WRITTEN QUESTION E-0437/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Concrete, glass or plastic panels on the exterior of new high-rise offices and flats working loose and falling off.
Date: 2003-02-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: building industry, building materials, building regulations, building safety, import restriction, product safety

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/203

The Commission is intending to include the social clause agreed with the social partners systematically in
all future negotiations on fisheries matters with non-member countries.

In addition, the above social partners meet regularly within the Sectoral Dialogue Committee set up by the
Commission to carry out the work programme drawn up following the Commission Communication on
‘The European social dialogue, a force for innovation and change’ (1) to contribute to the implementation
of the Lisbon strategy.

(1) COM(2002) 341 final.

(2003/C 222 E/231)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0437/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 February 2003)

Subject: Concrete, glass or plastic panels on the exterior of new high-rise offices and flats working loose

and falling off

1.
Is the Commission aware that many of the new office buildings and blocks of flats built over the past
few years have exterior cladding made of concrete, glass or plastic panels that are screwed or clipped on to
metal strips and that this supporting structure may give way as a result of wear or in a storm causing the
panels to crash to the ground without warning?

2.
Is it possible to eliminate completely the risks of using panels of this kind by any construction
technique or related building regulations issued by the authorities responsible, given that they may cause
fatal injury and result in the area around a building being closed off for safety reasons for a long period?

3.
Is it the case that cladding panels work loose and fall off relatively more frequently in some Member
States of the EU than in others? In which Member States does this pose the greatest problem and where
does it occur least often? Can this be explained by differences in sunshine, temperature, rainfall and acid
rain, or is it due to differences in legislation and insurance?

Do any EU Member States already apply rules requiring owners to pay damages, or policies to
4.
prevent the construction of new buildings with exterior cladding, or to phase-out existing cladding panels?

Does the Commission believe there are grounds for promoting a structured exchange of expertise

5.
between EU Member States to prevent accidents involving panels as far as possible in the future?

6.
Does the Commission believe it is necessary to introduce minimum safety standards for buildings at
EU level in order to prevent accidents involving cladding panels? Are there grounds for an import ban on
building components of this kind from outside the Union?

7. What else is the Commission doing to promote the safety of buildings and their environment in the
Union as far as the working loose of heavy components is concerned?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 2003)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concerns for the safety of European citizens as regards
the safety of buildings and civil engineering works.

C 222 E/204

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

This was its objective in implementing Council Directive 89/106/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the
approximation of
the Member States relating to
construction products (1), based on the six essential requirements which provide for aspects such as
structural safety, safety in use and the environmental impact of the materials, products and assemblies
which are intended to be incorporated permanently into building works.

laws, regulations and administrative provisions of

The cladding panels mentioned fall within the scope of this Directive and, in this context, standardisation
mandates have been drawn up to ensure that technical specifications (technical standards and approvals)
for these products are available as quickly as possible. These specifications will enable the products to be
assessed in relation to the essential requirements in the Directive, for the purpose of issuing the EC mark
certifying that they can be placed on the market and are suitable for end use in the construction.

This Directive is the only legislative instrument available to the Commission to secure the free movement
of construction products and to establish certain specifications ensuring that these same products comply
with safety criteria at the building design stage. The choice of products, their use in the final construction
and the responsibility for this choice do, however, remain the prerogative of the designers and prime
contractors who also have to comply with any specific safety requirements which the Member States may
have drawn up in the field of construction.

The national authorities do, in fact, ensure that the whole process encompassing the design, construction
and use of the end product is conducted in accordance with standard practice and they determine the
responsibilities of each party involved in this process. With regard to imports of these products, there is no
reason to ban them provided that they comply with the same safety requirements imposed on products of
European origin. They should bear the EC mark as soon as the harmonised technical specifications become
available.

These explanations are given in answer to questions 1, 2, 6 and 7. With regard to questions 3, 4 and 5, it
is the responsibility of the Member States to deal with any problems relating to construction defects. At
present, there is no exchange of information in this field and the Commission does not therefore have any
information on which to base a reply.

(1) OJ L 40, 11.2.1989.

(2003/C 222 E/232)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0443/03

by José Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 February 2003)

Subject: Withdrawal of foreign troops from the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Reports and evidence from NGOs working there point to a worrying situation in the Democratic Republic
of the Congo (DRC). There are signs that the withdrawal of foreign troops stationed in the DRC recently
has not been completed and that some of them are still there. If these reports are confirmed it could mean
that the already delicate security situation in the country has worsened and may hamper or prevent the
normalisation of the political situation in the DRC to be achieved by means of a global political agreement.
Furthermore,
is
inadequate to play an effective role in re-establishing normality and a situation of stability and security. All
this would simply aggravate the disastrous humanitarian situation in the country.

the mandate of MONUC (UN Mission in the DRC)

there are also complaints that

Does the Commission have evidence that foreign troops have not been completely and definitively
withdrawn from the DRC?

Does it consider that the mandate of the MONUC should be strengthened and the number of personnel be
increased in order to play an effective role in restoring normality in the DRC?

is the Commission’s assessment and what measures does it envisage to tackle the serious

What
humanitarian situation in the country?