Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-07-06-Speech-3-322-625"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110706.18.3-322-625"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Although a majority of the Members of the European Parliament voted in favour of a clearly defined authorisation of ‘processed animal proteins’ (animal meal), I did not. I rejected the reintroduction of such animal meal. It must be recognised that scientists’ views on the question of the dangers of using animal meal have changed greatly and, for some of them, it now seems possible to define the conditions for the safe use of these animal proteins. However, it seemed to me that we needed to take time to reflect and carry out studies, not to change the rules on animal meal and therefore apply the precautionary principle. That is why I voted against this reintroduction. As for the specific case of France, I would like to point out that the French Minister for Agriculture is saying that animal meal would still be banned in France. He made the commitment that, as long as he is the Minister for Agriculture, animal meal will not be reintroduced in France. In fact, there is nothing to stop a Member State from laying down a rule that offers greater protection than that laid down at the European level."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples