WRITTEN QUESTION E-2326/01 by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission. Mutual recognition of free travel for the elderly schemes.
Date: 2001-07-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, Ireland, approximation of laws, elderly person, free service, means of public conveyance, single document

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/109

(2002/C 93 E/126)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2324/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Subject: Under-18 footballers and other industries

In the light of Commissioner Diamantopoulou’s answer to my question E-1051/01 (1), where the
Commission maintains that Community law provisions on free movement of workers apply to all Union
citizens who have reached the minimum age fixed by the host Member State for access to its labour
market, and that they indicate ‘certain conditions’ aimed at ensuring the protection of football players
under the age of 18, can the Commission indicate if these ‘certain conditions’ will apply to workers in
other industries, and if so what are the conditions?

(1) OJ C 340 E, 4.12.2001, p. 156.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 2001)

The Commission would like to point out that, according to the principles set out in the outcome of its
discussions with the International Federation of Football Associations/Union of European Football
Associations (FIFA/UEFA),
international transfers of players between the minimum working age in the
country of the new training club and the age of 18 will be allowed, while their protection will be ensured
through a code of conduct regarding their treatment by the training club. It is for the football authorities
to establish such a code with due respect for the applicable Community and national rules.

This arrangement takes into account the specific characteristics of football and is not, thus, transposable
automatically to other industries.

(2002/C 93 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2326/01

by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Subject: Mutual recognition of free travel for the elderly schemes

Ireland operates a scheme where persons of 66 years and above are entitled to travel free on all public
transport in the country. The scheme is funded by the Irish Social Welfare Department.

Has the Commission studied this scheme and compared it with similar provisions existing in other
Member States? Would the Commission support the introduction of mutual recognition of such schemes,
so as to allow greater cross-border movement of the elderly by granting them equivalent rights outside the
Member State where they have their entitlement? Would the Commission support the introduction of a
common EU travel pass for pensioners, similar to the model of the EU driving licence, which would be
recognised in all Member States and allow pensioners free access to public transport across 15 Member
States?

C 93 E/110

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to written questions E-2406/99 by
John McCartin (1) and E-1054/99 by Angela Billingham (2), and to the replies to oral questions H-1148/98
by Nial Andrews during question time at Parliament’s December 1998 part-session (3) and H-1023/98 by
Robert Evans during question time at Parliament’s November 1998 part-session (4).

(1) OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000.
(2) OJ C 348, 3.12.1999.
(3) Written reply, 15.12.1998.
(4) Oral reply, 17.11.1998.

(2002/C 93 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2327/01

by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Animal testing in the 6th Framework Programme

(31 July 2001)

In its proposal for a 6th Framework Programme the Commission appears to have ignored its legal
obligation under the Treaty Protocol on Animal Welfare and also the increasing concern expressed by the
European Parliament and EU citizens about the slow rate of progress in developing non-animal alternatives
to animal tests used for assessing toxicological hazards of chemicals.

What steps will the Commission be taking to amend this 6th programme and ensure that financial
resources are made available to research into the development of non-animal toxicological tests?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2001)

In the process related to the preparation of the new Framework Programme 2002-2006 of the Community
for research, technological development and demonstration activities, the Commission adopted, on 30 May
2001, proposals for the Specific Programmes (1).

This text clearly mentions the development of new in vitro tests to replace animal experimentation in the
research priority (ii) of the thematic priority 1.1.1 ‘Genomics and biotechnology for health’ (see pages 20
of the text).

Furthermore, it includes several general statements regarding the respect of animal welfare, which concern
all activities of the new Framework Programme (see footnote 14, page 18 of the text).

Additionally, flexibility for policy-related research is offered under the heading ‘Anticipating the EU’s
scientific and technological needs’ (1) which covers policy-orientated research and could include non-animal
testings.

The Joint Research Centre (JRC) will continue to undertake the validation of these tests, which is currently
performed at ECVAM (the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods). Additionally, the
European Chemicals Bureau, the JRC, and Directorate General (DG) Environment will keep promoting
acceptance of alternative methods in the regulatory context.

The Commission’s White Paper on a strategy for a future chemicals policy (2) clearly states the commitment
of the Commission to the legislation on the protection of animals used for experimental and other
scientific purposes and establishes as ‘Action 3 F: To foster research on development and validation of
alternative methods both at the Community and at the level of Member States and to enhance the relevant
information that can be obtained from testing without simultaneously increasing the number of animals
involved’.