WRITTEN QUESTION P-1040/04 by Enrico Ferri (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Requirements for entry in the studbook, transposition of Community legislation.
Date: 2004-03-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, animal breeding, equidae, intra-EU trade, national implementing measure, technical barriers to trade, trade restriction

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/703

(cid:1) In the context of the EC-Switzerland agreement, especially as regards the application of Article 16 of
this agreement when determining the implications of the judgment, it should be noted that the legal
framework for assessing any unfavourable consequences for workers resulting from the replacement of
certain provisions of bilateral conventions between a Member State and a third country by the
EC-Switzerland agreement differs substantially from that underlying the judgment in Rönfeldt; even
though the EC-Switzerland agreement is concerned with the free movement of workers, this concept
does not have the same basis (in particular, the unconditional character that the Treaty confers on the
exercise of this basic freedom).

(cid:1) Similarly, a referral to the ‘acquis communautaire’ (i.e. Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71) does not mean
that the Court’s interpretation of certain provisions of the Regulation in terms of the free movement
of workers within the Community can automatically be applied to a situation involving Member State
nationals and nationals of a third country within the framework of an international agreement.

(cid:1) Moreover, as regards the transfer of contributions provided for in the Italo-Swiss agreement,
Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 lays down a different principle: that of aggregation/pro rata calculation;
Thus, the essential difference between the two methods has nothing to do with their aim, which is to
assist workers, but concerns the sharing of the costs of financing benefits between the various
countries where the employed person engaged in an activity that entitled him or her to receive
benefits. Accordingly, the Commission considers that, after the EC-Switzerland agreement came into
force, replacing the transfer of contributions by the aggregation/pro rata arrangements provided for in
the Regulation cannot be seen as placing the worker in a less favourable situation than that obtaining
previously under the bilateral convention between his or her country of origin and Switzerland.

(1) Case C-227/89, judgment of 7 February 1991, ECR I-323.
(2) Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to

employed persons and their families moving within the Community, OJ L 149 of 5.7.1971.

(2004/C 84 E/0789)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1040/04

by Enrico Ferri (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 March 2004)

Subject: Requirements for entry in the studbook, transposition of Community legislation

Further to my parliamentary question of 27 October 2003 and the Commission’s answer (P-3312/03 (1)),
it is important to point out that the question concerns a matter falling within the sphere of competence
not only of DG SANCO but also of DG MARKT, in addition to the fact that the Commission has merely
replied that it was not aware of the problem and has not expressed its views on the substance of the
matter.

Will the Commission, represented by Commissioner Byrne and Commissioner Bolkestein, indicate what
steps have been taken to check whether the Community legislation relating to the sector has been properly
and adequately transposed?

Has the Commission checked whether the existence of the assessment committee which I referred to is
admissible?

(1) OJ C 70 E, 20.3.2004, p. 254.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2004)

The Commission would like to reassure the Honourable Member that it followed up the information he
provided in Written Question P-3312/03 of 27 October 2003.

As indicated in its answer, the Commission had no knowledge of the existence in Italy of a morphological
test for entering stallions in the studbook and a committee to carry out the assessment.

C 84 E/704

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

However, following the written question, the Commission decided to open an own-initiative investigation,
registered as No 2004/2069, in order to clarify the facts and draw the appropriate conclusions.

The investigation is being carried out by the Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Protection,
which is the service responsible for Directive 90/427/EC (1) on the zootechnical and genealogical
conditions governing intra-Community trade in equidae.

A letter was sent to the Italian authorities on 31 March 2004 asking for confirmation of the existence of
this test and requesting a copy of the relevant national legislation.

(1) Council Directive 90/427/EEC of 26 June 1990 on the zootechnical and genealogical conditions governing intra-

Community trade in equidae, OJ L 224, 18.8.1990.

(2004/C 84 E/0790)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1222/04

by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(26 April 2004)

Subject: River access

Is the Commission aware of the diversity across the EU in terms of rights of passage along national rivers?
Some countries appear to have almost completely free access for the public, and others, including England
and Wales, are highly restricted.

Is the Commisison aware of studies or indeed has it conducted studies into this matter? Does it have any
plans to suggest a more unified approach to river access?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

The Commission has no jurisdiction to deal with the question asked, which is a matter solely for the
national authorities concerned.