WRITTEN QUESTION P-1106/04 by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission. Vaccination against bluetongue.
Date: 2004-04-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, South Africa, animal disease, cattle, disease prevention, health risk, vaccination, vaccine

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/945

Is this requirement compatible with the rules governing the single internal market and freedom of

1.
movement in the European Union?

Is it lawful for a sporting organisation such as UEFA to re-erect the national barriers which have long

2.
since been abolished by European law?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The Honourable Member is referring to the rules of the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA)
which oblige German football clubs to play their matches in stadiums in Germany.

The applicable regulation is the Regulation of the UEFA Cup 2003/2004. According to Article 3(6) of the
Regulation, a club may play its matches in the territory of another UEFA member association subject to
the agreement of the UEFA authorities.

In its decision to reject a complaint in the ‘Mouscron’ case (1), the Commission took the view that the rule
to the effect that each club must play its home match at its own ground (‘at home and away from home’
rule) and the exceptions to that rule (which allow for the possibility of playing a match at a ground in a
town in another country) was needed to ensure equality between clubs. The Commission argued that by
adopting this rule and the exceptions to it, UEFA had exercised its legitimate right of self-regulation as a
sports organisation in a manner which could not be challenged by the Treaty’s competition rules. This rule
and the exceptions to it cannot constitute improper exercise of UEFA’s regulatory powers provided these
exceptions are applied by UEFA in an objective and non-discriminatory manner.

(1) Case COMP/36851, see IP/99/965.

(2004/C 84 E/1044)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1106/04

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission

(5 April 2004)

Subject: Vaccination against bluetongue

A vaccine produced in South Africa is currently being used to combat the bovine disease, bluetongue.
At the moment the vaccine is not licensed for use in the European Union.

Cattle farmers, in Sicily in particular, are gravely concerned at the potentially huge damage to the livestock
population which would result from the planned vaccination campaign to prevent bluetongue. Recent
authoritative scientific studies say there is no risk of contagion for human beings or between susceptible
animals and point to the low mortality rate because of spontaneous recovery with auto-immunisation and,
consequently, the possibility in the near future of using inactivated vaccines with a very low risk of
vaccination incidents.

Does the Commission not consider that there is a risk in experimenting with this type of prophylactic
whose potential benefits and contra-indications are not yet known and which might cause serious
economic damage to livestock farmers?

Could the Commission suggest an alternative to this vaccine?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

As the Commission has already pointed out on several occasions, the decision to vaccinate against
bluetongue in Italy was not made without taking the necessary precautions.

C 84 E/946

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The Scientific Committee was consulted, safety checks were carried out on the vaccines used, and the
option of vaccinating with the only vaccines available on the market, which are produced by South Africa,
was taken only after in-depth discussions in close collaboration with the national authorities concerned.

The vaccines were specially produced by the Onderstepoort laboratory in South Africa, taking account of
the Italian situation, and they contained only the serotypes present in the regions affected.

With regard to the results of this strategy, it would be unfair not to acknowledge the undisputed success
achieved in some of the regions affected and not to bear in mind the hundreds of thousands of animals
which were lost, particularly in Sardinia, before the introduction of vaccination led to a drastic reduction
in the number of outbreaks and in the losses resulting from the disease on the farms.

As a result of this improvement in the situation, the rules have been gradually adapted and restrictions on
the movement of live animals have been eased.

However, the Commission is aware that the situation has become increasingly complex because of the
increase in the number of serotypes in circulation and the difficulty in adapting the vaccination strategy to
these constant changes in the epidemiological situation.

At this stage the Italian authorities have not informed the Commission of any significant negative effects
which could be directly attributed to vaccination, and the considerable damage reported here does not
correspond to the information which the Commission has available.

The Commission therefore intends to draw up a list with the Italian authorities of measures which have
been taken thus far and to consider, in the light of the conclusions drawn, what changes may prove
necessary to the strategy to tackle bluetongue.

(2004/C 84 E/1045)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1107/04

by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission

(5 April 2004)

Subject: Administrative work involved in preparing a subsidy application

It is said that if an organisation wishes to submit a project under the Media Programme TAO (cid:1)
it has to spend around EUR 4 000 on preparing its subsidy application. If the
Audiovisual Festivals,
application is accepted, the organisation receives barely EUR 10 000.

Is it not regrettable that the cost of submitting a project application amounts to 40 % of the sum which an
organisation ultimately receives?

Is there not an urgent need to simplify the preparation of subsidy applications, and ought not the costs to
applicants and the administrative costs to the Commission to be reduced in this way?

Has the Commission already taken any steps to achieve this?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2004)

Each Programme managed and implemented by the Commission is subject to the Financial Regulation
applicable to the general budget of
the European Communities. The procedures laid down by the
Regulation are aimed at ensuring sound financial management of Community resources. These provisions
may impose burdens on beneficiaries in terms of procedures and ultimately in terms of
the cost
effectiveness of Community support. The mid term evaluation of the MEDIA programmes and the public
consultation on the new generation of programmes have confirmed the need to simplify procedures for