29. 7. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 188/9 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision introducing a Community system of 
information on accidents in which consumer products are involved 
(85/C 188/04) 
On 28 January 1985 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
acting under the optional consultation clause of the Treaty establishing the European Eco­
nomic Community, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which 
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 
14 May 1985, in the light of the report by Mrs Williams. 
At its 227th plenary session (meeting of 29 May 1985) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion by 74 votes for, no votes against and 14 abstentions: 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee approves the Commission 
proposal subject to the following significant qualifica­
tions: 
1.1.1. The Committee insists on the overall necessity 
for the Community to elaborate a general safety policy 
for which data collection would be necessary and for 
which the current proposal would represent one of the 
first steps. Such work on safety should also be consid­
ered in the context of an eventual Community public 
health policy. 
1.1.2. Furthermore, the Committee asks that the 
competent authorities ensure that a specific reference to 
accidents as understood in this proposal be inserted 
under the heading of Social and Health Policy into the 
draft Treaty establishing the European Union. 
1.2. The Committee is of the opinion that there is a 
fundamental conceptual misunderstanding in the 
presentation of the proposal, in so far as the term 
'consumer products' is used in a very loose sense which 
is at variance with common linguistic usage, and in 
some cases with common sense. 
1.2.1. This misconception occurs in the text of the 
proposal itself and in the annex thereto concerning the 
pilot experiment in the Member States on accident 
information which is one of the bases for the proposed 
decision. 
1.2.2. The Committee does not agree with the assump­
tion that all accidents other than those occurring in 
occupational activities and road traffic, involve 
'consumer products'; or that 'steps', 'paths', 'wind' or 
'pets/animals: insects' should be classified as 'products' 
(as in the pilot experiment). 
1.2.3. The mere fact that this loose usage of the term 
'consumer products' may have received a certain accep­
tance is not considered by the Committee as justifica­
tion for perpetuating the practice. 
(i) OJ NoC 117, 11.5. 1985, p. 4. 1.3. The Committee proposes therefore that the 
Commission formulate an accurate definition of what 
exactly is covered by the proposed accident-informa­
tion system, and alter both the title and the text of the 
proposal accordingly. 
1.3.1. The Committee suggests a widening of the 
scope of the draft proposal and that the word 'features' 
should be used to indicate both the constructional 
aspects of homes and aspects of the outside environ­
ment. This term is officially used in the UK accidents' 
surveillance system, and also occurs in the EEC pilot 
study. The revised title could then refer to 'consumer 
products and features'. 
1.3.2. The Committee suggests that in view of the 
increasing popular interest in safety the Commission 
consider the adoption of an apropriate acronym to 
designate the proposed system. This would be in con­
formity with the practice in the two Member States 
which operate such a system a present — the UK where 
the system is referred to as HASS (Home Accidents 
Surveillance System) and the Netherlands where the 
system is known as PORS (Produkt-ongevallen Regis-
tratie-systeem) (which translates as Home Accidents 
Surveillance System), and with the practice in the USA 
where the system is known as NEISS (National Elec­
tronic Inquiry Surveillance System). 
1.3.3. On the operational side of the proposed system 
the experience of the abovementioned Member States 
should be drawn on, rather than dissipate energy on 
research to develop a third system to be superimposed 
on the Community as a whole. 
1.4. The Committee is aware that consumer careless­
ness, misuse and misunderstanding can be responsible 
for a wide range of accidents and accordingly lays great 
stress on the need for consumer information and educa­
tion and considers that this should be highlighted more 
fully in the proposal by means of a separate Article. 
1.5. The Committee is in favour of the establishment 
of accident-information-exchange systems with non-
Community countries, and where possible with the 
No C 188/10 Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 7. 85 
Third World where protective measures against 
products and features are not so well implemented. 
1.6. The Committee is concerned, however, that the 
ultimate objectives of the proposal must not be lost 
sight of. Collecting statistics must not be an end in 
itself, and the Commission should set up procedures to 
ensure that action is taken in respect of products and 
features which cause accidents. Such action would 
involve for example product recall and redesigning of 
products or features, and the setting of appropriate 
standards at Community and international level. 
1.6.1. The Committee agrees that measures should be 
taken to prevent the dissemination of irresponsible and 
unsubstantiated information which could be to the 
detriment of manufacturers. Nevertheless it insists that 
clear public identification of products should be 
made: 
— when the relevant authorities have sufficient indica­
tion that they constitute an immediate and grave 
public danger, and 
— when they have been declared to be the cause of 
accidents after due verification by officially 
approved agencies and/or consumer testing 
bodies. 
1.7. In respect of the proposed budget appended to 
the Commission proposal the Committee notes that it 
envisages a low expenditure in the early years, leading 
to a gradual build-up in the final year, but considers 
that, to enable the new system to get established on a 
sound basis, the heaviest expenditure should be in the 
early years. This was the practice followed successfully 
in the setting-up of the NEISS system in the USA. 2. Specific comments 
2.1. Article 1 
This Article should be revised in the light of the general 
comments: 
— in order to define clearly the meaning of 'products', 
and 
— in order to provide for a separate article on 
consumer information and education. 
Articles 1 (2) (sub-Articles (a) and (b)) 
should be altered to read: 
'(a) products intended exclusively for professional use 
at places of work; 
(b) products used in the sphere of road, rail, air and 
maritime transport.' 
2.2. Article 2 
2.2.1. The words 'shall compile information' should 
be replaced by 'shall compile and where appropriate 
disseminate information'. 
2.2.2. With reference to the 'role of the product' 
mentioned in this Article, a distinction must be made in 
the case of medical and pharmaceutical products, 
between accidents caused by the misuse of a product, 
and unforeseen adverse reactions of the 'victim' to 
treatment by a product. 
2.2.3. The word 'surroundings' and/or its equivalent 
in the other Community languages should be examined 
to see if it is appropriate in this context. 
1.7.1. However, in so far as concerns the actual 
amount of funding provided for in the proposed 
budget, over a four-year period, the Committee 
considers this sum to be totally inadequate to set up 
and administer a satisfactory accident-surveillance 
system at Community level. 2.3. Article 3 (1) 
The Committee insists that the 'common criteria' on the 
basis of which information shall be collected and 
compared shall be determined before the proposed 
Decision is put into operation, as otherwise the project 
will be inoperable. 
1.7.2. This inadequacy however should not prevent 
the dissemination of relevant information throughout 
the Community by those Member States which already 
have such systems in operation. 
1.7.3. The Committee draws attention to the necessity 
for the current proposal to be integrated into other 
Community actions as appropriate — in particular with 
ESPRIT, with the framework programmes for R&D, 
and with the proposed 'new approach' on technical 
harmonization and standards. Article 3 (1) (a) 
The Committee underlines the fact that the hospital 
casualty departments must be truly representative of 
the national situation and not be confined to hospitals 
in large urban centres, or to certain categories of hospi­
tals (e.g. geriatric institutions). 
In addition hospitals in areas devoted to leisure activi­
ties (e.g. skiing, water sports) should be included, as 
well as first-aid stations outside the formal hospital 
system. 
1.8. Finally, the Committee urges the Council to 
adopt as soon as possible proposals on product safety 
which are still pending, such as that on product 
liability. Article 3(2) 
1. The phrase 'information may be obtained' should 
be changed into 'information can be obtained'; 
29. 7. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 188/11 
2. The following sources of information should be 
added to the list: 
— retailers and distributors, 
— bodies responsible for civil defence, 
— centres for sports medicine, 
— associations or organizations in the social sphere. 
2.4. Article 4 
This Article should be revised to make it clear that the 
information compiled pursuant to Article 1 should be 
used not only to carry out studies but also to encourage 
any other appropriate action. 
2.5. Articles 6 and 7 
The Committee is concerned that the confidentiality of 
the doctor/patient relationship is maintained, even 
though it recognizes that in exceptional cases public 
interest may require that certain information may be 
needed to treat other victims of a similar kind of acci­
dent, and/or to prevent future such occurrences. 
Done at Brussels, 29 May 1985. 
1. Preliminary Remarks 
Under Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty, the Commis­
sion is obliged to publish periodically 'illustrative 
programmes indicating in particular nuclear energy This information should in principle be given only with 
the agreement of the victim concerned; or if this is not 
possible only on an anonymous basis. 
2.6. Article 8 
The Committee notes that an annual report should be 
sent to it on the functioning of the system but asks that 
this report should: 
— include detailed statistical data with appropriate 
explanatory and interpretational comment, 
— cover, where applicable, follow-up action taken or 
proposed on product withdrawal, re-design or the 
establishment of standards (see paragraph 1.6 of the 
general comments). 
2.7. Article 9 
The Commission should exchange not only statistical 
information but, where appropriate, all relevant infor­
mation with non-Member States. 
production targets and all types of investment required 
for their attainment' (PINC). 
Since the last illustrative programme dated back to 
1972, the Commission decided in 1982 to publish a new The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on nuclear industries in the Community — illustrative nuclear programme under 
Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty — 1984 
(85/C 188/05) 
On 28 November 1984 the Commission of the European Communities, in accordance with 
Article 40 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), 
asked the Economic and Social Committee for an opinion on the document entitled: 'The 
nuclear industries in the Community — Illustrative nuclear programme under Article 40 of 
the Euratom Treaty — 1984'. 
The Section for Energy and Nuclear Questions, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 14 May 1985 in the light of the oral 
report by Mr Querleux. 
At its 227th plenary session (meeting of 30 May 1985), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion with no votes against and four abstentions: