WRITTEN QUESTION E-1772/01 by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission. Conditions at the workplace.
Date: 2001-06-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: health policy, occupational health, occupational safety, working conditions, workplace

4.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/57

(2002/C 81 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1772/01

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(15 June 2001)

Subject: Conditions at the workplace

In recent years there has been a considerable improvement in a number of Member States in the legal
requirements governing safety at work. In other Member States the standards are very low or there is
widespread indifference about compliance with the standards.

Here, at the heart of the EU(cid:146)s administration, the city of Brussels, we are daily witness to working
conditions which should be totally unacceptable in Europe in this day and age. Everywhere in the city,
scaffolding work can be seen to flout northern European safety standards, and it is only necessary to look
out of the windows of Parliament(cid:146)s buildings to see construction work on the new railway station in
progress with total disregard for normal safety requirements. Workers cutting flagstones with angle
grinders without protective goggles, without ear or respiratory protection, crawling around on a slippery,
curved glass roof with no safety harness.

Clearly the savings to be made on the costs directly associated with work at height are so great that firms
which make their employees work under such conditions gain a competitive edge. In the light of this
situation, it seems understandable that despite the EU(cid:146)s rules on tendering, in practice virtually all firms
working in the building sector in Brussels are Belgian.

Will the Commission provide details of the nationality of those companies which have carried out the EU(cid:146)s
Justus Lipsius
major building projects,
Building?

including Parliament(cid:146)s buildings and the Council of Ministers(cid:146)

Poor working conditions cause extensive damage to health which is not compensated by those employers
who gain competitive advantages by disregarding safety at work. Different safety standards in the working
environment are therefore a serious factor in distorting competition.

It is unacceptable for the EU, which claims it is working for a better working environment, not to ensure
that safety at work is improved in those countries which do not meet the high standards set in other
Member States.

What is the Commission doing to ensure that all workers in the EU enjoy the same conditions in their
places of work?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2001)

As regards major building works or exterior renovations, the Commission does not hire contractors or
subcontractors directly, but engages the developer or the owner of the building to organise the works. In
the case of the Berlaymont building,
for the
Charlemagne, another major Commission building, it was Cofinimmo. The Honourable Member(cid:146)s question
would therefore be better addressed to these companies.

the company hiring contractors is Berlaymont 2000;

As regards the buildings of the Parliament and the Council, the Commission is of the opinion that the
question ought to be put to these Institutions.

With a view to improving the health and safety of workers in the Community and to reducing the number
of occupational accidents and diseases, the Community (cid:129) acting on proposals from the Commission (cid:129)
has put in place a major corpus of legislation since 1989. This corpus consists of the directives adopted on
the basis of Article 137 of the EC Treaty (ex-Article 118a) laying down minimum requirements for the
protection of workers(cid:146) health and safety at work. Pursuant to Article 137 (5) the provisions adopted

C 81 E/58

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.4.2002

pursuant to this Article shall not prevent any Member State from maintaining or introducing more
stringent protective measures compatible with the EC treaty. In particular, the Commission wishes to draw
the Honourable Member(cid:146)s attention to Council Directive 89/391/EC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction
of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (1), and in particular
the thirteenth recital, which states that (cid:145)the improvement of workers(cid:146) safety, hygiene and health at work is
an objective which should not be subordinated to purely economic considerations(cid:146).

These directives have to be transposed into the legal order of the Member States and it is for the Member
States themselves to see to the correct and effective enforcement of the national provisions transposing the
Community instruments. Hence, monitoring and surveillance of workplaces, and in particular building
sites, is a matter for the national authorities.

The latest statistics on accidents at work (2), dating from 1998, show an improvement at European level
both as regards the incidence of accidents at work requiring sick leave for over three days, namely 4 089
accidents per 100 000 workers in 1998 as compared with 4 229 in 1996 and 4 539 in 1994, and on the
incidence of fatal accidents at work, namely 3,5 fatalities per 100 000 workers in 1998 by comparison
with 3,6 in 1996 and 3,9 in 1994.

These statistical indicators show that the enforcement of Community legislation on health and safety of
workers at work has helped improve working conditions and reduce the accident rate throughout Europe.
Hence this legislation, when correctly enforced at national level, improves the health and safety of workers
at work.

For its part, the Commission is currently evaluating the situation and intends to propose measures to raise
awareness among the parties involved, so as to enhance the effectiveness of actions taken in this area up to
now, in the context of a future strategy in the field of protection of the health and safety of workers at
work.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.
(2) ESAW (cid:129) European statistics on accidents at work.

(2002/C 81 E/068)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1784/01

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission

(19 June 2001)

Subject: Sentence passed on Professor Saad Eddin Ibrahim

On 21 May 2001, Professor Saad Eddin Ibrahim was sentenced to seven years in prison by an Egyptian
State Security Court which ruled that his efforts to ensure the parliamentary elections were monitored
were defamatory to the State. Professor Ibrahim had been arrested the previous July when the Ibn
Khaldoun Study Centre of which he was the director began holding courses on (cid:145)voter education(cid:146) and
training for monitors of last Autumn(cid:146)s parliamentary elections.

The public prosecutor challenged the use to which the Ibn Khaldoun Study Centre had put Commission
funds of USD 250 000, with which it had produced a documentary film on electoral fraud in the last
election and constructed imitation voting booths to simulate voting during the voter education courses
organised in the run-up to the elections. 27 members of staff of the Ibn Khaldoun Study Centre were
convicted in addition to Professor Saad Eddin Ibrahim, thus effectively closing down one of the most
prestigious institutes of political science in the Arab world.

Was the Commission aware that Professor Saad Eddin Ibrahim had been imprisoned? What are the
Commission(cid:146)s views on the conviction by a third country of persons engaged in activities funded by the
Commission? What steps does the Commission intend to take to defend Professor Ibrahim and his staff
and protect them against the risks incurred by engaging in activities encouraged and funded by the
Commission?