Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-10-Speech-1-057-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120910.22.1-057-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this text is important because its two objectives are, on the one hand, the progressive and harmonious development of the electronic identification of bovine animals, with a five-year review clause for a possible transition to mandatory electronic identification and, on the other hand, the simplification of administrative procedures regarding the addition of voluntary indications that may be put on beef labels.
My reason for bringing this matter up in plenary is to correct inconsistencies attributable to the Commission services which arose when the vote was taken in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI).
Therefore, after consulting a number of parliamentary experts, I propose, today, the adoption of three amendments, the sole objective of which is to correct these inconsistencies and clarify the text.
Amendments 45 and 47 are therefore simple technical corrections. Amendment 46 proposes that the simplification of the voluntary labelling procedure should not enter into force until 1 January 2014.
Let me remind you that these voluntary indications must be objective, verifiable by the relevant authorities, and comprehensible to consumers.
To avoid any unfounded fear, I have also specified once again that the relevant authority should verify the truth of these indications and ensure that the sanctions referred to in Article 22(4a) are applied. We are talking here about voluntary indications and not mandatory indications relating to the origin of the meat. We are therefore talking about commercial information used by operators, the rules for which need to be simplified. Clearly, we are all in agreement on the need to move towards the electronic identification of bovine animals. We are not advocating forcing the agricultural sector to implement electronic identification immediately. I am a legislator and I believe that we are responsible for the laws we adopt which have an economic impact.
The meat industry in Europe and the beef industry in particular are suffering at present and we, as legislators, cannot subject them to even more expenditure. This is not a public health problem. The idea is to put in place electronic identification to ensure better traceability of bovine animals, which the sector will adopt over time. We will see in five years’ time whether, in fact, the technology is sound and whether or not the industries are ready. Perhaps the economic climate will be better.
As regards the second part, the labelling of bovine animals, what are we talking about? We are not talking about questioning voluntary labelling: we are not doing away with it, just to be clear. We are talking about simplifying the system and simplifying the procedure. I will explain it very simply: meat labelling is carried out in the same way for all meat. For the beef industry, for beef, mad cow disease has made the procedure more complex. Let us keep the voluntary system, but let us simplify it, because we are responsible for the administrative burden that is characteristic of our procedures in Europe. We must do everything in our power to simplify them for our citizens."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples