WRITTEN QUESTION E-1522/01 by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission. Harmful herbal preparations used in dieting.
Date: 2001-05-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer protection, dietary product, environmental risk prevention, food safety, health risk, marketing, medical plant, pharmaceutical legislation, product safety

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/179

(2001/C 350 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1520/01

by Martin Callanan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: BP Trent tragedy (cid:129) third-country obligations to co-operation with the European judicial system

In June 1993, nine British sailors were killed when the Panamanian registered vessel (cid:145)The Western Winner(cid:146)
collided with the British fuel tanker the (cid:145)BP British Trent(cid:146) near the Belgian port of Ostend.

Maritime investigations have shown that the Korean captain and crew of (cid:145)The Western Winner(cid:146) were to
blame, having failed to comply with essential maritime safety laws. The ship(cid:146)s master, crew and owners of
(cid:145)The Western Winner(cid:146) have failed to co-operate with the judicial process through failing to attend the
hearings organised by the prosecutor(cid:146)s office in Bruges. They also declined to assist the UK(cid:146)s Maritime
Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) which conducted an enquiry on behalf of the Bermudan authorities
shortly after the incident.

As a result the case is still, almost eight years on, pending before the criminal court in Bruges. The
Commission does not have the jurisdiction to prosecute the captain, crew or owners of the ship, neither
can the Belgian authorities interfere with the judicial process.

What are the powers of the Commission in such legal cases where liable bodies from a third country fail
to co-operate with the European judicial system, thus inhibiting the legal proceedings?

Could the Commission not put pressure on the relevant governmental authorities to demand that those
responsible for the tragedy co-operate with the European judicial system?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(19 July 2001)

The Commission regrets to inform the Honourable Member that it does not have any legal competence
over individual criminal proceedings in Member States, which fall within the responsibilities of the relevant
national authorities.

However, the European Commission Vice-President responsible for Transport, responding to numerous
letters by the Honourable Member, wrote to the Belgian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport
informing her of the importance that he attaches to this question.

(2001/C 350 E/193)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1522/01

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Harmful herbal preparations used in dieting

The use of herbal preparations for slimming has become widespread all over Europe. They have sometimes
caused damage or even death among people following this kind of diet. The use of herbs such as Larrea
tridentata (causing hepatitis), Teucrium chamaedis or Scutellaria laterifolia (harmful for the liver), Datura
stramonium or Phlox rhododendri (brain disorders) and (cid:145)Chinese herbs(cid:146) such as Aristolochia frangchi or
Stephania tetranda (causing lethal kidney damage) should be regulated at European level by the
compilation of lists of harmful herbs which should not be used in herbal medicine or, in certain cases,
should not be imported.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of this problem?

What proposals does it intend to put forward on the subject?

C 350 E/180

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2001)

The existing Community legislation forbids a medicinal product to be placed on the market of a Member
State unless a marketing authorisation has been issued either by the Commission or by one of the Member
States. The marketing authorisation is granted only where the product proves to comply with the
fundamental requirements of quality, safety and efficacy. The intention is to preclude the marketing of
medicinal products with a negative benefit-risk balance. This legislation applies to all kinds of medicinal
products, including those on herbal basis.

The treatment of herbal substances by national authorities is not completely coherent though, thus
endangering the effective protection of public health by the Community(cid:146)s pharmaceutical
legislation.
Differences relate inter alia to the classification of the products as well as to the application requirements
and the procedures.

To further improve this situation, the Commission currently prepares a separate directive on traditionally
used herbal medicinal products. It is envisaged to establish a special registration procedure and will lay
down specific criteria regarded appropriate to guarantee quality, safety and efficacy with regard to these
products. If a herbal medicinal product is not authorised under the existing legislation or registered under
the new directive, it will not be allowed to market it within the Community. For this reason, a separate list
of prohibited products or substances is not considered necessary and therefore not foreseen in the draft
directive.

(2001/C 350 E/194)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1525/01

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) and Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: The Netherlands Government(cid:146)s intention to cease paying social security benefits under the Social

Security Supplements Act

On 1 January 2000, the (cid:145)Beperking Export Uitkeringen (BEU Wet)(cid:146) (Restriction on the Payment Abroad of
Social Security Benefits Act) came into force in the Netherlands. As a result thereof, changes were made to
the possibilities for the payment abroad of social security benefits: payment of some benefits is now
restricted solely to countries in the EU or EEA, of others to countries in the EU or EEA and countries with
which the Netherlands has concluded of a social security agreement, and of yet others not at all.

At present, the payment abroad of social security benefits under the Social Security Supplements Act is
restricted to countries in the European Union and to countries which are members of the European
Economic Area.

The Netherlands Government now intends to impose a further restriction on the Social Security
Supplements Act, with the result that the payment abroad of any of the benefits in question will no
longer be possible. There is, however, a proviso that the relevant European Union law will have to be
changed first.

1.
Does the Commission agree with me that this ban on the payment abroad of social security benefits
is undesirable since it will lead to the abolition of the difference between EU Member States and non-
member countries? Does it take the view that the ban referred to constitutes a threat to the principle of the
free movement of workers?

2.
The Social Security Supplements Act serves to protect citizens with an income below the minimum,
especially partners. From the point of view of social security protection, does the Commission think it
desirable and admissible that such citizens should have their income reduced?

3.
The incoming Belgian Presidency has announced that one of the main priorities during its term of
office will be (cid:145)A Social Europe(cid:146), which entails, inter alia, a modern social security system for all Europeans.
To what extent does the Netherlands Government(cid:146)s planned measure fit in with that concept?

4.
The Netherlands Government has announced that the payment abroad of social security benefits will
cease as soon as the relevant European Union legislation has been changed. Can the Commission indicate
whether that process is already under way? Has it submitted any proposals to that end? If the process has
already begun, is the Commission prepared to suspend it on the grounds of the undesirable consequences
thereof?