WRITTEN QUESTION E-0917/01 by Anneli Hulthén (PSE) to the Commission. Amalgam and health.
Date: 2001-03-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: dental medicine, health risk, medical device, mercury, toxic substance

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/153

(2001/C 318 E/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0915/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Urban audit in Braga

On 17 June 1998 the Portuguese newspaper (cid:145)DiÆrio do Minho(cid:146) reported that the European Commission
was to promote an urban audit of Braga to be carried out in the context of a programme to increase
knowledge about the quality of life in cities, which would involve 58 European cities, the aim being to
gather information for the drafting of urban policies as well as to increase knowledge about urban areas.

It added that the assessment, scheduled to take a year, was to be carried out by the European Economic
Research and Advisory Consortium.

Can the Commission say what assessment was made of the Portuguese cities involved, which according to
the newspaper article were Braga, Lisbon and Oporto?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2001)

The urban audit was carried out by the Commission in 58 of Europe(cid:146)s largest cities to gather information
on the quality of life.

The results,
available on following website: http://www.inforegio.cec.eu.int/urban/audit

including a comparison of all the cities covered, were published in April 2000 and are

In Portugal, the audit was carried out in Lisbon, Oporto and Braga. Information on the three cities is given
under the heading (cid:145)Search by city(cid:146) on the above site and can be compared with that for the other cities
covered under the heading (cid:145)Search by domain(cid:146). These sections exist only in English.

(2001/C 318 E/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0917/01

by Anneli HulthØn (PSE) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Amalgam and health

Does the Commission consider that the use of amalgam is a public health problem in the Union? If it does,
does it have a plan for future action?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2001)

Dental amalgams are medical devices covered by the Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 (1) on medical
devices. In 1997, a Working Group, set up under the Medical Devices Experts Group, composed of
representatives of national authorities, patients, the dental profession and industry produced a report on
the use of dental amalgams in relation to health risks. It concluded, inter alia, that all dental restorative
materials have the potential for causing some adverse reactions and that most contain components which
it also concluded that currently available data indicate that mercury from dental
are toxic. However,
amalgams will not cause an unacceptable risk to the general population. Local reactions to dental
amalgams fillings and other dental restorative materials do occur but are relatively rare; cases have also
been reported of such reactions to materials used as alternatives to dental amalgams. According to the
report, the benefits of restoring teeth with dental amalgam outweigh significantly the documented risks,
and the risk-benefit ration corresponds to the currently acknowledged and accepted state of the art.

C 318 E/154

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

Commission and national authorities, in close co-operation with other interested parties, keep the use of
dental amalgams under constant scrutiny and follow attentively the development of substitutes and their
impact on health.

(1) OJ L 169, 12.7.1993.

(2001/C 318 E/166)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0928/01

by Jonas Sj(cid:246)stedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Dismissal and pensions

A Danish documentary shown on Swedish TV has outraged the public. It reported on a number of
problems involving the EU administration and organisation.

One item referred to Hubert Onidi, an official who used to work in ECHO. He was dismissed from the
Commission for involvement in fraud relating to ECHO projects. According to the documentary, the aid
money was found in his wife(cid:146)s bank account in Luxembourg.

Despite being sacked for irregularities, Mr Onidi
employers refuse to pay a pension if
Commission not follow the same principle?

is receiving a pension from the Commission. Many
the employee is dismissed for irregularities. Why does the

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2001)

In the case referred to by the Honourable Member, the appointing authority decided to remove the official
from his post and to reduce his pension rights.

The sanctions of dismissal and pension reduction were considered by the responsible authorities to be
appropriate to the gravity of the offences for which the official was formal guilty. Those offences did not
include fraud as the question says, they related to various failures to meet the obligations of independence
and honesty to which officials are bound under the Staff Regulations.

Since the case is still pending before the European Court of First Instance, the Commission is not in
a position to provide further information.

(2001/C 318 E/167)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0934/01

by Jonas Sj(cid:246)stedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: ISO and the (cid:145)Nordic(cid:146) methods

Salmonella contamination of meat can be detected using either the ISO or the Nordic method. In the EU
the former has been the rule. However, on 10 March 1998 Commissioner Fischler told the European
Parliament that the Council was discussing the possiblity of using the Nordic method as a reference
method.

How many Member States are now using the Nordic method as the reference for ascertaining whether
meat is contaminated by salmonella? What is the Commission doing to promote the use of the Nordic
method rather than the ISO method as the reference method?