You are on page 1of 2

C 374 E/200 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 28.12.

2000

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 May 2000)

The profession of tourist guide is subject in Italy to the possession of a qualification at the level indicated
in Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of
professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (1). The Directive provides that
nationals from one Member State have the right to exercise in another Member State a profession for
which they are fully qualified in their Member State of origin. The host Member State can require the
migrant to undergo an adaptation period or an aptitude test when there are substantial differences between
the migrant’s education and training and the requirements in the host Member State.

Italy has implemented the Directive through a decree adopted in 1994 (‘Decreto Legislativo 2 maggio
1994, No 319’). This decree provides that recognition can be made subject to the accomplishment of an
adaptation period or an aptitude test, at the option of the applicant, when there are substantial differences
between the applicant’s training and the training laid down by national law. Applicants can assert their
rights pursuant to this decree that appears in line with Community law.

As far as the Commission is aware, aptitude tests are regularly held for the applicants who have opted for
this kind of compensatory measure. The test is in Italian, but it is aimed to assess the professional
knowledge of the applicant on specific subjects necessary for the pursuit of the profession (i.e. archaeology
or art history) and not linguistic skills. In any case, it is for the applicant to chose between the aptitude test
and the adaptation period that does not involve a written examination.

As regards the geographical scope of the authorisations, the Commission would remind the Honourable
Member that under the Directive the applicant has the right to exercise the profession on the same
conditions as those which apply to the host Member State nationals. That said, the authorisations granted
to Italian nationals under the provisions governing entry to this profession in Italy are no broader than the
authorisations granted to Community nationals under the recognition system, as they are valid only in the
region issuing them. The extension of the authorisation to other regions is governed by internal law, which
applies equally to all Community nationals. The particular local cultural and historical aspects inherent to
this area of activity would seem capable of justifying specific regional provisions. Therefore, the
Commission takes the view there is no clear infringement of Community law.

(1) OJ L 30, 9.2.1995 (as last modified).

(2000/C 374 E/237) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1021/00
by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 April 2000)

Subject: Infringement of European legislation by the German and Belgian trotting federations

1. Can trotting horses which are regularly entered in the German Studbook be removed from the latter
by the German Trotting Federation (HVT) because the period allowed for export within the EU has been
exceeded by one month?

2. Can the Belgian and German Trotting Federations require the payment of import and export duties
by their members for the temporary or permanent import or export of trotting horses within the EU?

3. Can the German Trotting Federation (HVT) refuse to allow breeding mares imported into Germany
with a foal in order to obtain registration in Germany to be permanently exported to another EU Member
State?
28.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374 E/201

4. Can the German Trotting Federal require owners of trotting horses from another EU Member State to
stable horses of German nationality in Germany for six months of the year?

5. Can the German Trotting Federation remove trotting horses from the German Studbook and races
for failure to apply for an export document or for exceeding the period allowed for export within the EU?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(16 May 2000)

The Commission is not aware of the problems mentioned by the Honourable Member and has therefore
launched an inquiry with the authorities concerned. The competent authority of one Member State already
officially informed the Commission that they had requested the appropriate documentation from the
organisation in question. The Commission will reply direct to the Honourable Member about these
findings.

Community legislation with regard to equidae covers various aspects. The animal health conditions for
movement and imports of equidae are laid down in Council Directive 90/426/EEC of 26 June 1990 (1), and
the veterinary certificate to be used in combination with the passport for registered equidae is laid down in
Annex B of that Directive. Unless Member States apply the provisions of Article 6 of that Directive, an
animal health certificate must be completed by an official veterinarian of the Member State of dispatch
each time the animal is intended to be moved to another Member State, independently of whether this
‘export’ is permanent or temporary. This certificate is valid for a period of 10 days and may therefore be
used for more than one ‘border crossing’ within this period.

The zootechnical and genealogical conditions for intra-Community trade in equidae are laid down in
Council Directive 90/427/EEC of 26 June 1990. Based on this Directive, Commission Decision 92/353/
EEC of 11 June 1992 lays down the criteria for the approval or recognition of organizations and
associations which maintain or establish stud-books for registered equidae (2). In accordance with this
Decision, it is the responsibility of the Member States to approve the organizations and associations, in
particular to avoid any discrimination of breeders. The criteria for entry and registration of equidae in
stud-books for breeding purposes are laid down in Commission Decision 96/78/EC of 10 January 1996 (3).

Council Directive 90/428/EEC of 26 June 1990 on trade in equidae intended for competitions also lays
down the conditions for participation therein.

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990.
(2) OJ L 192, 11.7.1992.
(3) OJ L 19, 25.1.1996.

(2000/C 374 E/238) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1022/00
by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(29 March 2000)

Subject: Authority of the EU Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

According to the 6 March 2000 edition of the respected Danish newspaper Berlingske Tidende, Mrs Beate
Winkler, Director of the EU Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, has just taken part in a
multiethnic congress in Copenhagen.

At the congress, this EU official said that she and her Centre are monitoring and compiling statements by
the Danish Folkeparti which, according to her information, is regarded as one of Europe’s extreme right-
wing parties.

These statements are indefensible. The description ‘extreme right-wing party’ is absurd in reference to a
social and liberal party and the issues which the Centre should be dealing with have nothing to do with
the work or policies of the Danish Folkeparti. A left-wing Danish journalist who made similar statements
in 1999 was sued and convicted in the Danish courts.