WRITTEN QUESTION E-0310/02 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE)and Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Prevention of whiplash injury.
Date: 2002-02-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: chronic illness, motor car, motor vehicle industry, road safety, safety standard, technical regulations, transport accident

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/111

The Commission has contacted the Belgian authorities, and also the authorities of the other Member States
which have similar benefits that are excluded from the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 through
being entered in Section II of Annex II (particularly France, Luxembourg and Finland), in order to raise this
matter with them. It will keep the Honourable Members informed about any further steps it takes in this
connection.

The Commission would also inform the Honourable Members that it intends, by the end of the year, to
draw up a communication concerning all recent rulings of the Court of Justice relating to the free
movement of workers, including the coordination of social security schemes. This communication will
seek to identify and clarify the rights of European citizens deriving from these rulings.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed
persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community (OJ L 149,
5.7.1971), which was updated by Regulation (EC) No 118/97 (OJ L 28, 30.1.1997).

(2) OJ C 40 E, 14.2.2002.
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the

Judgment of 4 November 1997 in Case C-20/96 Snares, ECR I-6057.
Judgment of 8 March 2001 in Case C-215/99 Jauch, ECR I-1901.
Judgment of 31 May 2001 in Case C-43/99 Leclere, ECR I-4265.

Community (OJ L 257, 19.10.1968).

(2002/C 205 E/123)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0310/02

by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE)
and Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 February 2002)

Subject: Prevention of whiplash injury

Every year there are a large number of car accidents in the European Union in which the occupants suffer
whiplash injury. A common result of such injury is chronic neck pain, often resulting in long-term
inability to work. The social costs of neck complaints in the European Union are estimated at between 5
and 10 billion euro a year (source: Victims and society: Achmea Foundation, 2001). The findings of TNO
(Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research) report 96.OR.BV.050.0/EJ (1996) indicated that
there was inadequate protection for both front and rear seat occupants in all the cars tested. More stringent
technical requirements for the manufacture of cars could do a great deal to prevent whiplash injury.

Is the Commission aware of the TNO report referred to above and, if so, how does it intend to use

1.
the findings in drafting legislation on road safety in the European Union?

Is the Commission prepared to take steps to reduce whiplash injury and, if so, what measures does it

2.
envisage taking and when?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(21 March 2002)

The Commission is aware of the TNO report which was established at the demand of the Foundation

1.
Achmea in the Netherlands.

At the time of the report’s production, the Dutch government drew the attention of the Commission to the
need to improve the Community legislation in that respect. Consequently, Council Directive 74/408/EEC
of 22 July 1974 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the interior fittings of
motor vehicles (strength of seats and of their anchorages) (1) was substantially amended by Commission
Directive 96/37/EC of 17 June 1996 (2) in the particular context of head restraints. Two of the major
recommendations of the TNO report were thus taken into consideration.

C 205 E/112

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

Over time, the whiplash injuries issue has been acknowledged as a major car safety issue to all
2.
observers. Therefore, the Commission decided, as part of its 4th Framework Programme on Research and
Technological Development, to launch research initiatives in this area.

These researches were considered necessary in order to collect from all available publications, relevant
information regarding:

A biomechanical knowledge concerning neck injury;

A achievement of suitable dummies for safety assessment in rear end collision;

A measurement criteria regarding the neck injury risks;

with a view to introducing new designs of seat backs and head restraints systems.

These research efforts are still in progress. As soon as the results are available, the Commission will adopt
appropriate measures for the insertion of new requirements in the Community legislation.

(1) OJ L 221, 12.8.1974.
(2) OJ L 186, 25.7.1996.

(2002/C 205 E/124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0312/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 February 2002)

Subject: Letter from Mercedes de Sola to a witness in the ‘Stockholm scandal’

The head of the Commission’s disciplinary procedures unit, Mercedes de Sola, is said to have written to a
witness to the events surrounding the financial irregularities at the Commission’s information office in
Stockholm, calling on him to keep quiet about what he said when questioned by the investigators.

This has incensed a lot of people in Sweden, who consider the letter to be at odds with the Swedish view
of freedom of expression, and it represents a culture of government that is quite alien to Sweden.

Will the Commission publish the letter and explain Mercedes de Sola’s motives for sending it? Does it take
the view that Mercedes de Sola has acted correctly in this case?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(27 March 2002)

The letter referred to by the Honourable Member is a standard formal communication from the
Commission to witnesses in disciplinary proceedings and it has the following wording:

I wish to inform you that, in response to requests from several persons to whom the proceedings
underway relate, those concerned were apprised of your statements in compliance with the rights of
the defence, which the Commission has a duty to safeguard in the course of the inquiry.

I should also stress that the statements notified remain confidential. As a consequence, they cannot be
used for any purpose other than under the inquiry in progress or be divulged to anyone but the
person concerned by the proceedings, who alone may be privy to them.

The Commission transmitted the relevant parts of this standard letter, together with a full explanation of
the purpose and meaning of the letter, to the Swedish Press and to the TV 4 broadcasting station on
1 February 2002. The provision of this material was undertaken in order to respond to an item which was
apparently called ‘Silenced Witnesses’
in the Nyheterna programme broadcast on Saturday 26 January
2002.