Activities of George LYON related to 2009/2105(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Agricultural product quality policy: what strategy to follow? (debate)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. calls in this respect on the Commission to conduct a study on the various options available for giving European producers the possibility of displaying on their products their commitment to quality, food safety and respect of all European standards of production, includ; considers ing through the option ofis regard that a European Union quality logo, which should be made available only to agricultural goods resulting entirely from European productionould have no resonance with European consumers;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. calls on the Commission to simplify EU marketing standards in order to lay down compulsory rules in a general basic marketing code and to address stakeholders' demands for clarification and simplification;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. supports the introduction of additional optional reserved terms and the adoption of EU guidelines concerning their use, especially in terms of the provision of a clear definition and usage of the terms "mountain products" and "low carbon"; further expresses support for the harmonisation at Community level of the term "mountain products", which is currently regulated in only a few Member States;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. is in support of providing the consumer with the maximumrelevant amount of information available; is in favour of the introduction of comprehensive and compulsory legislation for "place of farming"-labelling for primary products on a case-by-case basis; considers that this mayust be done in a manner that takes into account the costs of such a Europe-wide operation, as well as the specificities of particular sectors, such as that of processed agricultural goods;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. believes that the effective costs of implementation should be analysed in a comprehensive Commission study on the matter, socalls on the Commission to carry out a thorough technical and economic study to ensure that the new legislation does not impose excessive costs on the food processing industry, in particular on small and medium-sized producers; considers to that effect that several options should be considered in addition, and as possible alternatives, to labelling - such as barcodes or the provision of information on websites; such study should cover the feasibility of introducing compulsory place of farming labelling for processed products which contain 'significant ingredients' (meaning an ingredient of a food product that represents more than 50% of the dry weight of that food product) or 'characterising ingredients' (meaning the ingredient of a food usually associated with the name of the food by consumers), as defined in the proposed EU Regulation on the provision of food information to consumers, Article 2;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. calls on the Commission to maintain consistency in its proposals on agricultural product-quality policy in terms of the approach to country of origin labelling as regards its proposed regulation on the provision of food information to consumers;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. calls foron the mandatory provision of information through labelling (and all other means available) with regard to the "place of farming" of raw materials, where this is different from the place indicated by the geographical indication and to the name of the producer when theCommission to conduct a study with regard to the appropriate information (labelling and all other means available) required for PDO/PGI product is marketed under the private trade name of a retailer;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. considers that the instrument of Traditional Specialties Guaranteed (TSG) must be kept, whilst the corresponding rules for registration need further simplification; calls, in this respect, on the Commission to review the TSG instrument, study the possibilities to shorten the time of the application procedure, and explore possibilities for offering better product protection under this scheme, as well as any other means which may render this particular scheme more attractive to producers; recalls that TSG is a relatively recent instrument, which explains its slow development; considers that this instrument should be better communicated to producers and left to 1 OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p, 12. 2 OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p, 12. become a familiar tool for quality promotion in Europe;