WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3050/98 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Dutch study of phthalates
14. 5. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/159 The Commission has no instruments at its disposal to speed up ratification procedures in national 4. parliaments. It can only underline the importance of ratification for the whole Energy Charter process, and especially for the creation of an investor friendly climate in the transition countries. (1999/C 135/197) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3044/98 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (8 October 1998) Subject: EU-funds for the trade sector What percentage of EU funding goes on trade in the following areas, broken down by single Member State if possible: 1. 2. 3. Item B3-4000, ‘Industrial relations and social dialogue’; Item B3-4002, ‘Information and training measure for workers’ organisations’; Item B3-4003, ‘Information, consultation, and participation of representatives of undertakings’; 4. Administrative funds via DG XXIII in the fields of trade and support for SMES; 5. Leonardo Programme. Can the Commissioner also tell me how and to what extent the social partners in the commercial sector are funded with EU monies, and provide data on their implementation, broken down by Member State? Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (4 December 1998) The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-2097/98 by Mr Blak (1). (1) See page 14. (1999/C 135/198) WRITTEN QUESTION P-3050/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (2 October 1998) Subject: Dutch study of phthalates 1. Why did the Scientific Committee for Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment set a higher TDI level in April 1998 than in 1994? 2. Why was the assumed weight of the baby raised from 5 kg in the committee’s report of February to 8 kg in that of April 1998 and the assumed sucking time reduced from 12 to 6 hours, with the result that only 2, instead of the former 3, phthalates were classified as potentially dangerous? 3. The Scientific Committee estimates that phthalate intake from toys only accounts for 10-30 % of total exposure. Why does the Committee nevertheless take the full TDI value (instead of only 10-30 %) as the basis for its recommendation regarding the withdrawal of phthalates, thus ignoring a fact which it had earlier pointed out itself?