Înapoi la portalul Europarl

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (selecţionat)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Acest document nu este disponibil în limba dvs. şi vă este propus într-o altă limbă dintre cele disponibile în bara de limbi.

 Text integral 
Monday, 17 January 2011 - Strasbourg OJ edition

Consequences in the European Union of the dioxin animal feed incident (debate)

  John Stuart Agnew (EFD). – Madam President, I would like to declare an interest: I am a British egg producer.

The dioxin contamination appears to be a consequence of the failure to adhere to the more rigorous processing standards needed for animal feed, as opposed to the less demanding process used to convert rapeseed to biofuel. The EU’s enthusiasm for biofuels can therefore have unintended consequences. In my view, however, this is not a matter for the EU. It will not be solved by – and certainly does not need – extra regulation. The Germans have identified a problem, they have told us about it and they are taking the necessary steps.

In the UK, we have a comprehensive assurance scheme called the Lion Code. It covers both animal feed production in the mill and egg production on the farm, thus ensuring that incidents like this are highly unlikely. So, if any of you are insistent on top quality eggs, ‘ask for the Lion’ and British producers will be delighted to supply you.

Aviz juridic - Politica de confidențialitate