WRITTEN QUESTION E-2632/00 by Carlos Lage (PSE) to the Commission. Marketing of toys contained in foodstuffs.
Date: 2000-08-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: accident in the home, child, confectionery, consumer protection, marketing standard, product safety, safety standard, toy industry

C 136 E/58

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

Does the Commission agree that the assumption upon which the age limit of 36 months was
2.
established (namely, that children over that age are unlikely to place objects in their mouths) should be
revised in the light of the fatal accidents which have occurred?

3.
Does the Commission agree that toys which are contained in foodstuffs and which are therefore
small in size or composed of small parts represent a specific risk to children, particularly on account of the
possible confusion between foodstuff and toy (this being a risk which cannot be fully covered by the
Directive)? If so, what additional measures does the Commission intend to propose?

Can the Commission describe the action taken by manufacturers in order to modify the design,
4.
packaging and marketing of toys contained in foodstuffs in the light of all the accidents which have
already occurred?

(1) OJ L 187, 16.7.1988, p. 1.

(2001/C 136 E/065)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2631/00

by Elisa Damiªo (PSE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: Marketing of toys contained in foodstuffs

A fatal accident has occurred in Portugal
involving a child who died of suffocation caused by a toy
contained in a packet of milk powder. Fatal accidents have occurred in the United Kingdom involving
children who have died of suffocation caused by toys contained in chocolate eggs.

It is a fact that Directive 88/378 (1) on the safety of toys does not fully ensure that the health and safety
objectives it proposed are achieved. What action is the Commission intending to take as regards the need
to lay down revised rules on the marketing of toys contained in foodstuffs?

(1) OJ L 187, 16.7.1988, p. 1.

(2001/C 136 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2632/00

by Carlos Lage (PSE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: Marketing of toys contained in foodstuffs

In view of the fatal accidents which have occurred in Portugal and the United Kingdom involving children
who have died of suffocation caused by toys or other objects contained in milk powder and chocolate
eggs. Can the Commission report on the action taken following the meeting on 16 May 2000 of the
Committee on Product Safety Emergencies as regards the need for food products and non-food products to
be marketed in separate packaging?

Can the Commission explain why it has not yet proposed any specific action to restrict the indiscriminate
sale of food products containing objects, in particular toys?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2630/00, E-2631/00 and E-2632/00
given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 2000)

The Commission has examined all aspects of the combination of non-food products with foodstuffs with
the help of the national consumer protection experts of the Committee on Product Safety Emergencies set
up by Council Directive 92/59/EEC of 29 June 1992 on general product safety (1). On 23 May 2000, the

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/59

Commission orally communicated the conclusions unanimously reached by the Emergencies Committee
(16 May 2000) to Parliament(cid:146)s Committee on Petitions, with written confirmation being provided on
20 June 2000.

Non-food products accompanying foodstuffs, which often take the form of confectionery, are generally
separately wrapped toys, that are either complete or to be assembled. Non-food products mixed with
foodstuffs are no longer marketed, as a result of action taken by the Member States in response to an
emergency notified in 1997 pursuant to Article 8 of Directive 92/59/EEC.

The products in question are not specifically governed by Community legislation. The non-food products
concerned (surprise toys) are, however, covered by Council Directive 88/378/EEC of 3 May 1988 on toy
safety. Compliance by manufacturers with the safety specifications of voluntary standard EN 71-1 in
respect of toys intended for children under 36 months confers a presumption of conformity with the
requirements of the Directive.

Over the past fifteen years, three fatal accidents have raised serious doubts with regard to the safety of
separately wrapped products. Two of these (Roddy Breslin (cid:129) Northern Ireland, 1985; Jennifer Ashton (cid:129)
UK, 1989) were attributed to toys contained in a surprise egg and one (Caren Day (cid:129) UK, 1991) to the
packaging of a surprise egg toy. Other accidents have involved toys directly mixed with foodstuffs,
although such products can no longer be marketed within the Community.

The three above-mentioned accidents involved children over the age (36 months) at which, according to
Directive 88/378/EEC, this type of toy can be assumed to be used safely. The two accidents linked to toy
safety occurred before that Directive came into force on 1 January 1990.

With the assistance of the Emergencies Committee, the Commission investigated whether the combination
of confectionery with toys involved a specific risk over and above that already posed by toys alone (greater
likelihood of ingestion or inhalation of small objects). In the light of available knowledge, the Emergencies
Committee concluded that, although the products in question could constitute risks, these were no
different from those associated with small toys or any toys incorporating small parts.
(cid:145)Combination(cid:146)
involving separate wrapping was not identified as a specific risk factor, since a causal link could not be
established between, on the one hand, distinctly wrapped toys associated with confectionery and, on the
other, an accident risk.

The risk depended on the characteristic features of the non-food product, particularly its reduced size or
that of its components or wrapping.

The products in question have not so far been notified under the emergency procedure laid down by
Article 8 of Directive 92/59/EEC. Nor has the Emergencies Committee received any information from the
Member States suggesting that they constitute a serious and direct risk requiring Community action
pursuant to Articles 9 et seq.

Nevertheless, as the three accidents highlighted by the petition demonstrate, these products (cid:129) and small
toys in general (cid:129) are not risk-free. The Emergencies Committee decided that the first step in meeting this
danger must be to ensure rigorous application of the existing legislation. The need to strengthen existing
rules should then be examined within the framework of Directive 88/378/EEC and standard EN 71-1.

This examination should focus, in particular, on the age limit fixed for the safe use of small toys and toys
incorporating small parts, the testing of such toys and consumer warnings.

Lastly, the Committee thought that special attention should be paid to any new developments and
information allowing a more precise evaluation of particular risks resulting from the combination of
foodstuffs and separately wrapped non-food products.

C 136 E/60

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

Such factors should also be carefully considered with a view to determining the need for more specific
European standards in respect of this type of product.

The Commission intends to present these conclusions to the appropriate bodies without delay.

(1) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.

(2001/C 136 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2635/00

by Karin Riis-Jłrgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: Illegal state aid to Combus A/S

The State-owned Danish coach company Combus A/S has, with the help of State aid, been able to
compete with private (domestic and foreign) coach companies charging fares well below real cost.

According to my information the Association of Danish bus and coach operators had a meeting with the
Commission in Autumn 1999 at which they expressed their objections to the illegal State aid to Combus
A/S, and were given to believe that the Commission was going to take the matter further.

The Commission:

1. Has it completed its inquiries following the visit to Brussels of the Danish bus and coach operators in

Autumn 1999?

2.

If its investigations are still under way, can the Commission tell me what progress has been made and
in particular when it expects to have dealt with the question of illegal State aid to Combus A/S?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 2000)

State funding which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings and
which affects trade between Member States requires, in principle, the Commission(cid:146)s prior clearance. No
state aid notification under Article 88 (ex Article 93) of the EC Treaty has reached the Commission on the
issue of the financing of the Danish public transport company Combus A/S.

However, financial compensation for the provision of public transport by road and rail is exempted from
an a priori notification and assessment by the Commission under the Treaty(cid:146)s state aid regime if granted in
accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 of 26 June 1969 on action by Member States
concerning the obligations inherent in the concept of a public service in transport by rail, road and inland
waterway (1) as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1893/91 of 20 June 1991 (2).

Within the framework of the Regulation, Member States are free to choose the form of compensation they
grant companies to balance costs for the provision of public services. The Commission will react however
in cases of documented misuse of such aid provided that both a harmful impact on competition and an
effect on cross-border trade can be established.

The Commission has not taken a formal decision regarding its assessment of the financing of Combus A/S.
In view of the current market situation the Commission believes an immediate reaction is not required.

(1) OJ L 156, 28.6.1969.
(2) OJ L 169, 29.6.1991.