WRITTEN QUESTION E-1238/00 by Karin Scheele (PSE) to the Commission. Legal classification of tattooing dyes.
13. 2. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 46 E/151 In the light of further European integration with the increased travel for leisure or in conjunction with cross-border economic activity, the issue is important from a general societal point of view and manifests a good example of a Community measure that directly benefits the citizens of Europe. The Commission shares the view that the common emergency number helps improve the effectiveness of providing emergency assistance in the Community. the Commission has proposed in the 1999 review To strengthen further the current communication (3) location data of callers in distress are passed on to the emergency service authorities, in both fixed and mobile networks. This will be one important aspect of the forthcoming review of the Communityís telecommunications policy. framework, that The common emergency number is an assurance for all 380 million Community citizens and for travellers from abroad that they can call for assistance whenever they are in an emergency or life-threatening situation. The guaranteed availability throughout the Community on fixed and mobile networks, the ability to make emergency calls free of charge and the ability to provide location data of users in an emergency are key issues. (1) OJ L 217, 6. 8. 1991. (2) OJ L 101, 1. 4. 1998. (3) COM(1999) 539 final. (2001/C 46 E/174) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1238/00 by Karin Scheele (PSE) to the Commission (14 April 2000) Subject: Legal classification of tattooing dyes The number of Europeans having themselves tattooed has been growing year by year. Tattooing involves among other things the use of azocolourants. In the Commission proposal amending for the nineteenth time Council Directive 76/769/EEC (1) relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (azocolourants) that applies to textiles and leather goods, the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment voices its concern that, on breakdown, azocolourants form amines that are classified as carcinogenic. In view of this possible health hazard, a legal basis is also required for azocolourants used in tattooing. Have studies dealing with the health risks of tattooing dyes already been carried out or are there 1. plans to do so? 2. Can the Commission name legal bases that include tattooing dyes in their field of application? If not, is it making preparations to provide at a future date a legal classification for tattooing dyes? 3. Will azocolourants be covered at the same time? (1) OJ L 262, 27. 9. 1976, p. 201. Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (13 June 2000) 1. The Commission is not aware of toxicological or epidemiological studies to specifically assess the health safety risks from the use of certain dyes in tattooing. Adverse effects of tattoos are well known. However the evidence is stronger for those effects arising from the tattooing procedures themselves (e. g. transmission of infectious diseases from non-sterile equipment, scarring) and less convincing for possible adverse effects arising from the tattooing dyes. C 46 E/152 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 13. 2. 2001 In considering possible legislative proposals on the safety of tattooing dyes, the Commission requested the opinion of the scientific committee on cosmetics and non food products (SCCNFP). In its opinion of 17 February 2000, the SCCNFP noted the large number of dyes used in tattooing for which the chemical structure, identity, and toxicological profile are incomplete or unknown, thereby precluding a proper health risk assessment. In its opinion, the SCCNFP recommended that a systematic effort be undertaken to information on tattooing dyes so that a proper risk amass the needed chemical and toxicological assessment can be conducted. In its remit to better protect public health, the Commission is currently evaluating the options to carry out this task. As for the azo-dyes mentioned specifically by the Honourable Member, the Commission would also share the view that in theory azo dyes in tattoos will break down in a similar way as they do in leather goods to give rise to the carcinogenic amines. Confirming scientific evidence is however lacking at present. The Commission intends to include this aspect on a priority basis when assessing tattooing dyes. 2. and 3. Tattooing dyes are used for cosmetic purposes yet the route of their administration (injection) puts them outside the scope of Council Directive 76/768/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States to cosmetic products (1) which considers that ásubstances or preparations intended to be ingested, inhaled, injected or implanted in the human body do not come under the field of cosmeticsí. However, tattooing dyes could be considered as general consumer products and hence would fall under the scope of Council Directive 92/59/EEC of 29 June 1992 on general product safety (2) and Council Directive 76/769/EEC of 27 July 1976 relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations. (1) OJ L 262, 27. 9. 1976. (2) OJ L 228, 11. 8. 1992. (2001/C 46 E/175) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1239/00 by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE) to the Commission (14 April 2000) Subject: Postal rates in Germany Germanyís Minister for Economic Affairs Müller has instructed the regulatory authority for postal services in Germany to halt the procedure relating to the expiry at the end of 2000 of the latest increase in postal rates to DM 1,10 and DM 1,00 per letter/postcard respectively and to grant a longer-term authorisation to retain these postal rates. The regulatory authority in Germany was already due shortly to complete the procedure and had the intention of refusing authorisation to retain the postal rate increases. This would have meant reintroducing a letter rate of DM 1,00 and a rate for postcards of DM 0,80. In the meantime, the advisory board of the regulatory authority has censured the Ministerís action by 11 votes to 7 as uncompetitive and has called for this decision to be rectified. Deutsche Post AG is a company that is also active in the European market outside Germany and is today one of the largest European companies engaged in the transmission of letters and parcels. The increased postage rate has up to now served to cross-subsidise less lucrative business sectors of the postal service, e. g. the parcels sector where there is much private-sector competition. This prompts the following questions: 1. How does the Commission view this behaviour by the Deutsche Post AG? 2. How does it view the attitude of the Federal German Ministry of Economic Affairs towards the regulatory authority? 3. Does it intend to investigate this episode in terms of its Europe-wide implications for competition law? 4. What steps will it take if necessary?