Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2016-04-13-Speech-3-342-093"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2016-04-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Objection pursuant to Rule 106: renewal of the approval of the active substance glyphosate (B8-0439/2016 )2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20160413.34.3-342-093"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2016-04-13-Speech-3-342-1252
lpv:speaker	lp:Matt Carthy2
lpv:spoken text	"I voted against this resolution on the EU approval process for the chemical glyphosate. I do not believe that any such process calling itself a scientific safety assessment can be based on unpublished, industry-sponsored and non-peer-reviewed data. Given that IARC, the well-respected cancer expert group of the World Health Organisation, using publicly available, peer-reviewed and independent data based on its strict policy on conflicts of interest, found that glyphosate was ‘probably carcinogenic’ raises serious concerns that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) found contradictory results (‘unlikely’ to cause cancer) just months later. EFSA claims that the reason for its differing conclusion is because it included data the WHO did not include, but this data was excluded from the WHO assessment precisely because it did not meet its standards on independent and peer-reviewed data. Scientific assessment should not be based on secret industry data and any approval process of glyphosate should be halted until EFSA releases the data it used to come to its conclusion. Not to do so risks further undermining confidence in the EU approval process as a whole."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; ECON (2014-07-01--2017-01-18)3 member; AGRI (2014-07-01--2017-01-18)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Matt Carthy (GUE/NGL ),"1 "in writing. ‒"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph