WRITTEN QUESTION E-1616/03 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council. SARS.
Date: 2003-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Schengen Agreement, airport, approximation of laws, border control, epidemic, exchange of information, external border of the EU, health control, health risk, infectious disease

C 51 E/116

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2003)

The Commission is well aware of the findings of the study by the International Energy Agency (IEA)
mentionned by the Honourable Member.

The Commission is currently preparing a proposal for a Directive establishing a framework for the setting
of eco-design requirements for energy-using products. Specific eco-design requirements will cover in
particular mandatory standards for the energy performance of products (all energy sources are covered).
The methodology to set the level of the energy efficiency requirements is defined in the draft Directive and
is based on the life cycle cost minimum to consumers; it is the same approach that was used by the IEA
for their study.

Concerning the energy labelling of domestic appliances, the Commission has started work on raising the
current requirements for the labelling of cold appliances (refrigerators freezers and their combinations) and
of washing machines. Work is also on-going to extend energy labelling to water heaters.

(2004/C 51 E/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1616/03

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council

(13 May 2003)

Subject: SARS

In view of the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome or SARS virus, urgent action by the Union
authorities is required to devise common protection measures and strengthen cooperation between
Member States.

The Italian Health Minister, Girolamo Sirchia, has called for checks in Europe to be stepped up because,
without close coordination, the open frontiers between the countries of the Schengen area could prove to
be a weak spot in preventing the spread of the epidemic.

It is vital to establish a European health protection strategy at borders, and above all at airports, and to
introduce a health safety code that will have to be enforced by all the countries that are signatories to the
Schengen agreement.

In the light of this, can the Council indicate what action it intends to take to prevent the spread of the
virus and strengthen coordination between the national authorities?

When does intend to respond to the request from the Italian Government for checks in countries of the
Schengen area to be improved?

Reply

(7 October 2003)

The Council thanks the Honourable Member for his question and refers him to the Council conclusions on
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) which were adopted at the extraordinary meeting of the
EPSCO Council on 6 May 2003 (9328/03).

At its meeting on 2 and 3 June 2003, the EPSCO Council took note of the progress report from
Commissioner Byrne on the SARS situation and then held a brief exchange of views on the current
situation. The Commissioner noted in particular that, on the basis of the responses so far received to a
Commission questionnaire on SARS, European countries have adopted rapid and consistent measures on
early detection of cases, implementation of isolation measures and guidance to health professionals and the
public on the identification of possible SARS cases. He also referred the Council to the Commission’s

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/117

commitment of EUR 9 000 000 before the end of 2003 to foster research on SARS and with particular
regard to diagnosis, medication and vaccination. The Presidency then stressed the importance of
coordinating exchange of information at European level in view of the cross-border nature of SARS.

The Council invites the Honourable Member to refer to the Presidency’s declaration on SARS made during
the EP session in Strasbourg in April 2003 and the answer given to H-0269/03 put by Patricia McKenna
to the Council at Question Time in May 2003.

The Council would stress that the removal of checks at internal borders goes hand in hand with the
strengthening of checks at external borders through the introduction of a high level of checks applied in a
harmonised manner. For as long as there were confirmed cases of the disease, checks at external borders,
in particular on aircraft arriving from countries affected by the SARS epidemic, therefore constituted a first
level of coordination for Member States and the adoption of specific protection measures. It may also be
noted that the Schengen States have retained the possibility of reintroducing internal border controls for a
limited period according to well-defined criteria and procedures (1).

(1) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000, pages 133-134.

(2004/C 51 E/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1619/03

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 May 2003)

Subject: Exposure of residents and long-term bystanders to pesticides

On 27 March 2003 the European Parliament adopted the Van Brempt report, ‘Towards a thematic strategy
on the sustainable use of pesticides’ (2002/2277(INI)), which called on the Commission, before the end of
2003, to ‘propose a ban … on the use of pesticides … in areas close to inhabited zones.’

the Commission itself acknowledged in its Thematic Strategy communication (1)

that
Furthermore,
‘potential exposure of bystanders and residents to pesticides via the air might constitute an exposure
route, which needs further attention by research and possibly also regulatory measures.’

Given that the EU has adopted the precautionary principle as a guiding concept, and given that several
million citizens of the EU live in zones close to fields where pesticides are regularly sprayed, what plans
does the Commission have to introduce a ban on the use of pesticides in areas close to inhabited zones?

While risk assessments for operators already exist, there appears to be currently no research into the risks
for residents and long-term bystanders. The UK Government, for example, recently admitted that ‘direct
measurements of long-term bystanders living adjacent to a treated area have not been made in the UK’.
What are the Commission’s intentions for action to remedy this situation?

Will the Commission also introduce new regulations to require farmers to disclose publicly the pesticides
which they are using, and to give prior notification before any spraying application?

(1) COM(2002) 349 final.