WRITTEN QUESTION E-1402/02 by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission. Access to television for people with sensory impairments.
Date: 2002-05-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European social policy, facilities for people with disabilities, integration of people with disabilities, programmes industry, television

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/139

3.

Does the Commission realise that differing measuring techniques may give rise to differing findings?

4. What measures does the Commission plan to take in connection with this matter?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2002)

The most up to date analytical methods available for the detection of nitrofuran metabolites have been
developed by a group of laboratories involved in the Community research project FoodBRAND (contract
Nr QLK1-1999-00142). This is a 42 months project which started in January 2000 supported (at a level of
68 %) by the Commission, within the Community Quality of Life Programme and Management of Living
Resources, Key Action 1 on Food, Nutrition and Health.

The FoodBRAND project aims at developing screening and confirmatory methods for tissue-bound
residues and disseminating their findings to the Union National Reference Laboratories. The project
includes participants from Belgium, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the Czech
Republic, and Hungary. Dr Kennedy is the project co-ordinator and not the owner (more information at
http://www.afsni.ac.uk/foodbrand).

Due to the difficulties with the analysis of nitrofurans, the Commission has asked the participants in the
FoodBRAND project to provide assistance to the Member States in order to improve the methods they
currently apply. In doing so they will fulfil one of the objectives of the project earlier than initially
foreseen.

It is common practice and also specified in Articles 16-18 of the general conditions of the model contract
for Community supported research (http://www.cordis.lu/fp5/mod-cont.htm)
that results of research,
including analytical methods, are not distributed by the research team before they have been published in a
specialized journal or presented at a scientific conference.

In this particular case, the method has not yet been published, nevertheless, the participants in the project
agreed to assist the official control laboratories of the Member States provided that the method was not
further distributed until its publication. Thereafter, the results of the project will be widely available.

It is correct that suppliers will not have access to this new method until
it is published. However,
nitrofurans are prohibited for use in food producing animals. Therefore suppliers need to ensure that these
substances are not used by appropriate specifications in their contracts with producers.

The official control laboratories have the obligation to control the implementation of the prohibition of
use of nitrofurans with the best available methods to ensure consumer protection. The Commission has
taken all necessary steps to assist them in this task.

Analytical methods used for residue control should provide reliable results. The methods should be
validated based on certain criteria to guarantee that the results obtained by different methods would be
equivalent within certain margins accepted by the legislation.

(2002/C 301 E/151)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1402/02

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(15 May 2002)

Subject: Access to television for people with sensory impairments

At present EU audiovisual policy does not address the issue of access to television for people with sensory
impairments. Most EU Member States have very low levels of subtitling and sign language interpretation

C 301 E/140

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

for deaf and hard of hearing people and audio description for the visually impaired. Yet more than 1 in 7
have significant hearing loss and 7,4 million people are blind or partially sighted in Europe. These people
face social exclusion if they are not given the chance to access broadcast services like everybody else. It is
crucial that this problem is addressed now, as digital television will not only be used for broadcasts in the
future but also for interactive services such as the internet.

Does the Commission intend to address the lack of access to television for deaf and hard of hearing and
blind and visually impaired people through the current review of the Television Without Frontiers
Directive and related initiatives, in the run up to European Year of People with Disabilities in 2003?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2002)

The issues raised by the Honourable Member do not fall within the fields coordinated by the Television
Without Frontiers Directive (1), which establishes the legal framework ensuring the freedom to provide
television broadcasting in the Community.

Assuming broadcasters do offer such services in line with Member States’ policies, their transmission over
electronic communications networks is addressed by the new regulatory framework for electronic
communications services and networks. In particular, the Honourable Member should refer to Article 31
of Directive 2002/22/EC of the Parliament and of the Council on universal service and users’ rights relating
to the electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) (2). The Universal
Service Directive explicitly refers to the possibility for Member States to impose certain must-carry rules on
undertaking providing electronic communications networks for the transmission of services specifically
designed to enable appropriate access by disabled users (3).

The Commission intervenes in this field by supporting various initiatives. In this respect, the Commission
Joint Research Centre is promoting, throughout the ‘Voice Project’ (http://voice.jrc.it), the development and
harmonisation of subtitling in European television broadcasting.

The eEurope 2002 Action Plan, adopted at the European Council of Feira in June 2000, includes the
specific objective of ensuring that people with disabilities benefit fully from new technologies and the
Internet and the specific target of adoption of the Web Accessibility Guidelines for public websites in
Member States and European Institutions. Accordingly, the Commission adopted on September 2001 the
Communication: ‘eEurope 2002: Accessibility of Public Web Sites and their Content’ (4). On March 25th
the Telecommunications Council adopted a Council Resolution on the subject.

More recently,
the Commission supported a joint European Committee for Standardisation (CEN),
European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation (Cenelec), European Telecommunications
Standards (ETSI) workshop ‘TV Broadcasting for all’ which was held successfully in Seville on 13-14 June
2002. The objective of the seminar was to discuss all issues of subtitling and audiodescription that could
be addressed by standardisation. A report summarises these issues and propose a way forward.

In its Communication ‘Towards a barrier free Europe for people with disabilities’ (5), the Commission
stressed the aspect of ‘harnessing the information society for the benefit of all’. Disability is one of the ten
priorities of the eEurope Initiative,
fostering on innovation and improvement in accessibility for all
communication products and services for disabled people.

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/141

In order to further develop awareness, and without prejudice to the application of the subsidiarity
principle, the Commission intends to raise this issue in the report on the application of the Television
Without Frontiers Directive, which is to be submitted to the Parliament and the Council by the end of
2002.

(1) Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law,
regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities,
OJ L 298, 17.10.1989, amended by Directive 97/36/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997,
OJ L 202, 30.7.1997.
(2) OJ L 108, 24.4.2002.
(3) See Recital 43 of Directive 2002/22/EC.
(4) COM(2001) 529 final.
(5) COM(2000) 284 final.

(2002/C 301 E/152)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1413/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 May 2002)

Subject: Absence of Dutch language sections at the European Schools in Alicante and Frankfurt

Neither of the two new European Schools which are being set up in Frankfurt and Alicante and which are
expected to open in September this year is to include a Dutch language section, unlike the European
Schools in Karlsruhe and Munich. In Frankfurt the planned language sections are German, English, French
and Italian. In Alicante they are German, English, French and Spanish.

Why has it been decided not to have Dutch language sections at the European Schools in Frankfurt and
Alicante?

What will the Commission do to ensure that Dutch language sections are after all included?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 2002)

The two new European Schools set up in Frankfurt and Alicante have no Dutch-language section because
of the number of children of Community staff in those two cities who have Dutch as their mother tongue
falls below the minimum required to open a language section.

Under the viability criteria laid down on 24 and 25 October 2000 by the Board of Governors of the
European Schools, the intergovernmental body responsible for those schools, each language section must
have a minimum of 75 pupils at primary level and 84 at secondary level.

If at any stage in the future it becomes likely that the validity criteria would be met for languages other
than those provided at Frankfurt and Alicante, the Commission would, of course, support opening the
relevant language sections in the schools concerned.

(2002/C 301 E/153)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1415/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 May 2002)

Subject: Safety of maize variety T-25 for consumers

According to reports by the BBC, the maize variety T-25 may be harmful to human and animal health.
Despite this, the commercial use of T-25 is permitted by the Commission. Evidently, authorisation was
granted on the basis of inaccurate research findings.