WRITTEN QUESTION E-3535/03 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission. Humana Milchunion — infant health.
Date: 2003-11-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU market, Israel, baby food, consumer information, food safety, public health, soya bean, substitute product

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/297

(cid:1) How does it intend to help fight the proliferation of ‘taxi companies’ illegally recruiting workers,

which are competing unfairly with legal temporary job companies?

(cid:1) Is it considering adopting any new ways of alerting European workers to the inherent risks of being

recruited for temporary work by illegal agencies?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 2004)

The Commission deplores the fraud described by the Honourable Member, which, it has recently learned,
seems to be on the increase in relation to Portuguese workers. However, the Commission must point out
that monitoring compliance with working and employment conditions is primarily the responsibility of
the national authorities.

It is not clear from the question whether the situations described fall within the scope of Directive 96/71/
EC (1) concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services. Insofar as this is
the case, the system of cooperation on information established by Article 4 of this Directive applies. Such
cooperation consists in particular of replying to requests from monitoring authorities for information on
the transnational hiring-out of workers,
including abuses or possible cases of unlawful transnational
activities. The Commission facilitates this process with its own resources by linking the various monitoring
authorities. To this end, and in order to solve the practical problems encountered by the national
authorities in this area, a group of government experts has been set up at the initiative of the Commission
to examine these questions in greater detail.
It is also looking at ways of gaining easier access to
information on the working and employment conditions applicable in the host country.

(1) Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of

workers in the framework of the provision of services, OJ L 18, 21.1.1997.

(2004/C 78 E/0299)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3535/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(28 November 2003)

Subject: Humana Milchunion (cid:1) infant health

The Israeli press reports that the German company Humana Milchunion, which manufactures a soya-based
milk substitute for babies for the Israeli company Remedia, has acknowledged its responsibility for
vitamin B1 deficiencies and mistakes in the quality control process for the product. The Israeli Health
Ministry believes that the lack of vitamin B1 killed three infants and damaged the central nervous system
of several more. For the moment, some 20 children in total are believed to be affected.

The same source reports that Humana Milchunion has acknowledged that an independent laboratory
demonstrated that their ‘Super Soya 1’ formula contained only 29 to 37 micrograms of vitamin B1 per
100 g of product, although the label stated that the vitamin B1 content was 385 micrograms; furthermore,
Humana Milchunion was apparently cooperating fully with the Israeli-German investigation of the case,
and wished to see those responsible for the mistakes duly punished.

Remedia claims that the change in the formula must have been due to the mistaken conclusion that the
soya itself must already contain sufficient quantities of vitamin B1, and that no further B1 needed to be
added.

Apparently, the problem was initially detected in Israel, because Human Milchunion, despite planning to
make the same change to the formula for all its products, began the changeover with their line of kosher
products destined for the Israeli market, since they were particularly popular amongst orthodox Jews.

C 78 E/298

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

In view of the Israeli revelations, the German authorities have apparently already begun their own
investigations of Humana Milchunion and the consumers its supplies.

The Commission:

(cid:1) What information does it have as to the continued presence of this product on the European market?

(cid:1) What measures has it taken or will it take to alert consumers to the possible risks they may be
running, with particular reference to Jewish communities in which consumption of products of this
kind is standard practice?

(cid:1) What contact has it established with the Israeli Government and the companies in question?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2004)

The Commission has received information from the German food authorities that the product concerned
was exported only to Israel.
the Commission contacted the Israeli authorities via the
Commission Delegation in order to obtain from them information regarding possible redistribution of the
product from Israel to Member States.

In addition,

On the basis of this information the Commission has no indication that the product concerned was ever
present on the Community market.

Even though the product concerned was not distributed in the Union, the Commission informed the
Member States of this issue, thus allowing them to take the appropriate measures to inform consumers if
necessary.

(2004/C 78 E/0300)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3545/03

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE), Karl-Heinz Florenz (PPE-DE) and Chris Davies (ELDR) to the
Commission

(28 November 2003)

Subject: Transposition of the directive on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) in France

France is the first EU country that has prepared an ‘official’ draft of the WEEE transposition. An English
translation has been provided by the Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development. The intention is to
have a final text in December.

Unfortunately this draft deviates from the WEEE Directive (2002/96/EC (1)) in many aspects, most notably
on the individual producer responsibility for future products. Instead a collective responsibility is proposed.

Please compare the WEEE directive Article 8.2:
‘For products put on the market later than 13 August
2005, each producer shall be responsible for financing the operations referred to in paragraph 1 relating to
the waste from his own products’with this wording of Article 15 of the French draft decree: ‘The producers
having put the household electric and electronic equipments on the market during the current year assure
the financing of the obligations which fall to them the same year in conformance with Articles 21-25 of
the present decree for the household electric and electronic equipments. These obligations are distributed
between the producers by type of equipments such as listed in the order mentioned in the 1st article, in
proportion to the household electric and electronic equipments launched on the market during the current
year.’ This is a very similar formulation as for historical waste in the WEEE directive (Article 8.3).

The French draft gives companies the possibility of setting up their own recycling operations, but a
possibility for a certain recycling set-up is NOT a legal producer responsibility. Apart from the drawbacks
of collective responsibility, a situation would occur where companies would not have to make reservations
and guarantees for products sold in France, but would need to make reservations and give guarantees for