WRITTEN QUESTION P-2699/03 by Uma Aaltonen (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Status of assistance dogs in the Union.
Date: 2003-09-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European standard, domestic animal, facilities for people with disabilities, integration of people with disabilities, physically disabled person, quality of life

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/261

Trade in fresh pork meat destined for Sweden is subject to additional guarantees in respect of salmonella
granted at the time of Sweden’s accession to the Union. Finland benefited from identical additional
guarantees. Under the Community provisions applying to salmonella in respect of consignments of fresh
pork meat destined for Sweden and Finland (2) the goods are certified as having been found free of
salmonella in tests on the consignment concerned in the forwarding country, performed in accordance
with a defined sampling and test protocol. This protocol gives a degree of reliability considered to be
similar to that under the national legislation.

Sweden and Finland were granted the additional guarantees on the grounds of the low prevalence of
salmonella and strict controls in force there. In the Commission’s view, these guarantees are based solely
on health considerations.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the
general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down
procedures in matters of food safety, OJ L 31, 1.2.2002.

(2) Council Decision 95/409/EC of 22 June 1995 laying down the rules for the microbiological testing by sampling of
fresh beef and veal and pigmeat intended for Finland and Sweden, OJ L 243, 11.10.1995, as amended by Council
Decision 98/227/EC of 16 March 1998, OJ L 87, 21.3.1998.

(2004/C 51 E/283)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2699/03

by Uma Aaltonen (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(3 September 2003)

Subject: Status of assistance dogs in the Union

In several Member States people suffering from various forms of disability use dogs specially trained to
help them. Guide dogs for the blind and visually impaired are the most familiar example of animals
providing help of this kind, which give their owners both independence and security. Guide dogs are
recognised to be necessary to their owners and in the EU are now admitted to almost every place where
their owners might need to go. However,
in European Year of People with Disabilities it might be
appropriate to draw attention to the newer ways in which dogs are increasingly being used to improve the
quality of life for the disabled. People with reduced mobility have assistance dogs to make the course of
their day-to-day lives easier by opening doors, turning lights on and off, picking up objects that have been
dropped, bringing necessary items within reach, and helping to support or pull their owners along when
they move about. People can be more independent when they do not always have to rely on other human
help. To help the hard of hearing and the deaf, dogs can also be trained to warn of sounds that demand
action. Hearing dogs alert their owners when a warning signal or fire alarm sounds, the doorbell or
telephone rings, water or food is boiling on the stove, and when they hear signs of many other significant
everyday occurrences. In addition, all assistance dogs act as ‘standard-bearers’ for their owners at the social
level, reducing the isolation caused by disability.

1. What will the Commission do to ensure that life runs smoothly for citizens who use assistance dogs,
without the inconvenience of explanations or delays to which they are subjected at present?

2.
Can the Commission provide some form of aid to the disabled in the new Member States by already
starting to support social, employment, and public health initiatives and programmes to train guide,
assistance, and hearing dogs in those countries?

3.
Can the Commission recommend to the Member States that they adopt common standards and a
distinguishing emblem to enable all citizens who use assistance dogs to move about, study, seek and do
work, and engage in social intercourse without obstacles and delays? Such a ‘passe-partout’ symbol, which
would have a very considerable impact on everyday life, should lead to an increase in dog training and
help the disabled to live more normal lives.

C 51 E/262

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 2003)

The Commission is very committed to improving the quality of life of people with disabilities. It hopes
that the European Year of People with Disabilities 2003 will further raise the level of awareness and
information in the European society as a whole and thus help to reduce the inconveniences that citizens
who use assistance dogs might be confronted with.

Before the end of 2003, the Commission will present a proposal for legislation to protect the rights of
persons with reduced mobility, including disabled people when travelling by air. Among other things, the
proposal will cover the carriage of guide dogs.

The Commission does not plan to launch a programme aimed at training assistance dogs in the new
Member States. Given the nature of the activity and with respect for the principle of subsidiarity the
Commission believes that such training should better be provided at local or regional level.

The Commission does not intend for the time being to recommend to the Member States that they adopt
common standards and a distinguishing emblem with regard to assistance dogs. It shares the opinion of
the Honourable Member that assistance dogs are largely recognised to be necessary to their owners and in
the Union are now admitted to almost every place where their owners might need to go.

(2004/C 51 E/284)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2835/03

by Heinz Kindermann (PSE) to the Commission

(18 September 2003)

Subject: Approval of TERRA project ‘Geoplantour’ (cid:1) OLAF investigations

The European Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, is investigating suspected irregularities (case reference IO/2001/
4030) in connection with the approval of a project entitled Geoplantour submitted under the EU’s TERRA
programme in 1997.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1.

Is the Geoplantour project approved in 1997 simply a modified version of the original project No. 57
B, ‘Bugewitzer Oderhaff-Zone’, or is a totally new project actually involved?

2. How does the Commission explain the fact that Directorate-General XVI (currently regional policy)
approved a Geoplantour project in the summer of 1997, i.e. a year after the deadline of 8 July 1986,
contrary to the implementing provisions for the TERRA programme and the principle of equal
treatment?

3. How does the Commission explain the fact that the Directorate-General for Regional Policy has to
date failed to answer two written inquiries from OLAF, thereby delaying OLAF’s investigations into
this matter?

4. What does the Commission now intend to do to step up the investigation into this case?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 2003)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.