WRITTEN QUESTION E-1222/02 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. The removal of mercury amalgam fillings.
Date: 2002-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law, dental medicine, mercury, public health, report, toxic substance

14.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 277 E/161

What stage have the proceedings now reached, and when did the Spanish Government notify the
Commission of this aid?

What analysis is the Commission carrying out in order to assess its compatibility with the rules laid down
in the Treaty with regard to state aids?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 2002)

By letter of 14 March 2002 the Commission informed Spain of its decision to initiate the procedure laid
down in Article 88 of the EC Treaty with regard to a scheme of aid granted by Spain to support the olive-
residue oil extracting, refining and bottling industries.

The aid was notified to the Commission by letter of 4 January 2002 in response to a Commission request
for information.

At this stage of the procedure, the Commission considers that + on the basis of the information available
+ the aid constitutes state aid which is intended to improve the industries’ financial situation, but which in
no way contributes to their development. Consequently, the aid could constitute operating aid which is
incompatible with the common market. The aid could also be in breach of Community rules (common
organisation of the market).

Initiating the formal examination procedure will enable the Member State concerned and third parties to
present their comments. The Commission will then decide whether the aid is compatible with the proper
functioning of the common market.

(2002/C 277 E/184)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1222/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(29 April 2002)

Subject: The removal of mercury amalgam fillings

Mercury amalgam poisoning is caused by the mercury metal in fillings, and has been linked to a number
of different illnesses and diseases,
including Alzheimer’s, and problems to the heart, the neurological
system and the immune system.

The Swedish Government banned the use of amalgam fillings in Sweden and since 1991 has paid 70 % of
the cost of removing amalgam fillings from Swedish people.

Germany has warned certain groups of people against using dental amalgam.

Could the Commission indicate if there is currently any EU legislation concerning the removal of mercury
amalgam fillings, and whether there is currently any research being done on this subject?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2002)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that there is no Community legislation in reference to
the removal of amalgam fillings and that it is not systematically informed of Member States’ initiatives in
this area. As regards research activities, the Commission refers to the report (1)
‘Dental Amalgam +
A report with reference to the Medical Devices Directive 93/42/EEC (2) from an Ad Hoc Working Group
mandated by DGIII of the European Commission 1998’.

C 277 E/162

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

As stated in the answer given by the Commission to written question E-0917/01 by Mrs Hulthén (3) on the
same issue, the report concluded that all dental restorative materials have the potential for causing some
adverse reactions and that most contain components which are toxic. However, it also concluded that
currently available data indicate that mercury from dental amalgams will not cause an unacceptable risk to
the general population. Local reactions to dental amalgams fillings and other dental restorative materials do
occur but are relatively rare; cases have also been reported of such reactions to materials used as
alternatives to dental amalgams. According to the report, the benefits of restoring teeth with dental
amalgam outweigh significantly the documented risks, and the risk-benefit ration corresponds to the
currently acknowledged and accepted state of the art.

Commission and national authorities, in close co-operation with other interested parties, keep the use of
dental amalgams under constant scrutiny and follow attentively the development of substitutes and their
impact on health.

(1) Available on website http://www.nordiskadental.se/default.htm.
(2) Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices, OJ L 169, 12.7.1993.
(3) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001.

(2002/C 277 E/185)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1233/02

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 April 2002)

Subject: Supplements to Commissioners’ salaries

Can the Commission confirm that some of its Members have parts of their salaries transferred to other EU
states, and not paid into a bank account in Belgium as set out in the relevant regulations?

Can it confirm that because of so-called weightings it pays supplements on these transfers, which for
example increase the amount transferred to the United Kingdom by more than 60 %?

In view of the very generous salaries and allowances paid to Commissioners, how can such increases in
income be justified?

Can the Commission confirm that although the Council has provided for the payment of
these
supplements in the case of officials’ salaries, within certain limits, this does not apply to Commissioners?

Can it confirm that Article 4a of
the
Commission, given as a legal basis in the budget (budget heading A-1090), includes no provisions which
would allow weightings to be used on transfers to other countries?

the Regulation determining the emoluments of Members of

Can it state whether
responsible for
administrative expenditure and the Budget Commissioner responsible for financial control have benefited
from such supplements?

the Commission Vice-President

to what extent)

(and if so,

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2002)

The legal basis for the salary of Members of the Commission is set down in Council Regulation (EC, ECSC,
Euratom) No 422/67/EEC, No 5/67/Euratom (1) and it determines the emoluments of the President, Vice-
presidents and Members of the Commission; the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the
Court of Justice and of the President, Members and Registrar of the Court of First Instance (2).

Furthermore, the provisions in the Staff Regulations as they apply to permanent officials are applied to
Members of the Commission, Court of Justice and Court of Auditors provided, of course, that these two
sets of rules do not conflict. For instance, because the conditions to which Members are subject in their
countries of origin are comparable with those of permanent officials, Article 17(2) and (3) of Annex VII of