Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-10-Speech-1-085-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120910.22.1-085-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would first of all like to thank the shadow rapporteurs who worked on this project in a constructive spirit. I would like to say to you just how important public health, the health of our citizens, of European citizens is to me. There is absolutely no doubt about that.
Identification of bovine animals exists. It is not electronic, but it exists. It allows for very high-quality traceability. That is not the issue at all. It is simply that, as Mr Bufton, Ms Reimers and Ms Girling have said, the technology for the electronic identification of bovine animals does not appear to be totally reliable. Therefore, let us wait until we can be sure that the system for the electronic identification of bovine animals is reliable before we decide to make it mandatory.
Furthermore, in reaching my compromises, I accepted without any difficulty that we would consider reviewing the issue in five years’ time to see whether the technology had progressed and was able to guarantee high-quality electronic identification.
This problem is also economic. I do not think that I am putting the health of European citizens at risk when I say that we must leave our agricultural sector and the beef industry sufficient time to adopt this new technology naturally. For farmers, there is a cost: an electronic chip costs EUR 1 for each animal in a herd. In addition to that, however, there is the whole system of automated reading and so on, which is very costly, and I would remind you that our farmers are suffering from the recession and a lack of competitiveness.
Secondly, I would like to say to Ms Bizzotto, for example, that I am not doing away with and do not wish to do away with voluntary labelling, not at all. As the Commissioner has said, it is not a question of doing away with voluntary labelling but of simplifying the system and the procedure.
All aspects of the public health of our citizens are indicated in mandatory labelling. There is absolutely no question of abandoning labelling information.
Lastly, in response to one of my fellow Members, I would like to reaffirm that there will not be a legal loophole in relation to labelling. We must ensure compliance with Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers. This is the horizontal legislation you spoke about, Commissioner, which concerns all types of meat. Beef will therefore be treated in the same way as all other types of meat. Furthermore, all the compromise amendments submitted to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) have been adopted. I therefore call on my fellow Members to take my lead in tomorrow’s vote and I should like to thank them most sincerely in advance.
I would just like to clarify that we are still aiming for an agreement at first reading. This means that tomorrow, under Article 57 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, I will ask for the final vote on the resolution to be postponed. I propose that we then move directly to the trialogue, and that we subsequently reconvene in plenary to put the result of the negotiation at first reading to the vote in Parliament."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples