14 Amendments of Maria BERGER
Amendment 3 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas most European citizens, especially young people aged from 10 to 2018, use a mobile phone, an object serving a practical purpose and a fashion accessory, but there are continuing uncertainties about the possible health risks,
Amendment 15 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Renews its call to the Council in its above-mentioned resolution of 4 September 2008 to update its Recommendation 1999/519/EC by laying down stricter exposure limits for all devices emitting electromagnetic waves in the frequency range between 0.1 MHz and 300 GHz, taking into account the best available techniques on the market (BATurges the Commission to review the scientific basis and adequacy of the EMF limits as in Recommendation 1999/519/EC and report to the Parliament. The review should be undertaken by its independent scientific committee, the Scientific Committee for Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR);
Amendment 27 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that, given the increasing numbers of legal actions and, for that matter, measures by public authorities having the effect of a moratoriumfaced with the proliferation of legal action taken and even moratoriums imposed by public authorities, it is in the general interest to encouragefavour solutions based on negotiations involvingdepending on dialogue between industryial stakeholders, public authorities, and local residents’ associations to determine the criteria for settregarding up new GSMwireless antennas or high- voltage power lines, and to ensure at least that schools, crèches, rest homes, and health care institutions are kept clear, within a reasonable distance, of facilities of this type;
Amendment 30 #
2008/0221(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 - point 1
Article 4 - point 1
(1) suppliers shall ensure that C1 and C2 tyres, which are delivered to distributors ordistributors, consumer protection organisations and end-users, are equipped with a sticker on the tyrinformed in advance about the tread displaying a label indicatinglevant parameters for C1 and C2 tyres, namely the fuel efficiency class as set out in Annex I, Part A and the external rolling noise measured value as set out in Annex I, Part C; C1 tyre labels shall also indicate the wet grip class as set out in Annex I, Part B;
Amendment 31 #
2008/0221(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 - point 1
Article 5 - point 1
(1) distributors shall ensure that tyres, at the point of sale, bear the stickerconsumers receive in good time, at the point of sale, information on tyre parameters relevant to safety and environmental protection provided by suppliers in accordance with Article 4(1) in a clearly visible position;
Amendment 33 #
2008/0221(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 - point 3
Article 5 - point 3
Amendment 104 #
2008/0152(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II– paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex II– paragraph 1 a (new)
Annual fee Member States may require each applicant who has been awarded an Ecolabel to pay an annual fee for the use of the label to the competent body which has awarded the label. The period covered by the fee should begin on the date of the award of the Ecolabel to the applicant. The annual fee may be calculated to ensure that the costs of running the label programme are fully covered, having taken into account both the application fee and the verification fees.
Amendment 111 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) It is appropriate to require that also patients who go for healthcare to another Member State in other circumstances than those envisaged for coordination of social security schemes established by the Regulation (EC) No. 1408/71 should be able to benefit from the principles of free movement of services in accordance with the Treaty and the provisions of this Directive. Patients should be guaranteed assumption of the costs of that healthcare at least at the level provided for the same or similar healthcare had they been provided in the Member State of affiliation. This fully respects responsibility of the Member States to determine the extent of the sickness cover available to their citizens and prevents any significant effect on the financing of the national healthcare systems. Member States may neverthelessshall provide in their national legislation for reimbursement of the costs of the treatment at the tariffs in force in the Member State of treatment if t. This is more beneficial for the patient. This may be the case in particular for any treatment provided through European reference networks as mentioned in Article 15 of this Directive.
Amendment 121 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The patient should, in any event, not derive a financial advantage from the healthcare provided in another Member State and the assumption of costs should be therefore limited only to actual costs of healthcare received. However, the Member States should also assume other healthcare-related costs, such as for therapeutic treatment;
Amendment 157 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) In any event, if a Member State decided to establish a system of prior authorisation for assumption of costs of hospital or specialised care provided in another Member States in accordance with the provision of this Directive, the costs of such care provided in another Member State should also be reimbursed by the Member State of affiliation up to the level of costs that would have been assumed had the same or similar healthcare been provided in the Member State of affiliation, without exceeding the actual costs of healthcare received. However, when the conditions set out in Article 22(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 are fulfilled the authorisation should be granted and the benefits provided in accordance with that Regulation. This applies in particular in instances where the authorisation is granted after an administrative or judicial review of the request and that the person concerned has received the treatment in another Member State. In that case Articles 6, 7, 8 and 9 of this Directive shall not apply. This is in line with the case law of the Court of Justice which has specified that patients who received a refusal of authorisation subsequently held to be unfounded, are entitled to have the cost of the treatment obtained in another Member State reimbursed in full according to the provisions of the legislation in the Member State of treatment.
Amendment 386 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Subject to the provisions of this Directive, in particular Articles 7, 8 and 9, the Member State of affiliation shall ensure that insured persons travelling to another Member State with the purpose of receiving healthcare there or seeking to receive healthcare provided in another Member State, will not be prevented from receiving healthcare provided in another Member State where the treatment in question is among the benefits provided for by the legislation of the Member State of affiliation to which the insured person is entitled. The Member State of affiliation shall reimburse the actual costs to the insured person, which would have been paid for by its statutory social security system had the same or similar healthcare been provided in its territory of the healthcare received in the Member State of treatment. Where several methods are available for the treatment of a specific disease or injury, the patient shall have a right to reimbursement for all treatment methods which have been sufficiently tested and recognised in international medical science, even if they are not available in the Member State of affiliation. In any event, it is for the Member State of affiliation to determine the healthcare that is paid for regardless of where it is provided.
Amendment 395 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The costs of healthcare provided in another Member State shall be reimbursed in full by the Member State of affiliation in accordance with the provisions of this Directive up to the level of costs that would have been assumed had the same or similar healthcare been provided in the Member State of affiliation, without exceeding the actual costs of healthcare received. The Member States shall also assume other healthcare-related costs, such as for therapeutic treatment.
Amendment 420 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall have a mechanism for calculation of costs that are to be reimbursed to the insured person by the statutory social security system for healthcare provided in another Member State. This mechanism shall be based on objective, non-discriminatory criteria known in advance and the costs reimbursed according to this mechanism shall be not less than what would have been assumed had the same or similar healthcare been provided in the territory of the Member State of affiliation.
Amendment 541 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that any administrative decisions regarding the use of healthcare in another Member State, in particular refusal of the prior authorisation referred to in Article 8(3), are subject to administrative review and also capable of being challenged in judicial proceedings, which include provision for interim measures.