WRITTEN QUESTION E-0227/04 by Ewa Hedkvist Petersen (PSE) to the Commission. Alcohol ignition interlock devices (alcolocks).
Date: 2004-02-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC conformity marking, EU law - national law, Sweden, road safety, safety device, technical regulations

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/335

Until any proposal to amend the legislation resulting from the review is agreed by the Council and the
Parliament, the requirements of Directive 2003/17/EC must continue to be respected and applied by the
Member States. Therefore, the Commission has opened a case against Spain concerning the problem raised
by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L 350, 28.12.1998, as amended by Directive 2003/17/EC, OJ L 76, 22.3.2003.
(2) OJ L 123, 17.5.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0394)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0211/04

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 January 2004)

Subject: Allegations of manoeuvring to seize property owned by building cooperatives in Greece

There has been a stream of allegations from numerous building cooperatives in Greece (such as ‘I YGIA’,
which owns land at Saronida, Attica, and whose members have already appealed to Parliament’s
Committee on Petitions, the cooperative of employees of the Bank of Greece, which owns land at
Anavissos, Attica, etc.), that the Greek authorities are continually obstructing the development of the
property of which the cooperatives are the legal owners. They allege that the ultimate objective is the
seizure of their property by the Greek State. The executive committees of numerous building cooperatives
(which represent 500 000 Greek citizens according to the Greek press) point out that, although they hold
the legal deeds to the property and have been recognised officially by the Greek State for almost 40 years,
the Greek authorities constantly create obstacles through their administrative departments, compelling the
cooperatives continuously to bring actions before the Greek courts, which duly rule in their favour.
Despite that, the Greek authorities (in particular the Ministry for the Environment, Planning and Public
Works) continue to concoct further obstacles with the aim (cid:1) allegedly (cid:1) of confiscating the cooperatives’
property in violation of court rulings.

Is such alleged manoeuvring in order to seize property belonging to building cooperatives consistent with
Community law? What action can the Commission take to put an end to the tactics adopted by the Greek
authorities and to ensure that the members of the above cooperatives obtain the land to which they are
entitled?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Since this matter is not covered by Community law, the Commission does not consider itself competent to
reply to the questions put by the Honourable Member.

The Commission would also point out that any person who considers their fundamental rights to have
been violated may appeal to the European Court of Human Rights once they have exhausted all the legal
remedies available in their own country.

(2004/C 84 E/0395)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0227/04

by Ewa Hedkvist Petersen (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Alcohol ignition interlock devices (‘alcolocks’)

(2 February 2004)

Trials are now being conducted in some parts of Sweden with ‘alcolocks’ on buses. Does the Commission
consider that a Member State can require all vehicles in the country to be fitted with ‘alcolocks’ in order to
improve road safety?

C 84 E/336

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 2004)

If a Member State should decide to make the installation of alcohol ignition interlock devices obligatory,
it would have to notify the Commission of
technical regulation as required by the
Community rules on the notification of technical regulations. If the measure were then to be considered
compatible with Community legislation for vehicles registered in that Member State, the latter would still
have to comply with international agreements allowing the circulation of vehicles registered in other
States.

the full draft

Member States have to authorise the sale and first registration of type-approved private cars which are
covered by a European certificate of conformity. For other categories of vehicles, particularly public
transport vehicles, the Commission has proposed a staggered timetable which is currently being considered
by the Council and the Parliament.

The Commission recognises the potential of alcohol ignition interlock devices. At the end of 2003 it
launched a study to evaluate the possible applications for such systems. However, at present, given their
high cost and the need for frequent recalibration, the Commission considers that such systems should be
installed only as an alternative penalty for drink-driving offences, and not as a general measure which, a
priori, would only be useful for a small proportion of drivers.

(2004/C 84 E/0396)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0228/04

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 February 2004)

Subject: Timely development and production of drugs to combat the merging of avian influenza virus

H5N1 and influenza A occurring in humans

1.
Is the Commission aware of the source of infection which recently emerged in Vietnam for ‘bird flu’
(avian influenza A), a constantly mutating virus which, in this instance, has occurred as variant H5N1?
Is the Commission aware that it affects domestically kept birds in particular, such as poultry, but that the
preventive culling of millions of birds in Vietnam could not prevent the virus from claiming five lives
between 30 December 2003 and 19 January 2004 or, now, from spreading to South Korea and Japan via
bird droppings?

2.
Is the Commission bearing in mind the possibility that the virus will combine naturally with a
human pathogen known as the influenza A virus and subsequently reach Europe in a form which cannot
be combated with currently available anti-viral drugs and that this will lead to a recurrence of the 1918-
1919 pandemic which claimed 40 to 50 million lives?

3.
Are attempts already being made within the EU to combine the two viruses artificially, with a view
to developing antibodies in time and making them available on a sufficient scale? In which Member States
is this taking place? Who has the authority to take decisions on this?

4.
Is the research referred to in question 3 being obstructed or restricted in any way, for fear that a
virus whose production has been accelerated through human intervention cannot be kept in isolation and
that, potentially, this will cause an epidemic? Are there EU Member States in which, because of those fears,
such research is not permitted?

5. What contribution is the Commission making towards ensuring that anti-viral drugs are made
available in time on a sufficient scale in Europe?