WRITTEN QUESTION E-1238/00 by Karin Scheele (PSE) to the Commission. Legal classification of tattooing dyes.
Date: 2000-04-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: dyestuff, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, legal basis, toxic substance

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46 E/151

In the light of further European integration with the increased travel for leisure or in conjunction with
cross-border economic activity, the issue is important from a general societal point of view and manifests a
good example of a Community measure that directly benefits the citizens of Europe. The Commission
shares the view that the common emergency number helps improve the effectiveness of providing
emergency assistance in the Community.

the Commission has proposed in the 1999 review
To strengthen further the current
communication (3)
location data of callers in distress are passed on to the emergency service
authorities, in both fixed and mobile networks. This will be one important aspect of the forthcoming
review of the Community(cid:146)s telecommunications policy.

framework,

that

The common emergency number is an assurance for all 380 million Community citizens and for travellers
from abroad that they can call for assistance whenever they are in an emergency or life-threatening
situation. The guaranteed availability throughout the Community on fixed and mobile networks, the ability
to make emergency calls free of charge and the ability to provide location data of users in an emergency
are key issues.

(1) OJ L 217, 6.8.1991.
(2) OJ L 101, 1.4.1998.
(3) COM(1999) 539 final.

(2001/C 46 E/174)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1238/00

by Karin Scheele (PSE) to the Commission

(14 April 2000)

Subject: Legal classification of tattooing dyes

The number of Europeans having themselves tattooed has been growing year by year. Tattooing involves
among other things the use of azocolourants. In the Commission proposal amending for the nineteenth
time Council Directive 76/769/EEC (1) relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain
dangerous substances and preparations (azocolourants) that applies to textiles and leather goods, the
Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment voices its concern that, on breakdown,
azocolourants form amines that are classified as carcinogenic. In view of this possible health hazard, a legal
basis is also required for azocolourants used in tattooing.

Have studies dealing with the health risks of tattooing dyes already been carried out or are there

1.
plans to do so?

2.

Can the Commission name legal bases that include tattooing dyes in their field of application?

If not, is it making preparations to provide at a future date a legal classification for tattooing dyes?

3.
Will azocolourants be covered at the same time?

(1) OJ L 262, 27.9.1976, p. 201.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(13 June 2000)

1.
The Commission is not aware of toxicological or epidemiological studies to specifically assess the
health safety risks from the use of certain dyes in tattooing. Adverse effects of tattoos are well known.
However the evidence is stronger for those effects arising from the tattooing procedures themselves (e.g.
transmission of infectious diseases from non-sterile equipment, scarring) and less convincing for possible
adverse effects arising from the tattooing dyes.

C 46 E/152

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.2.2001

In considering possible legislative proposals on the safety of tattooing dyes, the Commission requested the
opinion of the scientific committee on cosmetics and non food products (SCCNFP). In its opinion of
17 February 2000, the SCCNFP noted the large number of dyes used in tattooing for which the chemical
structure,
identity, and toxicological profile are incomplete or unknown, thereby precluding a proper
health risk assessment. In its opinion, the SCCNFP recommended that a systematic effort be undertaken to
information on tattooing dyes so that a proper risk
amass the needed chemical and toxicological
assessment can be conducted. In its remit to better protect public health, the Commission is currently
evaluating the options to carry out this task.

As for the azo-dyes mentioned specifically by the Honourable Member, the Commission would also share
the view that in theory azo dyes in tattoos will break down in a similar way as they do in leather goods to
give rise to the carcinogenic amines. Confirming scientific evidence is however lacking at present. The
Commission intends to include this aspect on a priority basis when assessing tattooing dyes.

2. and 3.
Tattooing dyes are used for cosmetic purposes yet the route of their administration (injection)
puts them outside the scope of Council Directive 76/768/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of
the laws of the Member States to cosmetic products (1) which considers that (cid:145)substances or preparations
intended to be ingested, inhaled, injected or implanted in the human body do not come under the field of
cosmetics(cid:146). However, tattooing dyes could be considered as general consumer products and hence would
fall under the scope of Council Directive 92/59/EEC of 29 June 1992 on general product safety (2) and
Council Directive 76/769/EEC of 27 July 1976 relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain
dangerous substances and preparations.

(1) OJ L 262, 27.9.1976.
(2) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.

(2001/C 46 E/175)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1239/00

by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 April 2000)

Subject: Postal rates in Germany

Germany(cid:146)s Minister for Economic Affairs M(cid:252)ller has instructed the regulatory authority for postal services
in Germany to halt the procedure relating to the expiry at the end of 2000 of the latest increase in postal
rates to DM 1,10 and DM 1,00 per letter/postcard respectively and to grant a longer-term authorisation to
retain these postal rates. The regulatory authority in Germany was already due shortly to complete the
procedure and had the intention of refusing authorisation to retain the postal rate increases. This would
have meant reintroducing a letter rate of DM 1,00 and a rate for postcards of DM 0,80. In the meantime,
the advisory board of the regulatory authority has censured the Minister(cid:146)s action by 11 votes to 7 as
uncompetitive and has called for this decision to be rectified.

Deutsche Post AG is a company that is also active in the European market outside Germany and is today
one of the largest European companies engaged in the transmission of letters and parcels. The increased
postage rate has up to now served to cross-subsidise less lucrative business sectors of the postal service,
e.g. the parcels sector where there is much private-sector competition.

This prompts the following questions:

1. How does the Commission view this behaviour by the Deutsche Post AG?

2. How does it view the attitude of the Federal German Ministry of Economic Affairs towards the

regulatory authority?

3. Does it intend to investigate this episode in terms of its Europe-wide implications for competition law?

4. What steps will it take if necessary?