WRITTEN QUESTION E-2058/01 by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Prevention of occupational diseases.
Date: 2001-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU action, Portugal, disease prevention, health policy, occupational disease, occupational health, occupational safety

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/173

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

(18 September 2001)

the texts transposing Article 6 of Council
The Commission informs the Honourable Member that
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
into French law are currently being examined for conformity by the Commission.

Hunting is a legitimate activity in accordance with Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the
conservation of wild birds and does not have to be outlawed a priori from Natura 2000 sites. As far as
sites protected under Directive 92/43/EEC are concerned, game hunting is highly unlikely to cause a
problem, except for a small number of species. As far as sites protected under Directive 79/409/EEC are
concerned,
In numerous cases, properly managed hunting is not
incompatible with maintaining species of birds in a good state of conservation. That is why a human
activity such as hunting has to be carried out under strict conditions in order to ensure a balance between
the activity in question and the long-term conservation interest of the species of birds likely to be hunted.
The most appropriate framework for defining such conditions on a case by case basis is a site management
plan which involves the parties concerned.

the question is more complex.

As the Commission makes clear in the guide (cid:145)Managing Natura 2000 sites (cid:129) the provisions of Article 6 of
the Habitats Directive(cid:146), conditions governing the concepts of (cid:145)disturbances(cid:146) have to be assessed in the light
of the general state of conservation of the species or habitats concerned and in the light of local
conditions. At a particular site, disturbances are generally appraised on a case by case basis. The
Commission considers that a species is being disturbed when the data relating to the population dynamic
of that site show that, compared with the initial situation, the species in question might no longer
constitute a viable element of the site concerned. This appraisal is carried out in accordance with the site(cid:146)s
contribution to the coherence of the Natura 2000 network.

Incidentally, as far as the Honourable Member(cid:146)s reference to the Commission(cid:146)s reasoned opinion of
13 September 1994 is concerned, the Commission(cid:146)s position in this matter reflected an extreme situation
at the site in question, where the pressure of hunting on the fauna present was unusually severe.

Finally, it must be pointed out that, in accordance with Article 220 (formerly Article 164) of the EC Treaty,
the Court of Justice has the sole power to interpret Community law.

(2002/C 40 E/186)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2058/01

by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Prevention of occupational diseases

Council Directive 89/391/EEC (1) of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage
improvements in the safety and health of workers at work states, in its Article 5, that (cid:145)the employer shall
have a duty to ensure the safety and health of workers in every aspect related to the work.(cid:146)

Despite this, in Portugal work-related tendinitis has been on the rise since 1992. In 1994, 150 employees
of Ford Electr(cid:243)nica were already suffering from this disease. Today, in the electrical sector and in southern
Portugal alone, 1500 workers aged under 30, employed by such firms as Visteon (formerly Ford
Electr(cid:243)nica), Indelma, Delphi, Deta, Pioneer, Samsung, Legrand ElØctrica and Tyco, have been confirmed as
suffering from tendinitis, and the same fate could soon await thousands of others.

One of the factors common to enterprises where tendinitis is rife is the so-called (cid:145)modernisation(cid:146) of work.
The labour process is characterised by mechanisation, fragmentation of production and a high degree of
specialisation. This means an increase in the number of tasks which place high physical demands on the
hands, arms and shoulders and which call for fast, exact and repetitive movements, which may require
considerable straining, difficult postures and the use of force.

C 40 E/174

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

In spite of the warnings issued and proposals made by the trade union for the sector, on the basis of
studies and scientific opinions emanating from specialists and national and international organisations, it is
clear that not a single one of the companies located in Portugal in which there is a high incidence of
tendinitis has introduced any kind of workplace health and safety programme aimed at preventing
repetitive strain injuries. On the contrary,
the workers affected are expected, after treatment and
convalescence, to return to work under the same conditions as created the illness in the first place; and if
they are replaced, it is by new workers who will very soon develop similar illnesses and, over time, become
victims of occupational disease.

Can the Commission state whether it is aware of this situation, how far it believes it is compatible with EU
legislation, and what type of action is provided for in EU law to ensure that suitable health and safety
conditions are created in workplaces with a view to preventing the development of injuries of this kind?

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2001)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the answers given by the Commission to written questions
E-3198/95 (1) and E-382/97 (2) by Mr SØrgio Ribeiro.

The Commission also informs the Honourable Member that it is aware of the frequency and significance of
musculoskeletal problems at work and is currently examining possible Community measures to ensure
more effective prevention of such problems.

The Commission is assisted in this work by the Advisory Committee on Safety, Hygiene and Health
Protection at Work which, at its plenary meeting of 15 May 2001, adopted a specific opinion on
musculoskeletal disorders at work. The Commission will forward a copy of that opinion directly to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat-General.

(1) OJ C 109, 15.4.1996.
(2) OJ C 217, 17.7.1997.

(2002/C 40 E/187)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2059/01

by Per Gahrton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: The Commission(cid:146)s failure to comply with Articles 155 and 169 of the EC Treaty

Pursuant to Article 155, the Commission is required to ensure that Member States transpose Council
directives into national
to
Article 169, the Commission is required to bring legal action against Member States which do not comply
with these directives.

law. Such changes in the law are binding on Member States. Pursuant

Articles 48 and 100 of the EC Treaty prohibit discrimination on grounds of sex and against other EU
citizens at work. The ILO principle of equal pay for equal work applies throughout the EC. The Council
has adopted a series of directives to implement these prohibitions.

A few years ago I put a question to the Commission about a case of wage discrimination about which a
complaint had been made to the Commission. Commissioner Padraig Flynn replied to it before Parliament
and promised that the case would be processed swiftly.

A further inquiry (cid:129) not by the Commission (cid:129) showed that since becoming a party to the EEA Agreement
and later acceding to the EC, Sweden had not transposed the directives into its domestic employment
legislation but instead had introduced wage discrimination as a principle throughout the public sector. The
Commission has been aware of this situation at least since Padraig Flynn give his reply to my question in
Parliament.