WRITTEN QUESTION P-3919/00 by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Bathing Water Directive.
Date: 2000-12-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, application of EU law, bathing water

C 174 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

In the wake of this case of BSE 2 800 cattle were slaughtered on the Azores. Are requests for
4.
compensation being made to Germany or to those in the agircultural sector who supplied the animal
infected with BSE?

In accordance with the European BSE notification requirement the farmers in the Member State

5.
should have been informed by the authorities. To what extent did this happen in Germany?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(20 February 2001)

The Commission would point out that this question is exactly the same as the Honourable Member(cid:146)s
Written Question P-3881/00

The Commission would therefore refer the Honourable Member to the answer it has already given to that
question (1).

(1) See page 171.

(2001/C 174 E/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3919/00

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 December 2000)

Subject: Bathing Water Directive

Would the Commission explain how it is that Member States, despite formal complaints to the Commis-
sion, contrary to the requirements of the 76/160/EC (1) Bathing Water Directive, are being permitted to
continue to publicise false (cid:145)passes(cid:146) for bathing waters proven to fail the Directive mandatory standard? I
refer to the United Kingdom, which in 1999 claimed 491 passes to mandatory conformity (91,4 %
compliant) and 45 failures (8,8 % non-compliant) of their 537 designated bathing water resorts, when the
findings conclusively prove only 54 (10 %) to pass, 76 (14,2 %) to fail with the remaining 407 (75,8 %) of
unknown compliance due to dismissal and lack of
four mandatory microbiological
pathogens?

testing for all

Does the Commission agree that issue of such false conformities is a threat to the health of unsuspecting
people innocently entering such polluted waters, and will it take action to ensure factual and responsible
public reporting of bathing water quality by all Member States in the future?

(1) OJ L 31, 5.2.1976, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2001)

The Commission does not consider issuing such information as the Honourable Member is referring to is a
threat to human health. Council Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December 1975 main objective is to protect
citizens against sewage polluted bathing water. The main indicators for sewage pollution are faecal
indicators, such as faecal coliforms. The results presented in the Commission(cid:146)s annual report are based
on the microbiological parameters, total and faecal coliforms which refer to possible human health risks;
and three physico-chemical parameters (cid:129) or aesthetic parameters, i.e. is the water attractive to go bathing
(cid:129) mineral oils, surface-active substances (detergents) and phenols (residue of chemical industry). Salmo-
nella and enterovirus are not such indicators. Moreover, there is an ongoing debate about the relevance of
these parameters in relation to bathing water quality management. The Commission has therefore asked
the World health organisation (WHO) for its opinion on the issue.

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/187

Strictly legally speaking there is a case to disqualify beaches if salmonella/enterovirus are found to be
present and to pursue Member States for not testing for salmonella and/or enterovirus. However, there is
no statistical information to allow for a substantiated and meaningful evaluation of the situation across the
Community. The Commission is currently assessing what action has been taken in all Member States to
follow-up these parameters.

(2001/C 174 E/198)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3921/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Subject: The Dolomites as a European cultural heritage site

Does the Commission agree that it would be appropriate officially to declare the Dolomites a European
cultural heritage site?

Answer given by Ms Reding on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Article 151 (ex Article 128) of the EC Treaty gives the Community only limited powers in the area of
culture. Action by the Community must be aimed at encouraging cooperation between Member States and,
if necessary, supporting and supplementing their action in a certain number of areas,
including the
protection, preservation and development of the cultural heritage. This objective is pursued through the
Culture 2000 programme, the new framework programme to promote cultural cooperation in Europe.

Consequently, the Community is not in a position to declare that a natural site such as the Dolomites
should be listed as a (cid:145)European cultural heritage site(cid:146). Even so, the Commission would point out to the
Honourable Member that the fact of listing a site as forming part of the cultural heritage does not
necessarily mean that it is protected. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, protection regimes
are the exclusive responsibility of the Member States.

(2001/C 174 E/199)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3922/00

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Increase in xenophobia in Europe

The annual report recently published by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
notes a significant increase in racism in the European Union. Dr Beate Winkler, the Director of the Centre,
noted that Sweden, France, Germany and many other countries are showing an alarming rise in cases of
racist violence, the main victims of which are African and Arab immigrants, Albanians and Roma, while at
the same time there has also been an increase in attacks on synagogues, Jewish cemeteries, and mosques.
The 1999 report by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia also stresses the
significant increase in the use of the Internet by neo-Nazi organisations to promote their political and
racist propaganda.

The declaration by the European Conference against Racism held in Strasbourg last month stresses that
Europe is a community of shared values, multicultural in its past, present and future. How effective are the
measures taken by the Council and in what way is it possible to honour the Strasbourg commitments to
combat racism and racist discrimination, xenophobia, religious fanaticism, intolerance, anti-Semitism and
Islamophobia, which threaten democratic societies and their fundamental values?