WRITTEN QUESTION E-0586/04 by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission. Horse passports.
Date: 2004-02-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal welfare, application of EU law, equidae, health certificate, veterinary legislation

C 84 E/432

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

and, in doing so, reduce the number of unemployed. The economy is also in need of a skilled workforce in
order to keep up with the rapid scientific and technological developments. Against this backdrop, the
Leonardo da Vinci programme serves as a laboratory of innovation in the field of lifelong learning.

Can the Commission provide a list of
the projects that have been approved under the Leonardo
programme over the last three years, including details of the promoters and the level of funding, stating
how much has been paid out and how much is outstanding?

Are there any noticeable differences in outlook between the countries and the project managers with
regard to various criteria, such as budget, share of funding and the actual results?

How does the Commission ensure that an audit of the funded projects is carried out quickly and
efficiently, and how much time elapses on average between a project’s completion and the audit?

In which countries do difficulties frequently arise when it comes to the audit?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2004)

The Commission would like to reiterate the important role played by the Leonardo da Vinci programme in
the field of vocational training and lifelong learning.

It would remind the Honourable Member that Parliament has lists of Leonardo da Vinci projects selected at
Community level over the last three years. Under the committee procedures, once the programme
committee has expressed its opinion, these lists are forwarded to Parliament for scrutiny. They include
project titles, promoters’ names, project durations and the amounts of financial assistance envisaged for
each project.

Most of the projects financed last for a maximum of three years, which means the first significant results
were not available until the end of 2003. The Commission is analysing the assessments already undertaken
with regard to the final reports and results of projects, including the final subsidy allocations and payment
periods. It will inform the Honourable Member of the results of this analysis in due course.

(2004/C 84 E/0503)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0586/04

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 February 2004)

Subject: Horse passports

How many of the Member States have implemented European Commission Decision 2000/68/EC (1)? Is the
Commission satisfied that they have done so correctly?

Does the Commission have any plans to allow the use of freeze marking and/or microchipping as
acceptable methods of identification?

(1) OJ L 23, 28.1.2000, p. 72.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2004)

According to Article 4 of Commission Decision 2000/68/EC of 22 December 1999 amending
Commission Decision 93/623/EEC and establishing the identification of equidae for breeding and
production, Member States shall ensure that as from 1 July 2000 at the latest, registered equidae and

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/433

equidae for breeding and production are accompanied during their movement by the identification
document as referred to above. This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Decision 2000/68/EC does not oblige Member States to notify the legal provisions they have implemented
to comply with the provisions of this Decision. So far, the Commission has not received any complaint
relating to the failure of a Member State to implement the above Decision.

Community animal welfare legislation does not contain specific restrictions of the use of these methods.
With regard to mutilations in general, Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the
protection of animals kept for farming purposes (1) stipulates that relevant national provisions shall apply
in accordance with the general rules of the EC Treaty.

The Commission is aware that
in certain Member States electronic transponders are used for the
identification of equidae. Furthermore, freeze marking and hot branding are used to mark equidae. Freeze
branding was required by Community legislation for equidae vaccinated against African horse sickness
when this disease occurred on the Iberian Peninsula in 1989.

The legislation in force allows additional active marking in excess of the identification by passport. In such
cases, details about the applied marks have to be specified in the identification document.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.

(2004/C 84 E/0504)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0597/04

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 February 2004)

Subject: Freedom of movement

1. Will the Commission tabulate for each Member State the provisions that exist whereby nationals of
other Member States may avail themselves of their rights to free movement of labour? For example, which
Member States insist on registration with the police or on carrying a special identity card?

At what point is the national of another Member State entitled in each case to claim benefit, and

2.
what is the level of that benefit and what are the qualifications for it?

3. Will the Commission list in the case of each Member State any other provisions that might be
regarded as treating nationals of another Member State differently to nationals of the home Member State?

Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2004)

Free movement of persons is one of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by Community law and
1.
includes the right to live and work in another Member State. Insofar as workers are concerned, Article 39
(2) of the EC Treaty prohibits ‘any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member
States’. Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for
workers within the Community (1) implements Article 39(2) of the EC Treaty whereas Council Directive
68/360/EEC of 15 October 1968 on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the
Community for workers of Member States and their families (2) abolishes restrictions on movement and
residents within the Community for workers and their families. Thus, migrant workers in the EU can
exercise their right to free movement simply on production of a valid identity card or passport (3).
According to the European Court of Justice, the Member State is entitled to check the passports or identity
cards (4) and require that the nationals of the other Member States report their presence to the competent