WRITTEN QUESTION E-3045/01 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. Provision of lifeguards.
Date: 2001-11-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, accident in the home, accident prevention, protective equipment, safety standard, sea, sports facilities

C 134 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

Geo-information is a concern for all levels of responsibility: Local, Regional, National and European.
3.
Since GI-related issues very often have an important European, cross-border component, the European
Union has a clear role to play. The initiatives mentioned above show how the Commission is already
contributing to the GI-area, where there is a clear European added-value. In some cases, cooperation in
Geo-information goes even beyond the European scale. The Commission is currently contributing to the
world-wide scale GSDI initiative (Global Spatial Data Infrastructure).

(1) COM(2001) 607 final.
(2) Cf for instance Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a
framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000. Proposal for a directive of the
Parliament and of the Council relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise 3 OJ C 337 E,
28.11.2000.

(2002/C 134 E/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3045/01

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Provision of lifeguards

Is the Commission aware of a recent UK study into the number of children who drown in pools and in the
sea in Member States of the EU every year?

In the light of this study, would the Commission consider initiating a systematic recording of figures in all
Member States in the EU?

What plans does the Commission have to introduce a Regulation on the provision of lifeguards at public
pools and beaches?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2002)

The Commission has attempted to find the study referred to by the Honourable Member. The competent
UK authorities have sent it two recent reports on drowning accidents produced for the Department of
Trade and Industry (DTI) (1). However, these refer only to accidents in the domestic environment (home
and garden), and to the situation in the United Kingdom.

One of these studies focuses on accidents in the garden to children under the age of five, while the other
provides a more general analysis of the problem of drowning accidents in the home and garden.

On the basis of
the data collected, both studies describe the main accident scenarios and make
recommendations to limit the risks of domestic drowning accidents. They conclude that most accidents to
very young children occur as a result of a lack of supervision.

The Commission has been unable to identify any study carried out in the United Kingdom or elsewhere
with a more general scope covering drowning accidents to children in pools and in the sea, as referred to
in the Honourable Member’s question.

The Commission does not have any plans for a specific Community initiative involving the collection of
information on drowning accidents to children in the Member States and the provision of lifeguards in
public pools and on beaches. The Commission feels that these matters are the responsibility of the Member
States and their local authorities. However, certain aspects of the matter, namely those relating to the

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/187

safety of services in tourist facilities in more general terms, can be covered by horizontal initiatives on the
safety of services, a subject on which Parliament has recently asked the Commission to present a report
and appropriate proposals in 2003.

(1)

‘Drowning accidents in the garden involving children under five 3 July 2000 3 URN00/906’; ‘Drowning in the
home & garden 3 June 2001 3 URN 01/903’.

(2002/C 134 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3049/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Controls on the health and safety of workers

(5 November 2001)

In its reply to my question E-0906/01 (1) on controls on the improvement of the health and safety of
workers the Commission provided a table showing that Greece has made the least effort to carry out
inspections and had imposed penalties on 55 undertakings.

Since the issue remains a serious one and controls are still inadequate, will the Commission say:

1. What charges have been brought against the above undertakings? Have penalties actually been

imposed and, if so, what kind of penalties?

2. What measures does the Commission intend to take to increase inspections in Greece and to make

them more substantial?

(1) OJ C 340 E, 4.12.2001, p. 119.

(2002/C 134 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3050/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Additional information on workers’ health and safety

(5 November 2001)

In its reply to my Question E-0906/01 (1) on adequate controls by the Member States in compliance with
Article 4(2) of framework directive 89/391/EEC (2) on the improvement of the safety and health of workers,
the Commission states: ‘As far as the specific situation in Greece is concerned, the Commission requested
further information from the plaintiff (Petition 00/4404) following the complaint made by the General
Confederation of Greek Workers. After receiving this information, the Commission also sent a letter to the
Greek Government requesting information on the introduction of measures … Although a reminder letter
on this matter has been sent to the Greek authorities, they have not yet provided the information
requested by the Commission’.

Despite all the above, the Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs has asked the plaintiff for
additional information (Doc. 62383 of 1 August 2001). Since this remains an urgent matter and controls
inadequate, will the Commission say why it has not opened infringement proceedings under
are still
Article 226 with the information on which the complaints are based or which it has collected itself and
why it is continuing to ask for additional information from the plaintiff?

(1) OJ C 340 E, 4.12.2001, p. 119.
(2) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.