WRITTEN QUESTION E-1820/03 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Sausage meat.
Date: 2003-06-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer protection, food safety, health control, health risk, meat product, pigmeat, slaughter animal

C 78 E/48

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Taking typical emission factor data and concentrating only on diesel vehicles and the main regulated
pollutants of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and particulates, a modern diesel engined passenger car may emit
40 % less NOX and 20 % less particulate travelling at a steady 50 kilometre per hour (km/h) than at a
steady 120 km/h.

A diesel engined light commercial vehicle may emit 43 % less NOX and 70 % less particulate travelling at a
steady 50 km/h than at a steady 120 km/h.

A diesel engine articulated heavy-duty vehicle may emit 3 % less NOX and 12 % more particulate travelling
at a steady 50 km/h than at a steady 100 km/h.

Of course, these figures can all be influenced by ambient conditions such as temperature, humidity and
road gradient.

(1) Directive 98/69/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1998 relating to measures to be taken
against air pollution by emissions from motor vehicles and amending Council Directive 70/220/EEC, OJ L 350,
28.12.1998, specific table p. 15.

(2) Directive 1999/96/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 1999 on the approximation of the
laws of the Member States relating to measures to be taken against the emission of gaseous and particulate
pollutants from compression ignition engines for use in vehicles, and the emission of gaseous pollutants from
positive ignition engines fuelled with natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas for use in vehicles and amending
Council Directive 88/77/EEC, OJ L 44, 16.2.2000, specific table p. 22.

(2004/C 78 E/0046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1820/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject: Sausage meat

Is the Commission satisfied that the use of pork cheek or jowl in sausage meat is still consistent with
healthy eating, particularly for children and old people, given the possible build-up of drug residues and
disease in the pituitary glands?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2003)

Definitions of ‘meat’ and ‘fresh meat’ are set down in Council Directive 64/433/EEC of 26 June 1964 on
health problems affecting intra-Community trade in fresh meat (1). The terms mean that all parts of
domestic swine which are suitable for human consumption and which have not undergone any treatment
other than cold treatment to ensure preservation may be considered as fresh meat. The Directive prescribes
ante mortem and post mortem health inspections and lists the meats that the official veterinarian declares
unfit for human consumption. The use of hygienically produced pork cheek or jowl meat, in accordance
with the requirements of the Directive, as raw material for the production of sausage meat is thus
acceptable in principle. The term ‘sausage meat’, as such, is not defined in Council Directive 94/65/EC of
14 December 1994 laying down the requirements for the production and placing on the market of minced
meat and meat preparations (2). Sausage meat must be produced in accordance with the requirements in
that Directive for meat preparations.

The pituitary gland or hypophysis, being located at the base of the brain in the cranial cavity, is not
harvested when cheek meat is removed.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/49

In addition, Council Directive 96/23/EC of 29 April 1996 on measures to monitor certain substances and
residues thereof in live animals and animal products (3) provides for a statistically significant surveillance in
food producing animals. It also requires that Member States take measures to protect the consumers where
prohibited substances or residues above the permitted limits have been found. The Commission reports on
these actions on a yearly basis.

(1) OJ P 121, 29.7.1964.
(2) OJ L 368, 31.12.1994.
(3) OJ L 125, 23.5.1996.

(2004/C 78 E/0047)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1831/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject: Statistics concerning poverty and unemployment in Greece

On 16 May 2003 it was announced that another Greek company, the ‘Yvonni Stores’ chain of beauty
products, had failed, resulting in job losses for over 100 women. This unfortunate development follows the
recent closure of the Siser-Palko factory ten days ago resulting in placing a further 500 Greek women out
of work. According to Eurostat statistics (Communication 8/2003 and Press Release 43/2002) published in
‘Agence Europe’ on 10 May 2003, statistics for ‘total long-term unemployment’ and ‘total very long-term
unemployment’ in Greece between 60 and 70 % higher than the Community average. The poverty risk is
21 % in Greece and Portugal, higher than in all other EU Member States.

‘long-term unemployment’ and ‘very long-term unemployment’ indicators are much higher
Furthermore,
than the Community average for both men and women, unemployment among women giving particular
cause for concern; the ‘long-term unemployment’ indicator being 8,7 (Community average: 3,7), while for
very long-term unemployment’ it is 5,1 in Greece as opposed to 2,4 in the EU as a whole. Furthermore,
according to the European Community Household Panel (ECHP), the indicator for those who have been
poor at least once in their life is 25,1 in Greece (EU 19,2), while the indicator for those in a permanent
state of poverty in Greece is 6,5 (EU 3,8). (Information published by Agence Europe on 10 May 2003).

What view does the Commission take of the persistent and long-term unemployment in Greece, coupled
with the high poverty levels? Does it have statistics regarding the number of enterprises which have closed
down since 1994 in Greece? How many have transferred to countries outside the EU and what is the total
number of job losses in Greece? Has the Commission made any recommendations to the Greek authorities
concerning measures to contain the problem and, if so, what was their response?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2003)

is a key structural problem in the labour market.

Long-term unemployment
It affects the most
disadvantaged groups of the population, women and young people, and it drives individuals towards
inactivity and social exclusion. The Greek employment situation, as presented in the 2002 National Action
Plan for Employment, shows that although long-term unemployment in the country is declining,
it
continues to lie above the Union’s average. In addition, the rate of long-term unemployment to the overall
unemployment rate is higher than the Union’s average.

The Commission’s view is that long-term unemployment needs to be further reduced in order to achieve
an inclusive labour market; in spite of the progress made, the employment position of disadvantaged
people remains weak. This calls for better tailored policies, comprehensive approaches involving both
supply and demand and a close link with the wider policies of social inclusion.