WRITTEN QUESTION E-3976/00 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Monopoly in sports and recognition of diplomas in sports training.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, recognition of diplomas, sport

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/205

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2001)

The Commission is well aware of the risks posed by certain types of tyres and has taken action in order to
examine the situation and measures taken in the Community in relation to the tyres in question.

The Commission contacted Firestone/Bridgestone Europe already in August 2000, in order to know what
actions were planned for the European market. The company provided information showing that measures
similar to those in the United States were being voluntarily launched in the Community.

On 12 September 2000 France notified the Commission through the Rapid Alert System (RAPEX),
established by the Council Directive 92/59/EEC of 29 June 1992, on General Product Safety (GPSD) (1),
of an order suspending the placing on the market of and requiring other measures in relation to three
types of tyres produced by Bridgestone/Firestone.

Almost all Member States have reported to the Commission that recall actions have been launched on their
respective territories. In addition, Commission officials met twice with representatives of Firestone/Bridge-
stone to be informed of the details of the recall campaign in Europe and its results.

The Emergencies Committee of the GPSD has reviewed progress on this subject at its meeting of
15 December 2000. There was general agreement that the measures taken by Firestone/Bridgestone were
satisfactory and that no further measures were needed at Community level.

The Commission is following-up the progress with the voluntary recall launched by Bridgestone/Firestone
as well as any other possible problems found in relation to some Goodyear tyres.

(1) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.

(2001/C 174 E/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3976/00

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Monopoly in sports and recognition of diplomas in sports training

Through decrees Nos 115/92 and 319/94, Italy has incorporated Directives 89/48/EEC (1) and 92/51/
EEC (2), which established a general system for the recognition of diplomas in order to facilitate access to
regulated professions.

Article 22(13) of Decree No 286/1998 provides that (cid:145)Italian workers and workers from outside the EU
may apply for the recognition of professional training qualifications obtained abroad, in the absence of
specific agreements with their countries of origin, and the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, having
consulted the Central Employment Committee, shall give a ruling on recognition of the qualifications(cid:146).
Article 27(1) confirms that (cid:145)foreigners intending to practise any type of professional sporting activity in
Italian sports undertakings, under the terms of Law No 91 of 23 March 1981, are permitted entry.(cid:146)
Liberalising the sporting professions market for those from outside the EU seems a positive step, but also a
contradictory one, since CONI (Italian National Olympic Committee) still currently prevents, for instance,
the head of the Italian federation of sports trainers (not a member of CONI) from practising his profession
in Italy and thereby in the other European Union countries.

In view of the above:

1. Does the Commission not think that CONI, which has a monopoly on the sporting professions,

contravenes the principle of the plurality necessary in professional training?

C 174 E/206

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

2.

Is the existence of a monopoly in the sporting sector, with its own legal order, its own health rules
(viz. the use of inappropriate drugs), and its own professional regulations, which rule out any
possibility of a non-member practising, still compatible with Community legislation?

3. How can the Commission justify the discrimination which is,

in fact, practised between non-EU
citizens who have obtained professional qualifications abroad, and Italian citizens who have obtained
their qualifications by working in Italy or other EU countries?

4. What initiatives does it intend to take to ensure that the internal market becomes a genuine reality in

the sporting sector?

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989, p. 16.
(2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 25.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2001)

In accordance with Article 149 (ex Article 126) of the EC Treaty, the Member States are responsible for
the content of teaching and the organisation of their education systems. The Commission therefore has no
authority to comment on the matter and to challenge decisions that are the sole prerogative of the Italian
authorities.

The fact that an undertaking is in a dominant position in the market is not in itself an infringement of
Community law. What is prohibited by Community law is abusive behaviour by undertakings in a
dominant position. The Commission requests the honourable Member to provide the necessary informa-
tion so that it can check whether CONI may be considered an undertaking, whether it is in a dominant
position and whether in fact it abuses this position.

Applications for the recognition of qualifications by nationals of non-member countries or by Italians who
gained their qualifications in Italy do not come under the Community(cid:146)s repsonsibility. The Italian
authorities have the sole right to deal with such applications.

On the other hand, Community law does apply when an Italian citizen obtains qualifications in another
Member State and applies for recognition in Italy. However, no complaint has yet been filed with the
Commission in such an instance. It nevertheless recently came to the Commission(cid:146)s notice that Italy had
not transposed Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the
recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC in connection with
the professions covered by Italian Law No 91 of 23 March 1981 on the rules governing relations between
professional sportsmen and clubs. The Commission has launched infringement proceedings against Italy.

In general, it is not the feeling of the Commission that the internal market operates poorly in the sporting
sector, and it therefore has no plans for any initiatives in this area.

(2001/C 174 E/219)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3984/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Freedom of expression for the media

In paragraph 1.2.6 ((cid:145)Mass Media and Xenophobia(cid:146)) of the summary of the 1999 annual report published by
the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia it is stated that (and I quote verbatim): (cid:145)In
1999 the reporting by media in Greece and in Italy may have contributed to the criminalising discourse on
immigration related to a recent wave of migration from Albania(cid:146).

(cid:129) This is a somewhat harsh statement which does not reflect the true state of affairs. The Commission
should bear in mind that, when a document to be issued by such a body is being drawn up, an
objective approach should be adopted.