WRITTEN QUESTION E-3654/01 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission. Fire at Paris hotel — checks on observance of European fire prevention standards.
Date: 2002-01-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, application of EU law, consumer protection, death, fire, fire protection, hotel industry, safety standard

C 147 E/214

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

Why were only former heads of government considered when the president and vice-presidents were
appointed and not serving members of parliament?

Why is there not a single woman among the president and two vice-presidents?

Reply

(18 March 2002)

After a substantive discussion of all the relevant issues and taking into account a number of different
options, the European Council meeting in Laeken agreed to appoint Mr Valéry Giscard d’Estaing as
president of the Convention.

The ‘Council’ is in no position to speculate on the subjective motives of the participants.

(2002/C 147 E/226)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3654/01

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(15 January 2002)

Subject: Fire at Paris hotel 3 checks on observance of European fire prevention standards

On 17 December 2001 four people, including two young Italian women, died in a fire 3 probably of
criminal origin 3 at the Hôtel du Palais in Paris.

This tragic occurrence has pointed up the frequent and deliberate failure to apply the strict European rules
on fire risks and their prevention in full, or, indeed, at all, especially at hotels.

Does the Commission not consider that checks should be made concerning the real observance of the anti-
fire standards in the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2002)

The Commission has been informed about the fire which claimed the lives of four people and injured
seven at the Hôtel du Palais in Paris during the night of 17 December 2001.

According to the initial police findings, it was an act of arson and the perpetrator, a habitual offender, was
apprehended on the spot.

Given these tragic circumstances, the Commission is unable to comment on the way in which safety
standards were implemented in the case in question. This is particularly so when there is a deliberate
intention to start a fire, in which case even rigorous application of the preventive arrangements in force
may prove insufficient.

However, generally speaking, the Commission shares the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member
and is currently working, in collaboration with the Member States, on improvements which could be made
to the main Community instrument applicable: Council Recommendation 86/666/EEC of 22 December
1986 on fire safety in existing hotels (1).

The first phase of this work was concluded with the adoption, on 27 June 2001, of a Commission report
on application of the Recommendation (2). This report points out that the Recommendation has helped to
improve safety, particularly in areas where it was most needed, and also identifies grey areas which ought
to be addressed. In this connection, the report raises points for consideration with a view to furthering the
Commission’s work on the subject.

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/215

The second phase (improvement of the existing arrangements) has just commenced and will initially entail
updating the requirements contained in the Recommendation’s guidelines. Subsequently, in the course of
2003, the measures taken should help to reinforce the objective set out in the Recommendation, namely
to provide consumers with a high and consistent level of safety protection against the risks of fire in all the
hotels of the Community.

(1) OJ L 384, 31.12.1986.
(2) COM(2001) 348 final.

(2002/C 147 E/227)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3655/01

by Toine Manders (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 January 2002)

Subject: Testing standards conformity in the case of construction materials

In the Netherlands and Germany, construction materials undergo product approval testing at a test
institute on the basis of European standard EN-45011. Various technical aspects are tested and eventually
described in a KOMO attestation, which provides an assurance as to the soundness of the product
concerned. Conformity arrangements exist within the European Community as regards the approval testing
of construction materials. This means that each country must accept aspects that have already been
approved and may at most add a number of requirements specific to its own situation.

In practice, however, paving brick manufacturers are encountering problems with a number of
municipalities in Belgium, as the KOMO certificate is not recognised there. The Belgian municipalities are
demanding that products obtain the Benor mark, in accordance with type specification 250 of the Flemish
Community, before they can be placed on the market. These conditions imposed by the Belgian authorities
cost both time and money. The procedure for obtaining the Benor mark has to be completed in its
entirety, despite the fact
in question in
accordance with European rules, which means that the tested and approved aspects are not being accepted.

test mark already exists for the product

that an approval

Is the Commission aware of the differences which clearly exist on Europe’s internal market as regards

1.
the recognition of approval test marks?

2.

Is it of the opinion that a rule of European law has been infringed in this case?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2002)

The Commission had already received complaints about the compulsory or quasi-compulsory use of the
‘BENOR’ mark for certain types of construction products marketed in Belgium. Following discussions with
the Commission, the Belgian authorities have undertaken to amend their rules so that the principle of
mutual recognition can play its proper role.

Nonetheless, the Commission is closely examining how free movement may potentially be hampered by
national conformity marks granted by private or semi-public bodies, which attest that a product conforms
with the (voluntary) standards or the compulsory technical rules that economic operators choose to
comply with, on the basis of tests and certification carried out by the body in question. Compulsory
conformity marks constitute an obstacle to the free movement of construction products insofar as they
exclude from the national market products from other Member States which comply with technical
specifications ensuring a level of protection which is equivalent to that sought by the Member State of
destination.