WRITTEN QUESTION E-2891/03 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Inadequate measures relating to safely at work in Greece.
Date: 2003-09-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU statistics, Greece, national implementing measure, occupational accident, occupational health, occupational mortality, occupational safety

C 70 E/156

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2003)

The Commission is not aware of the facts referred to by the Honourable Member. It has asked the Member
State concerned for information. Following an assessment of the answer the Commission will deal with
any potential illegal aid.

(2004/C 70 E/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2891/03

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Inadequate measures relating to safely at work in Greece

(29 September 2003)

The recent occupational accident in the meat processing factory ‘Floridi Brothers’ on the boundary between
Agios Ioannis Rendis and Moschato in Attica, which caused the tragic death of two workers, again turned
the spotlight on the problem of inadequate preventive measures in relation to safety at work.

Despite the fall in the number of fatal accidents at work in Greece (153 deaths were recorded in 2002
compared with 181 in 2001, and 62 workers died at work in the first half of 2003), the problem remains
serious.

Can the Commission say where Greece stands by comparison with the other Member States, in
1.
absolute and relative terms (per thousand inhabitants, for example), as regards the number of accidents and
deaths over the period 2000-2002?

2.
Is the Commission satisfied with the transposition and implementation of Community law in Greece
as regards safety and the prevention of accidents at work, and if not, what steps will it take to guarantee its
implementation?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(14 November 2003)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concern regarding the number of fatal accidents at
1.
work. The Commission’s objective, as described in its communication ‘Adapting to change in work and
society: a new Community strategy on health and safety at work 2002-2006’ (1), is a continual reduction in
the number of accidents at work, including fatal accidents. The new strategy is based on consolidating a
culture of risk prevention, on combining a variety of political instruments (cid:1) legislation, social dialogue,
innovative approaches and identifying best practice, corporate social responsibility, economic incentives (cid:1)
and on building partnerships between all players in the field of health and safety.

The Commission has had harmonised figures relating to accidents at work in the Member States since
1994, and would like to draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that Eurostat receives data
the ESAW (2) harmonisation
from the Greek National Statistical
methodology. Since ESAW data on Greece covers only salaried workers, accidents among self-employed
workers are not included in these statistics. Furthermore, in view of the need to harmonise sources from
different countries, the ESAW data cover only accidents that happen at work and not those that occur
during the return journey between home and work.

Institute produced on the basis of

The latest ESAW figures, from 2000, show that there has been an improvement in Greece, both in the
number of accidents in absolute terms and in the standardised incidence rate of fatal accidents at work per
100 000 persons in employment. To be precise, 83 workers died in 1994 and the incidence rate was 4,3,
whereas 57 workers died in 2000 and the incidence rate was 2,7. The situation for accidents at work that
result in more than three days’ absence has also improved in Greece since 1994, both in absolute terms
(39 098 accidents in 2000 compared with 53 829 in 1994) and in terms of the standardised incidence rate
(2 595 in 2000 compared with 3 702 in 2000). However, although the ESAW methodology produces
harmonised statistical data, differences in the proportion of accidents declared in each country mean that it
remains difficult to make comparisons between the Member States.

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/157

2. With regard to the Honourable Member’s questions on both the transposition and implementation of
Community law in Greece in matters relating to safety and the prevention of accidents at work, it should
be noted that the Directives must be transposed by the Member States and it is their responsibility to
ensure adequate control and monitoring of the national provisions transposing Community Directives on
the health and safety of workers at work (cf. Article 4 of Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of
measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (3)). Accordingly, it is for
the Greek authorities, in this case the labour inspectorates, to ensure that these measures are correctly and
effectively applied.

However, if the Commission had firm evidence of a general failure to implement national law transposing
the Community Directives,
in particular those under
Article 226.

it could make use of

the Treaty provisions,

Greece has notified the Commission of its measures to transpose the Directives on health and safety at
work. However, following a complaint which may expose a general failure to implement Greek law
transposing the Community Directives on the health and safety of workers, the Commission has sent the
Greek Government a letter of formal notice regarding implementation of Directive 89/391/EEC and is now
awaiting the Greek authorities’ response.

(1) COM(2002) 118 final, of 11.03.2002.
(2) European Statistics on Accidents at Work.
(3) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.

(2004/C 70 E/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2893/03

by Ole Krarup (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 September 2003)

Subject: Violation of the data protection rules

Would the Commission tell us exactly what parts of the European rules on data protection are being
violated due to the demands from the USA regarding transfer of personal data by airlines in connection
with transatlantic flights?

Would the Commission tell us when and how that will be brought to an end?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 2003)

It should be noted, first, that the data protection directive 95/46/CE (1) does not apply to processing
operations concerning public security, defence, State security and the activities of the State in areas of
criminal
law, such as the processing of personal data carried out directly by the police. Where the
processing of personal data does fall within its scope, as in the case of the processing of passenger name
records by airlines and computer reservation systems, the data protection directive imposes on Member
States the obligation to adopt implementing legislation that must include a number of rules. These include
the principles that personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully, and that the transfer of personal
data to a third country may take place only if the third country in question ensures an adequate level of
protection. ‘Adequate’ protection means that a number of data protection principles of substance are in
place, and that sufficient mechanisms exist in the country of destination to ensure that those principles are
complied with. The Directive provides a number of exceptions, for example it is also possible to transfer
the data when this is legally required on important public interest grounds. Such legal obligation may arise
from national
instruments may also allow
exceptions to be made to restrict the scope of some of the obligations and rights provided for in the
in particular the principle that data should be used for purposes compatible with those for
Directive,
which they were collected. In those cases it is required that legislative measures are adopted, and that such
a restriction constitutes a necessary measure to safeguard important public interests, such as national
security, public security, prevention, investigation detection and prosecution of criminal offences, or to
safeguard a monitoring,
regulatory function connected, even occasionally, with the
aforementioned safeguard measures.

legislation or from an international agreement. These legal

inspection or