WRITTEN QUESTION No. 399/99 by Phillip WHITEHEAD Fire safety
Date: 1999-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament, WHITEHEAD
Subjects: EU statistics, fire, fire protection, member country

3.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 348/61

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 1999)

The site the Honourable Member refers to (‘Pieria Ori’) has been proposed by the Greek authorities as a
1.
Site of Community Importance (SIC) in accordance with Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora (1). The site hosts a number of priority habitats and
species and should therefore be automatically included in the Natura 2000 network under the terms of the
Directive. Consequently, appropriate measures must be taken by the Member State concerned to ensure that
the site does not deteriorate. The Commission will therefore contact the Greek authorities to check whether
the impact studies which should be carried out for the project in question, in accordance with Council
Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects
on the environment (2), took sufficient account of the natural value of the site concerned.

The decision to authorise the activity in question, and its revocation, is the sole responsibility of the

2
Member State. The Commission can only intervene if Community law has clearly been infringed.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(1999/C 348/075)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0399/99

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Fire safety

Will the Commission list the countries which have responded to the study drawn up by the French company
CETEN-APAVE relating to the implementation of the 1986 EU recommendations on fire safety?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

For the part of the 1996 study on fire safety in hotels, which was based on a survey, CETEN ? APAVE had
received replies to the questionnaires from eight Member States (Belgium, Greece, France, Ireland, Italy, the
Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom).

(1999/C 348/076)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0404/99

by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

Subject: Measures to prevent counterfeiting of the euro

(1 March 1999)

In the run-up to the issuing of euro notes and coins, experts on combating counterfeit money believe that an
agency should be set up to coordinate the policies of each country and the surveillance systems operated by
issuing banks. Mention has even been made of the possibility of creating a European Central Office which
would centralise the data provided by each country on this subject.

Likewise, the authorities in certain countries of the euro zone take the view that it would be desirable to
standardise legislation and penalties applying to euro counterfeiters, thus preventing a situation where
committing such crimes would be punished less severely in some countries than in others. Otherwise,
criminals are likely to set up clandestine printshops in countries with less stringent laws, even though everyone
might be equally affected by the forged currency.