. This ban is not justified, neither scientifically nor legally. Indeed, the conclusions of the scientific opinion given by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) at the end of 2007 are based on data concerning the slaughter of animals in abattoirs and which are not reliable with regard to seal hunting. The legal base is also questionable, as the European Parliament’s legal opinion, dated 1 April 2009, shows: ‘It seems virtually impossible to justify the ban on the sole basis of animal well-being, since the Treaty contains no legal basis on animal well-being’. The protection of the species, for its part, is not at stake, its population having even tripled in Greenland over 25 years. Finally, an embargo on which the Commission gives assurances that there would be no impact on Inuit traditional hunting is unrealistic. In this context, the request submitted by Canada to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) concerning the creation of a special dispute settlement body in relation to the European embargo is justified."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples