WRITTEN QUESTION E-3811/02 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. The ongoing problem relating to the evaluation of fenthion.
Date: 2003-01-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, bird, environmental impact, evaluation method, foodstuff, pesticide, product safety, public health, scientific committee (EU), testing

C 161 E/148

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

Can the Commission state the grounds on which it has decided, in this case, simultaneously to open the
procedure provided for in Article 29 of the Staff Regulations, given that in the past the procedure for A2
posts has always been to examine internal applications first and to consider external applications only if no
internal candidate is found suitable?

Does the Commission not consider that this decision sets a precedent running counter to both the
legitimate expectations of officials as regards career questions and the obligation to practise sound and
properly-balanced human resources management?

(1) OJ C 181, 30.7.2002, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2003)

Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations allows for the publication of grade A1 or A2 posts outside the
1.
Institutions. The Commission has, from time to time, published vacancies externally, particularly for
positions that require specific qualifications and/or in order to encourage a wide spectrum of applicants.

The post of Director for Security is obviously a very specialised function with a distinctive profile. It
therefore necessitates both specific expertise and related experience.

2.
Recognising those realities, in this precise case the Commission considered it appropriate to publish
the post both internally and externally in order to save time. The aim of this decision was also to attract
the largest possible number of candidates from a variety of backgrounds who would meet the necessary
relevant qualifications. The fact that 39 applications were received demonstrates,
in the view of the
Commission, that this was an appropriate strategy.

The Commission does not consider that this procedure constitutes a practice which will jeopardise
3.
the legitimate career expectations of European officials. The procedure used does not adversely affect the
chances of existing officials to be successful for such a position, particularly since such parallel publication
enables officials who do possess the appropriate profile for the post concerned, but lack the necessary
seniority within the terms of the internal publication, to apply for the post.

(2003/C 161 E/153)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3811/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 January 2003)

Subject: The ongoing problem relating to the evaluation of fenthion

On 16 January 2000, Commissioner Byrne, in answer to Written Question E-3552/00 (1) by the Greek
Member Mr Papayannakis, stated that ‘Article 8 of Directive 91/414/EEC (2) provides for a derogation
during a period of 12 years (until 25 July 2003) for Member States to continue to authorise plant
protection products containing active substances not included in Annex 1 of the Directive on the basis of
the general safety requirements of Article 4 of the Directive and national data requirements’, that during
this period ‘the Commission shall implement a program for gradual examination of the active substances’,
that ‘fenthion is one of the active substances currently being evaluated under Commission Regulation (EEC)
No 3600/92 (3)’ and that it was expected that ‘the Commission will be able to adopt a decision on fenthion
in early 2001’. The Commission also indicated that it would inform the Parliament and Council by July
2001 on progress with the re-evaluation programme.

On 22 October 2001, in answer to my Written Question E-2883/01 (4), Commissioner Byrne stated that
‘the Community evaluation of
fenthion has almost been finalised and the Commission will, after
consultation of the Scientific Committee on Plants, propose as soon as possible a decision on fenthion,
which will also address the acceptable ways of application’.

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/149

On 15 March 2002, in answer to Written Question E-0749/02 (5), Commissioner Byrne confirmed that the
evaluation of fenthion had now indeed been completed, with the exception of one study which had only
very recently been submitted to the (unspecified) rapporteur Member State, that the evaluation of that
study would be available in April 2002 ‘but should not delay the decision making process’. The
Commission added that it would submit the result of its evaluation to the Scientific Committee on Plants
in April 2002 and that it was expected that the Committee would deliver its opinion ‘within two months’.

On 4 December 2002, in answer to Written Question E-3116/02 (6) requesting an update on the findings
of the Scientific Committee, the Commission stated that it had asked the opinion of the Scientific
Committee on Plants several questions arising from the evaluation of fenthion, and that ‘given the
complexity of the issues surrounding the substance the Committee has taken longer than expected to
finalise its opinion’.

How many more months or years will it take for the Committee to give a final opinion on the central
issue of delayed neurotoxicity and the concerns of Member States such as Britain and France concerning
the clastogenic properties of fenthion? Are these delays a foretaste of what is to come with the impending
Chemicals Directive or is the Commission prepared to set a time limit for a final decision from the
Scientific Committee? Finally, what role does the Commission believe that the precautionary principle
should play?

(1) OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001, p. 76.
(2) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 366, 15.12.1992, p. 10.
(4) OJ C 115 E, 16.5.2002, p. 187.
(5) OJ C 172 E, 18.7.2002, p. 225.
(6) OJ C 110 E, 8.5.2003, p. 166.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 2003)

The notifier has submitted to the rapporteur Member State (Greece) all the information requested for
fenthion in relation to use of fenthion as a bait application in olives and citrus. The Commission submitted
the result of the evaluation of that new information to the Scientific Committee on Plants in April 2002.
The Scientific Committee on Plants delivered its opinion on 17 December 2002. The Committee was asked
to comment on the relevance of the new data and arguments related to the risk assessment to birds and to
the toxicological properties of fenthion.

The Committee concluded that the available new toxicological information does not alter the Committee’s
previous opinion regarding the mutagenic properties of fenthion. In particular, that available new data
indicates that fenthion is unlikely to pose a risk of delayed neurotoxicity in humans.

The Committee however also concluded that, despite a change of the application method and the
provision of new studies, risks to birds from the proposed use of fenthion are very uncertain and that
therefore the concerns raised in the Committee’s previous opinion remain unresolved. As a result, the
Committee has made some recommendations in order to improve the risk assessment for birds.

The Commission is of the opinion that the legislation on plant protection products takes into account the
precautionary principle. A plant protection product can only be authorized provided it is demonstrated, in
the light of current scientific and technical knowledge, that its residues and its use, consequent on
application consistent with good plant protection practice, does not have any harmful effects on human or
animal health or any unacceptable influence on the environment.

The Commission will follow the procedures established in Commission Regulation (EEC) 3600/92 of
11 December 1992 laying down the detailed rules for the implementation of the first stage of the
programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of
plant protection products on the market. After all consultations are finalized, the Commission will forward
a proposal for fenthion to the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, as soon as
possible, most likely at its meeting in April 2003.