Brussels, 03/11/2000 (Agence Europe) - The Sports Ministers of the 15 European Union countries will meet on Monday, 6 November, in Paris, with Marie-George Buffet, French Minister and Council President, in the Chair. According to the positions expressed by Mrs Buffet at the European Sports Forum (held late last week in Lille), she seems determined to secure a clear definition of the specific nature of sports, pinpointing what just what this means and its implications. The Council Presidency is said to have the objective of approval of a declaration on this subject at the Nice Summit setting out certain major principles that would then make it possible to clarify the situation in relation to Treaty provisions (in particular, competition rules and rules on the free movement of workers).
The principle of the uniqueness of sports has been accepted and is no longer being debated. The European Commissioner for Culture and Sports, Mrs Reding, stated in Lille: "As the Court of Justice has recognised on several occasions, sports needs a certain degree of autonomy to establish its own rules and organisation structures; actions by public authorities must take this into account." The problem is knowing whether the attitude of European Commission services actually conforms to this position, which is not always the case, in the view of sports authorities, certain Member States and the Council Presidency. Thus the need to clarify the impact and repercussions of the specific nature of sports.
The working group on the uniqueness of sports at the Lille Forum reached the following conclusions:
- the participants (political and sports officials from EU countries and applicant states) emphasised the social role of sport and its values, noting that sport is not an activity like any other. It is admittedly also an economic activity; normal laws must apply to it when sport corresponds to a normal economic activity. There is no justification of special treatment for sports organisations when it comes to economic and financial regulations;
- nevertheless, strictly sporting rules are a matter for sports organisations themselves; as there is no economic aim, such rules should not be subject to competition law. Participants noted that sport is basically a matter for those who practise it and who organise activities within sports federations;
- the European Commission, in the report on sport submitted to the Helsinki Summit, recognised for the first time that sport is not a purely economic matter; but this is one step in a process that is not over. It is now time to define this uniqueness in more precise terms in order to provide sports organisations with legal certainty. There is a need for a precise definition of what constitutes the uniqueness of sport and the consequences of this uniqueness, including recognition of the autonomy of sport for all rules of a non-economic nature;
- participants praised the efforts of the French Council Presidency to prepare a declaration on the uniqueness of sport and voiced support for its efforts to strengthen the status of sport at Community level. The adoption of a declaration on this subject at the Nice Summit should represent another step forward in the process of defining the role sport should have in Community policies.
At Monday's meeting, Ministers will have a draft declaration for submission to the Nice Summit -
Two controversial aspects
For Monday's informal meeting in Paris, the Sports Ministers of the fifteen Member States will already have a draft declaration expected to be submitted in December, in Nice, to the Heads of State and Government, a draft prepared by the working group set in place at the Lisbon Summit last May. According to available information, the draft has 7 points: a reminder of the social importance of sport, which must be accessible to all; recognition of the central role of sports federations; the will to preserve clubs' training capacity; a call for mobilisation for better protection of young sportsmen in training; the means for guaranteeing the fairness of competitions (the danger of multi-ownership of clubs, control of management); solidarity mechanisms related to the sale of broadcasting rights; adaptation of employment contracts to the specific nature of sport.
On most of these points, a large measure of agreement exists among the Fifteen. But there are two controversial items:
a) the central role of sports federations. Most Member States agree on the necessity of defending and protecting this role given the rise in power of competing organisations, which have the tendency or ambition of organising national or European events themselves. …/…
Some Member States, however, are of the view that competition in this area must be open. The divergence is quite an important one;
b) the adaptation of contracts to the uniqueness of sport. The European Commission's competition services give the impression they do not want to recognise that sports contracts are specific in nature (differences of view over rules on the transfer of football players concern this point to a large extent). It seems obvious that they will be less intransigent if the Heads of Government include this aspect among the elements constituting the specific nature of sport.
Mrs Reding's concerns about EU role in the world anti-doping agency - Broad consensus
on guidelines for protecting young sportsmen
Two other items are on the agenda for the Paris meeting. The first concerns efforts to combat doping. The Lille Forum approved conclusions setting the objective of "zero doping" for the EU; the Athens Olympics (2004) must be the "cleanest" in history. A list of priorities has been drawn up, essentially covering: education programmes to alert young people to the dangers of doping; cooperation with the pharmaceutical industry; examination of the causes of doping; the harmonisation of anti-doping measures; the updating of lists of banned substances; priority to prevention rather than repression.
There is broad consensus on these measures. Mrs Reding's concerns as the Commissioner with responsibility for sport concern instead the EU's role in the world anti-doping agency. The EU's initiatives under Mrs Reding's impetus underpin creation of this agency, and yet Europe could be marginalised therein. Mr Christophe Forax, Mrs Reding's spokesman, noted that Europe could lose all influence in the agency to the North American continent: no working group is chaired by an EU state and the Fifteen have not come to any agreement to propose a European city as headquarters of the agency. Mrs Reding will doubtless stress to Ministers the necessity of the EU's participation in its own right in the agency from 2002 (end of the current transition period). But the Fifteen still have not come to unanimous agreement on this subject.
Regarding young people in training, the Lille Forum approved conclusions noting both the virtues and the dangers of the practice of sports by young people. Excessive training or competition, the race for results at all costs, disregarding the ethical value of sports and so on can be harmful to the health of young people and their mental stability. Young people must be protected against these dangers. The dangerous practices mentioned are not only doping or excess, but also professional transfers of very young sportsmen and the illegal arrival of young sportsmen from the third world, who risk a clandestine situation, failure and exclusion. Member State authorities are invited to take measures in these different areas. The responsibilities are essentially national, but the EU can also play a key role. The Council Presidency and Commission hope that Monday's debate by Ministers will result in the outlines of a work programme that includes guidelines and principles, but also operational measures such as the use of the 1994 directive on the protection of young people at the workplace, through the inclusion of doping in the list of dangerous products annexed to the directive.