WRITTEN QUESTION E-0250/04 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Retirement age of football referees.
Date: 2004-02-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law - national law, labour law, professional sport, retirement conditions

C 84 E/182

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Does the Commission consider that, given the existing controls on OPTA, the new law imposes an

1.
unnecessarily heavy burden, will delay OPTA decisions and restrict its options?

2.
Does the Commission believe that such delays will make it more difficult for OPTA to act effectively
and therefore be to the advantage of dominant parties by allowing them to exercise a monopoly for
longer?

3.
Does the Commission consider that this provision is in breach of any provisions of the Telecoms
package and the objectives of the relevant guidelines that Member States are required to transpose into
national law?

4.

If so, what action does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2004)

As was the case on the occasion of the Commmission’s reply to the previous question of the Honourable
Member on a closely related subject (P-2753/03 (1)), the Commission has not received notification from the
legislative measures transposing the new regulatory framework on electronic
Dutch authorities of
communications.

In addition to the information provided in the response to the above-mentioned written question, on
17 December 2003 the second stage of infringement proceedings under Article 226 of the EC Treaty was
launched against the Netherlands, among others, for non-communication of its transposition measures (2).
As the Commission has not received notification of the transposition measures from the Dutch authorities,
it
is not yet possible to determine whether the legislation transposing the new framework in the
Netherlands will be in compliance with it, including as regards the discretionary powers of the national
regulatory authority (NRA).

The Commission will analyse the legislative measures transposing the new framework in the Netherlands
once they have been notified and,
in the event of non-compliance, may propose the opening of an
infringement proceeding. In the case of persisting non-compliance with the Directive’s provisions, the
Commission might decide to apply to the Court of Justice after issuing a reasoned opinion. As the
Honourable Member will recall, the Court has sole competence to rule on the legality or otherwise of a
transposition measure.

(1) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 755.
(2)
IP/03/1750 of 17.12.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0222)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0250/04

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 February 2004)

Subject: Retirement age of football referees

Pierluigi Collina is the best football referee in the world and has been voted the game’s best official six
times. Yet in 2005 he will no longer be able to referee, as 45 is the official retirement age for his
profession in Italy. Other Member States also have a retirement age of 45 for football referees.

Would the Commission agree that this rule constitutes age discrimination under EU law?

Would the Commission also agree that this rule is in breach of EU employment laws?

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/183

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2004)

According to the information given by the Honourable Member, the Commission is unable to give an
opinion on this particular case since:

(cid:1) The rule seems to be applied to all categories of referees and it is necessary to know whether it is a
genuine sport rule. This economic impact is indeed required to justify the applicability of Community
rules (1);

(cid:1) There is no evidence about the possible arguments used by sports organizations to justify the

establishment of such an age limit.

framework for equal

The Commission can therefore only recall that Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000
in employment and occupation (2) prohibits
establishing a general
treatment
discrimination in employment on grounds of, ‘inter alia’, age and must be transposed into national law
by 2 December 2003. In addition, Member States may, if necessary, have an additional period of three
years from 2 December 2003 to implement
the Directive on age and disability
discrimination. Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom have informed the
Commission that
Italy has
transposed Directive 2000/78/EC by Decree No 216 of 13 August 2003, which entered into force on
28 August 2003. As Italy has transposed the Directive, individual complaints of discrimination should be
made under the national law before the national courts.

they will use this additional three years, and Denmark one extra year.

the provisions of

the Commission recalls that Article 6 of

the Directive allows for the justification of
Furthermore,
differences of treatment on the grounds of age in certain circumstances, as long as this is objectively
justified by a legitimate aim, and the means of achieving that aim are proportionate and necessary. The use
of fixed age limits could only be used where they were objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate
aim.

Joint cases ‘Deliège’ C-51/96 and C-191/97.

(1)
(2) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(2004/C 84 E/0223)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0251/04

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(3 February 2004)

Subject: Labelling of bread

Recently, Italian bakers joined forces in a campaign to save their profession. They have drafted a proposal
for a law to regulate the use of the term ‘fresh bread’, to ensure that it is applied only to bread made by
traditional methods and sold on the day it is made. Consequently, only undertakings which are responsible
for the whole production process from beginning to end will be able to call themselves ‘bakeries’, and will
be able to label their bread as ‘fresh bread’. The problem that Italian bakers (cid:1) and European bakers in
general (cid:1) have had to cope with for many years now is competition from bread sold in supermarkets. In
most cases, supermarket bread is a product which is partially baked in the factory, frozen and transported
to the place of sale, where it is placed in electric ovens to give it a similar colour, appearance and taste to
freshly baked bread. By this means, the supermarkets manage to be extremely competitive on the market
by reducing production costs. Bakers practising their profession in the traditional way are obliged (cid:1) by the
very nature of the product (cid:1) to work at night, and consequently to pay their employees a higher rate,
which greatly increases the cost of fresh bread. Consequently, consumers (cid:1) as shown by recent surveys (cid:1)
are increasingly likely, on economic grounds, to buy their bread in supermarkets. Often, however,
consumers base their decision to do so on a mistaken assumption, which is that the product they are
buying is the same as, rather than similar to, the product offered by traditional bakeries.