EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 65/265

(2004/C 65 E/280)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3078/03

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: European standard EN-1078

Two Flemish professors at the Catholic University of Louvain (CUL) have carried out a study of 86 cycling accidents and have come to the conclusion that when a rider falls it makes little difference whether or not he or she is wearing a helmet. They go on to argue for helmets to be completely redesigned.

The academics acknowledge that it is safer to wear a helmet when cycling. However, current helmets do not prevent the cranial vibrations which can be caused by a fall and fail to provide full protection for the temple area.

Cycling helmets must comply with European standard EN-1078. The two academics describe that standard as too vague and as not being based on reliable scientific data, with the result that helmets fail to meet the purpose for which they are designed.

Is the Commission aware of the study carried out by the two CUL professors?

Does it share their conclusion that European standard EN-1078 is too vague and not based on reliable scientific data and, if not, what arguments can it put forward to counter that view?

Is the Commission prepared to release resources to fund scientific studies into the production of the safest, most comfortable and cheapest cycling helmets possible, and if not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 2003)

The standard EN 1078 was elaborated by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) which means that a group of international experts had developed this product standard in the light of the technical state-of-the-art and that the standard had been voted by the CEN signatories after due verification.

The Commission published the reference of this standard in accordance to Article 5.4 of Council Directive 89/686/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the approximation of the laws of the Members States relating to personal protective equipment (1) (PPE). Thus the standard was accepted for supporting the implementation of this Directive since it directly addressed the essential health and safety requirement of its Annex II.

So far no research results challenging the protective performance of the standard have been mentioned by any of the Member States representatives which meet twice a year with the Commission in two different groups, the Expert Group ‘PPE’ and the Group of administrative co-operation related to market surveillance: the Commission service responsible for the Directive mentioned above is not aware of the study quoted by the Honourable Member.

The Commission would also like to emphasise its interest to be informed about research finding concluding that a product standard is not fully satisfying and thus potentially exposing the European citizen to safety and health hazards.

The Commission will put this issue on the agenda of the forthcoming meeting of the Member State's market surveillance authorities scheduled for December 2003 in order to investigate about the European dimension of the problem raised.

The Commission will also discuss the issue with CEN directly in order to explore the need for action. The issue could be tackled within the routine revision of product standards organised by CEN. Alternatively, it could be included in the Commission's mandates to CEN, using the framework within which the Commission funds substantially the European standardisation work.

(1) OJ L 399, 30.12.1989.