WRITTEN QUESTION P-2488/01 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Proliferation of crime in the Member States.
Date: 2001-09-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, EU police cooperation, EU programme, crime, fight against crime, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU

4.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/185

The expenditure for the preparatory studies and the main works has to be made within the period between
28 July 1998 and 30 December 2003.

As regards the period in which the above expenditure is to be made, the Commission may postpone the
final date given above if the Member State sends it valid supporting material to justify this before the
finalisation date.

(1) OJ C 261 E, 18.9.2001.
(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(4) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.
(5) Decision C (1999) 2379, 26.7.1999.

(2002/C 81 E/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2488/01

by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Proliferation of crime in the Member States

(5 September 2001)

for criminological

Data published by centres
international
organisations and the media point to a sharp rise in crime in many Member States of the Union, ranging
from organised crime and trafficking in human beings and drugs to youth crime. Police reports for the
period 1998-2000 are mainly concerned with cross-border crime (between Member States and with
eastern European countries), while the problem is exacerbated by a lack of adequate specialist police forces
and competent officials in terms of both quantity and quality.

reports by police authorities,

studies,

There is a direct link between these issues and public safety and quality of life in Europe. Politicians and
the authorities are also confused over which methods would be effective against such crime without
infringing civil rights.

The European Union has developed various policies and measures to combat crime, such as the STOP,
FALCONE, OISIN, ODYSSEUS and GROTIUS programmes. Recently, the European Network for Crime
Prevention convened for the first time and the Council adopted the two-year Hippocrates Programme.

Is the Commission satisfied with the results of those programmes? Does it intend to publish detailed and
reliable information on indicators of crime in the Member States? What additional measures will it propose
to tackle such criminal activities effectively?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2001)

The aim of the programmes implemented under Title VI of the European Union Treaty (Oisin II, Stop II,
Grotius II, Falcone and Hipprokrates) is to facilitate cooperation between the Member States in the fight
against crime at Union level. This calls for financial instruments to supplement the Member States(cid:146) national
policies and instruments. Direct contact, indispensable in this field, serves to exchange experiences and
supports the development of projects whose European dimension contribute to the creation of a common
culture and a common area of freedom, security and justice.

In the absence of European crime indicators, it is difficult to gauge the direct impact of crime reduction
programmes. However, with the services of over 5000 professionals provided by the authorities concerned
or outside players (non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and universities), the projects co-financed
(exchanges, seminars, joint projects, implementation of the instruments adopted at Union level, etc (cid:133))
create links for easier day-to-day cooperation. This was borne out by the evaluation of the effectiveness of
these programmes in terms of their objectives in 2000.

C 81 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.4.2002

A single programme combining all Title VI programmes is currently being finalised. The aim is to make it
easier to manage them and to make them more efficient instruments in developing judicial and police
cooperation in the Union. It is also planned to increase their resources.

the only instruments promoting European
It should be emphasised that
cooperation in the fight against crime, which needs to be planned and carried out within the more general
framework of the Scoreboard on the implementation of an area of freedom, security and justice.

the programmes are not

(2002/C 81 E/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2498/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 September 2001)

Subject: Inadequate view of traffic approaching from the right at T-junctions for drivers of coaches with an

elevated passenger compartment

1.
Is the Commission aware that drivers of coaches with a very elevated passenger compartment have
great difficulty in seeing traffic coming from the right at an angle less than 90 degrees, that side mirrors
also fail to provide adequate visibility and that drivers can only avoid accidents by asking passengers help
them look or even by standing up while they are driving?

Can the Commission indicate how many accidents occur because of this blind spot? What are the
2.
consequences for highly populated urban areas and for T-junctions on winding roads in hilly areas where
visibility is restricted?

3. What can the Commission do to ensure that new coaches in the EU Member States no longer have
this safety fault and that, as far as possible, modifications are made to existing coaches?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2001)

The Commission is not aware of any accident accumulation of coaches due to problems of indirect vision,
neither have Member States informed the Commission thereof.

Virtually all coaches on the European market today have an elevated passenger compartment in order to
provide for sufficient trunk space and to improve the sight for passengers. Therefore the driver(cid:146)s seat is on
a lower level than the passenger(cid:146)s seats. Although this construction characteristic prevents the coach driver
from having a direct view through the side windows of the passenger compartment, there is sufficient view
of vehicles and other road users coming from the rear through the exterior and interior rear view mirrors.

At T-junctions, which are mentioned in the question, the front view and the view to both sides is
particularly good for the driver. The large rounded windscreen and the large windows in the front door of
coaches provide a good direct view for the driver. Right side view is similarly good.

However, there are other situations in which it would be beneficial for coach drivers to have a wider view
to the rear. The Commission can therefore inform the Honourable Member that the Commission is
preparing an amendment of Council Directive 71/127/EEC of 1 March 1971 on the approximation of the
laws of the Member States relating to the rear-view mirrors of motor vehicles (1). In this proposal certain
characteristics of mirrors, e.g. the curvature of the surface, are modified according to technical progress in
order to increase the field of indirect view. Such an extension of the view will also have positive effects for
the indirect view of coaches.

(1) OJ L 68, 22.3.1971.