WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1816/98 by Florus WIJSENBEEK to the Commission. Inquiry into tachograph use
18. 1. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 13/93 Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1998) 1. The Commission considers that it has been neither slow nor late in reacting to the discriminatory behaviour of the 1998 World Cup tournament organisers. In March 1997, during preliminary discussions with the French organising committee (CFO) concerning arrangements for the sale of tickets through tour operators, the Commission made clear that arrangements requiring the general public to prove residency in France in order to purchase tickets were discriminatory and therefore unacceptable. Furthermore, when the CFO informed the Commission in January 1998 that consumers wishing to purchase tickets directly from the committee had been required to provide an address in France, action was taken promptly to bring an end to the discriminatory behaviour in question. The Honourable Member can be assured that when it is appropriate to do so the Commissionís services 2. work actively with one another in their co-ordination and implementation of Commission policy. The study commissioned by DGX and prepared by Coopers & Lybrand in close cooperation with the relevant directorates- general of the Commission, to which she refers, reflects the principles followed by the Commissionís directorate- general for competition on ticket sales by tour operators. 3. The Commissionís investigations into ticketing arrangements for the 1990 World Cup in Italy and 1992 Olympic Games in Barcelona related exclusively to ticket sales by tour operators. Similarly, discussions which took place with the Commission in 1997 also related exclusively to sales arrangements through tour operators. As such the Commission was not at the time made aware of the discriminatory sales arrangements applied by the CFO in France, in relation to the sale of tickets to the general public through outlets other than tour operators. That information was only provided by the committee in January 1998, whereupon action was taken promptly by the Commission to bring an end to the CFOís discriminatory practices. (1999/C 13/133) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1816/98 by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission (11 June 1998) Subject: Inquiry into tachograph use Is the Commission aware of a study carried out by Britainís Cambridge University showing that the new digital tachograph, specified as compulsory for new road-haulage vehicles in the European Union as at 1 July 2000, is susceptible to fraud? Is it true, as reported in the study, that cards containing permitted itineraries are readily available on the black market that can easily be substituted for cards on which infringements have been recorded? If so, what action is the Commission prepared to take to ensure that itineraries cannot be faked? Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (24 July 1998) The study mentioned by the Honourable Member was made on the basis of the Councilís political agreement of 17 June 1997. This laid down a general framework for a digital tachograph. At that stage technical specifications for the digital tachograph and the driver cards had not been defined in detail. This is particularly true for the security aspects. Any report based on that text can therefore only lead to the conclusion that the technical requirements were incomplete. The study does have its merits, but more as a useful checklist for the current work on defining technical specifications than as a valid judgement on a system that is still in the process of being finalised. In the meantime, work has been progressing with industry and with software experts to define the final, detailed technical specifications in order to ensure that it will be harder to break the electronic security of the recording equipment and driver cards, and also to ensure that attempts to tamper with the system will be easier to detect