WRITTEN QUESTION E-0049/02 by Francesco Speroni (NI) to the Commission. Discrimination in fees for Union residents.
Date: 2002-01-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU national, Italy, discrimination on the basis of nationality, discriminatory price, equal treatment, sporting event

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/235

exists) and include the question of whether different language groups can be interspersed at local and
regional level without jeopardising the groups’ internal identities and whether they can minimise their
mutual historical or other conflicts. There are numerous common themes and needs: learning of the other
language, effective bilingual administration, communication, the psychology of prejudice, discrimination
and glass ceilings, local cultural exchanges on the basis of language, the tendency towards segregation of
residential areas, etc.

A practical way of dealing with common issues might be to set up a network for bilingual regions. The
idea would be to mutually exchange and compare practices, standards and modes of interaction in
different countries and regions. However, such an interface would need to be created specially, and it is
unlikely that any one region would have the capacity to do this on its own initiative: rather, a Community
initiative would be required.

Are any cross-border networks of bilingual regions currently operational within the EU? Is there a need for
such a network, and will the Commission promote the establishment of one? What timetable could be
adopted for this?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(20 February 2002)

To the Commission’s knowledge, there is no network of bilingual regions as such currently operating in
the Union.

However, there are networks dealing with aspects of bilingualism. The European Bureau for Lesser Used
Languages (http://www.eblul.org), an organisation funded by the Community, runs the Partnership for
Diversity scheme, which brings together regional and local authorities from parts of Europe where there
are regional or minority languages to discuss issues of mutual
interest and promote cooperation. A
language planning agencies, which was set up with Community support and is
network of official
currently coordinated by the Welsh Language Board (http://www.bwrdd-yr-iaith.org.uk), meets regularly to
discuss issues relating to language promotion. Under the Lingua action of the Socrates programme, the
Community supports Euroclic (http://www.euroclic.net), a pan-European network bringing together
teachers, teacher trainers, researchers, policymakers and other players in the field of multilingual education
in both bilingual and monolingual areas.

Projects involving transnational networks dealing with other aspects of bilingualism might qualify for
support under other Community programmes and actions, such as Socrates Comenius or Interreg,
provided that any proposals of this kind comply with the requirements and objectives of the actions in
question.

The Commission warmly encourages regions to participate in existing networks and take advantage of
opportunities within existing programmes to promote Europe-wide cooperation on such issues.

(2002/C 147 E/252)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0049/02

by Francesco Speroni (NI) to the Commission

(24 January 2002)

Subject: Discrimination in fees for Union residents

According to the website www.maratonasant-antonio.com, the organisers of the Padua Marathon, to be
held on 28 April 2002, are charging people resident abroad, including those residing in the Union, a
higher enrolment fee than those resident in Italy.

Can the Commission say whether this differentiation is fair?

C 147 E/236

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2002)

The Commission was unable to verify whether the organisers of the Padua marathon, which is to be held
on 28 April 2002, are in fact applying higher registration fees for non-residents than for those resident in
Italy. No information on this matter could be accessed on the website indicated by the Honourable
Member.

However, if this information were to be confirmed, the Commission would strongly urge the organisers of
the marathon not to discriminate between participants, as this could be contrary to the fundamental
principle of non-discrimination. This principle, which is enshrined in Article 12 of the EC Treaty, prohibits
not only any discrimination on grounds of nationality but also the application of any other criterion
which, as in the case in point, directly or indirectly produces the same result.

Moreover, if it were to emerge that the authorities were involved in organising the marathon in that way,
the Commission, after examining the relevant circumstances of the case in point, could initiate an
infringement procedure against Italy under Article 226 of the EC Treaty.

(2002/C 147 E/253)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0051/02

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 January 2002)

Subject: Cyclamate

Almost half of all ‘light’ products contain artificial sweeteners such as cyclamate. The European Acceptable
Daily Intake (ADI) standard for cyclamate is 7 mg per day per kg of body weight for children up to eight
years of age.

According to the Netherlands Nutrition Centre, this means that, in order to comply with the European
standard for cyclamate intake, children up to that age must not drink more than two glasses of ‘light’ soft
drinks a day. In the case of adults, the limit is 1,1 litres of soft drinks a day.

However, there are millions of children in the European Union who drink more than two glasses of
artificially sweetened soft drinks a day.

Is it not time that the European Union > following the example set by the United States in 1969 >
banned the addition of cyclamate (E952) as an artificial sweetener?

Is the Commission considering the compulsory introduction of a warning on soft drink containers about
the maximum daily number of glasses which should be consumed by children?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2002)

The Scientific Committee on Food has last evaluated the artificial sweetener cyclamate in March 2000. The
former Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of 11 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) body weight was lowered to
7 mg/kg body weight. The ADI is defined as the amount of a food additive that can be ingested daily over
a lifetime without incurring any appreciable health risk. Therefore, the Commission does not consider a
complete ban of cyclamate as justified. The Commission is however examining how to ensure that the
intake of cyclamate does not exceed the new ADI, for example by amendments to authorised limits for its
use and the authorisation of alternatives.

The Commission considers that for substances such as additives, for which restrictive conditions of use are
laid down by the legislation on the basis of a risk assessment, additional labelling requirements are not
justified. Therefore, the Commission does not wish to introduce a warning statement on the label of soft
drinks as suggested by the Honourable Member.