WRITTEN QUESTION E-2117/00 by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Setting of motorcycle insurance premiums in the Member States.
Date: 2000-06-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, Finland, intra-EU trade, third-party insurance, two-wheeled vehicle

C 89 E/150

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.3.2001

(2001/C 89 E/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2105/00

by Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Threats to cetaceans from French and Spanish trawlers

(30 June 2000)

Is the Commission aware of the serious threat to cetaceans caused in particular by French and Spanish
trawlers? Given that the Commission has made sustainable fisheries one of the key issues in the common
fisheries policy, should it not endeavour to protect marine mammals on the same scale as fish caught for
human consumption? Is the Commission proposing the early launch of an initiative to this effect?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2000)

The Commission is fully aware of reports of strandings of approximately 350 dolphins in the Bay of Biscay
and of smaller numbers of dolphins on the coast of south west England earlier this year. The Commission
is also aware that the media have indicated that these strandings were a result of the dolphins being caught
by Spanish and French vessels using pelagic trawls.

In this context, it should be noted that Spanish national legislation prohibits the use by Spanish vessels of
pelagic trawls.

The Commission considers that means must be found to provide appropriate levels of protection for
cetaceans.

At the Council of 16 June 2000, the Commission expressed its deepest concern on this and similar issues.
To follow up, the Commission will very soon contact Member States requesting them to inform it what
actions they have taken or intend to take at national level. Furthermore, the Member of the Commission in
charge of Fisheries indicated his intention to give priority to further research and to consider what might
be done in the immediate future.

(2001/C 89 E/166)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2117/00

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 June 2000)

Subject: Setting of motorcycle insurance premiums in the Member States

In Finland the premiums for insuring motorcycles are particularly high. The reason for the cost of the
premiums is of course the high accident risk associated with motorcycles. However, it appears that the
insurance premiums of the various motorcycle categories are not targeted fairly in relation to the number
of accidents in which each category is involved. In practice, the owners of larger motorcycles pay out a
disproportionate amount for accidents involving smaller motorcycles.

Is the Commission aware of the premium-setting practice in Finland?

Does this practice, as described above, differ from that in other Member States?

Does the Commission see a positive solution to this problem which would make the allocation of
premiums fairer? Does the internal market operate in such a way that a Finnish motorcyclist can take
out insurance in another Member State in which the pricing is in a reasonable relation to the risk of the
particular motorcyclist, taking account of his or her age, driving experience, place of residence and model
and size of motorcycle?

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/151

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2000)

The commercial practice referred to by the Honourable Member is based on a criterion relating to the
vehicle, i.e. its cylinder capacity, which is taken into account when insurance companies assess a risk. As
far as the Commission is aware, the criterion of engine size or power is taken into account by insurance
companies in most Member States, including Finland.

Fixing premiums is part of the commercial policy of all companies, and they are free to choose the criteria
and methods for assessing loss ratios. The Commission cannot intervene in an area which is covered by
the principle of contractual freedom, especially as the very core of the Community provisions in this area
demands that premiums be determined freely by insurance companies on the basis of their own tariff
criteria.

Community law, through the Third Non-life Council Directive 92/49/EEC of 18 June 1992 on the
coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to direct insurance other than life
assurance and amending Directives 73/239/EEC and 88/357/EEC (1), allows any insurer in a Member State
to carry on class 10 insurance business in the field of compulsory third-party motor insurance in any other
Member State, whether through a branch or under the freedom to provide services. Thus a motorcyclist
may take out compulsory third-party liability insurance for a motorbike registered in Finland with an
insurer established in a Member State other than Finland, provided that the insurer is authorised to do so
by the Member State of origin and is also a member of the motor vehicle insurers(cid:146) bureau and the Finnish
motor vehicle guarantee fund (2). Membership of the two bodies is necessary in order to guarantee the
operation of the (cid:145)green card(cid:146) system and compulsory motor vehicle civil liability insurance established by
Council Directive 72/166/EEC of 24 April 1972 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States
relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and to the enforcement
the Second Council Directive 84/5/EEC of
of
30 December 1983 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against
civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (4) and the Third Council Directive 90/232/EEC of
14 May 1990 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil
liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (5). The legal framework enabling consumers to choose the
insurance products that best suits them and the insurer they prefer, irrespective of the Member State of
origin, is thus in place.

the obligation to insure against

such liability (3),

(1) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.
(2) Directive 90/618/EEC (OJ L 330, 29.11.1990), as amended by Directive 92/49/EEC (OJ L 228, 11.8.1992).
(3) OJ L 103, 2.5.1972.
(4) OJ L 8, 11.1.1984.
(5) OJ L 129, 19.5.1990.

(2001/C 89 E/167)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2118/00

by Giovanni Procacci (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 June 2000)

Subject: Proceedings No 94/4855 brought by the Commission against the restrictions imposed by the (cid:145)Evin

law(cid:146) on the broadcasting in France of sports events held abroad

It would seem that the Commission at last intends to take firm action to put an end to the discrimination
in France against the broadcasting of sporting events held in other countries,
if advertising hoardings
featuring alcoholic beverages are shown, introduced by the (cid:145)Evin law(cid:146).

The European wine-producing industry, via the complaint lodged with the Commission by producers of
French DOC and Bordeaux wines, has been monitoring with concern the action of the French authorities,
which penalises wine in particular.