WRITTEN QUESTION E-1651/99 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Discrimination in connection with pigeon racing in the border regions of Belgium and the Netherlands.
20. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 170 E/63 private investor operating under normal market economy conditions (1) would require. The Commission has written to the Italian authorities requesting information so that it can examine ENELís investment and determine whether it comprises a state aid component. (1) Commission communication to the Member States ü Application of Articles 92 and 93 of the EEC Treaty and of Article 5 of Commission Directive 80/0723/CEE to public undertakings in the manufacturing sector: OJ C 307, 13. 11. 1993. (2000/C 170 E/071) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1651/99 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission (22 September 1999) Subject: Discrimination in connection with pigeon racing in the border regions of Belgium and the Netherlands For the past fifty years Belgian pigeon-fanciers have been unable to take part in pigeon races across the border. Pigeon-keepers from the Netherlands are not allowed to participate in races in Belgium, and vice- versa. People living in border regions in the Netherlands who wish to race homing pigeons in Belgium, and their counterparts in Belgium, are very unhappy with this situation. The question arises of whether the rules concerned contravene Article 59 of the Treaty. As pigeon racing is not recognised as a sport by the International Olympic Committee, the rules would not be regarded as entailing discrimination against sportsmen and -women. For those who take part in the popular sport of pigeon racing, such a situation is fundamentally unacceptable. There is also an economic aspect to the holding of pigeon races. A registration fee has to be paid in connection with racing homing pigeons. In my view, therefore, objections to the rules in question are justified, as the ban on participation by Dutch people in races held in Belgium is discriminatory within the meaning of Article 59. The ban is, after all, not imposed on grounds of public order, public safety or public health. Article 59 does not apply only to rules laid down by governments, but to all rules governing the provision of services. Does the Commission take the view that such a ban therefore contravenes Article 59 and should be lifted? I consider discrimination of anachronistic at a time when European integration is being stepped up. this kind affecting a popular sport in border regions as completely Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (4 November 1999) According to the information available to the Commission, pigeon races are organised by the relevant associations, and the criterion for membership of a pigeon-fancier association in an area of Belgium or the Netherlands is the place of residence. If there were an economic aspect to this sport, it could come under the provisions of Article 49 of the EC Treaty (formerly Article 59). However, the restriction of access to competitions on the basis of residence does not appear to be incompatible with Article 49 of the EC Treaty. In fact, it has been brought to the attention of the Commission that the residence criterion for membership of a pigeon-fancier association is intended to take into account the distances to be covered. For the same reason, it appears that even within one of these two Member States pigeon fanciers may join only the association covering their geographical area. C 170 E/64 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 6. 2000 In accordance with the established case-law of the Court of Justice (1), the principles of the EC Treaty do not preclude rules established on non-economic grounds which relate to the specific nature of the sporting activity in question. The organisation of pigeon races with relation to the specific nature of the activity does not therefore appear to be incompatible with the provisions of Article 49 of the EC Treaty. (1) Cf. the Bosman judgment of 15 December 1995 (C-415/93). (2000/C 170 E/072) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1652/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission Subject: Pollution of the waters in regional canal 66í (22 September 1999) Regional canal 66í crosses the prefectures of Imathia and Pella, taking in the waters of small local rivers before flowing into the Aliakmon and downstream into the Thermaic Gulf. Industrial waste is unlawfully discharged into canal 66í throughout the region. Samples and measurements taken at various points along the canal show that it is impossible for any form of life to exist in it, particularly during the summer months. Having regard to: ü the fact that some industrial plants in the region are operating without biological waste treatment facilities, while others have such facilities but do not use or underuse them, thereby disposing of industrial waste in breach of Community legislation, ü the petitions submitted by the mayors of Irinoupoli ü Ap. Pavlos and Anthemia and the complaints and strong protests over the last ten years from the inhabitants of the villages in the vicinity of the canal and from local environment organisations, ü the damage to the environment and public health (poisoning, stench, dead fish washed up through lack of oxygen), ü the infringement of Community directives concerning waste, protection of ground water, the quality of drinking water and prevention of marine pollution. Will the Commission say: 1. whether it will ask the Greek authorities to guarantee a permanent halt to sewage pollution of canal 66í, 2. whether, if requested, it will finance a management plan in the area concerned in order to restore the severely disrupted ecological balance along the entire length of the canal bed, and 3. what measures it will take, should it identify breaches of Community environment legislation, to enforce correct implementation of its provisions? Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (27 October 1999) The Commission had not been informed of the pollution of the water in regional canal 66í and would like to thank the honourable Member for the information received. The Commission will ask the Greek authorities for information on the operation of the existing treatment works, on the collection system for