WRITTEN QUESTION E-2579/02 by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Attestation of professional competence for cabin crews in civil aviation.
Date: 2002-09-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: air safety, civil aviation, crew, professional qualifications, vocational training

C 137 E/92

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

12.6.2003

(2003/C 137 E/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2573/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(16 September 2002)

Subject: Nickel allergy

Nickel allergy is the most common form of contact allergy in industrialised countries, occurring in 10 to
15 percent of women and a small proportion of men. Coins of 1 and 2 euros contain nickel in quantities
that can cause people with a nickel allergy to suffer eczema on their hands. Brief contact with the coins
can produce itching or irritation, according to dermatologists. Reports of allergy to euro coins began to
surface in the media following the introduction of the coins.

Is the Commission aware of cases of allergy to nickel in euro coins?

If so, does it have any statistics?

Are there alternatives to the use of nickel in coins?

If so, what are the alternatives and does the Commission intend to make use of them?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 2002)

The Commission is not aware of any particular cases of patients suffering from nickel allergy, which can
be traced back to the handling or use of 1- and 2- euro coins.

Before the decision on the technical specifications of the euro coins was taken in 1997, the Commission
consulted its ‘Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment’ (SCTEE), which based its
conclusions on all evidence available. The SCTEE had concluded at the time that there was no evidence,
which suggested that the old national coins (whose nickel content was much higher than for the euro
coins) have caused any form of sensitisation to nickel of either workers handling coins or the normal
consumer.

Nickel has been a very popular material for the minting of coins due to its technical properties since the
19th century. The copper-nickel and nickel-brass alloys used for the 1- and 2- euro coins do not oxidise.
Due to its conductivity it allows for the reliable identification of euro coins in coin-operated machines and
its three-layer structure assures the detection of counterfeit coins. Nickel greatly contributes to the higher
security standard of coins and its use was therefore decided for the higher-value euro coins.

The technical specifications of the euro coins have been laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 975/98
of 3 May 1998 on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation (1).
Currently and in the foreseeable future the Commission does not have any plans to propose a change of
the technical specifications of the euro coins.

(1) OJ L 139, 11.5.1998.

(2003/C 137 E/105)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2579/02

by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(16 September 2002)

Subject: Attestation of professional competence for cabin crews in civil aviation

In 1997 the Commission submitted a proposal for a Directive (1) on safety requirements and attestation of
professional competence for cabin crews in civil aviation, on which the European Parliament delivered its
opinion at first reading on 19 February 1998.

12.6.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137 E/93

To date this dossier has not been completed and the training and attestation of professional competence
for cabin crews in civil aviation remain in the hands of the operators, since it has not yet been established
that their training should be carried out by independent bodies appointed by the Member States.

In the meantime, and according to information from trade unions representing cabin staff, an increasing
number of airlines are employing crews on a temporary and seasonal basis, and some of them have even
reduced the period of basic training.

In view of current security concerns in air transport and the importance and responsibility of cabin crews
in this area, can the Council say why the proposal for a directive has not yet been followed up and what
the prospects are for its definitive adoption?

(1) COM/97/0382, OJ C 263, 29.8.1997, p. 5.

Reply

(18 February 2003)

Following the events of 11 September, on 16 October 2001 the Council resumed its examination of the
proposal for a Directive on the professional competence of cabin crews so as to push forward work on
this dossier. It has turned out, however, that advances in this area are closely linked to progress on another
dossier, that relating to the harmonisation of technical requirements and administrative procedures in the
field of civil aviation (transposition of JAR OPS 1). It has thus proved desirable that these two dossiers be
examined in parallel. The proposal for a Directive on the professional competence of cabin crews will
therefore be examined together with the proposal for a Regulation on JAR OPS, currently being revised by
the Commission, in particular as regards Annex III.

(2003/C 137 E/106)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2583/02

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Council

(10 September 2002)

Subject: Harmonisation of Turkish legislation with Community law

A few days ago,
the
ambassadors of the 15 Member States of the Union to inform them of the package of measures designed
to bring Turkish legislation into line with Community law.

the Turkish Deputy Prime Minister, Mr M. Yilmaz, convened a meeting of

However, the following observations have been made from numerous quarters:

(cid:1) the package does not refer to the personal assets of individuals of Member State origin who were or
are resident in Turkey but only to the purchase and sale of property by the religious institutions of the
communities to which such individuals belong,

(cid:1) neither does the package make reference to the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul since it is not (cid:1)
even now (cid:1) recognised as having legal personality and is compelled to register its property in the
name of clerics and private individuals. The result of this situation is that the Patriarchate has only one
main property (the orphanage on the island of Prinkipos) which a document describes as being
‘occupied’ by the Turkish Directorate-General for Church Property. There are misgivings in this respect
that the Turkish administration is manoeuvring to prevent the change in the law being used and to
annul the registration of the orphanage in the name of the Patriarchate,

(cid:1) the provisions announced by Turkey do not have retroactive effect, as Mr Yilmaz stressed to the
Community ambassadors. Article 4A of the package refers only to future acquisition or sale of real
property. The purchase or sale of property by institutions will still require authorisation by the
Turkish Council of Ministers, which may cause insuperable problems for institutions wishing to do so.