25 Amendments of Christel SCHALDEMOSE related to 2016/0404(COD)
Amendment 17 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The activities covered by this Directive should concern the regulated professions falling within the scope of Directive 2005/36/EC, without prejudice to recital 7a. This Directive should apply in addition to Directive 2005/36/EC and without prejudice to other provisions laid down in a separate Union act concerning access to, and the exercise of a given regulated profession.
Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) The right to determine the level of protection that Member States wish to provide to public health as well as the means and methods to reach that level lies solely with the Member States.This has been recognised by the Court of Justice as well as the Union legislators.Furthermore, they have also held that health and life of humans come before any other interest protected by the TFEU.Hence, health professions should be excluded from the scope of this Directive.That exclusion should cover professions embracing activities related to the provision of healthcare services.Furthermore, that exclusion would also cover pharmaceutical services and the prescription, dispensation and provision of medicinal products and medical devices to patients to assess, maintain or restore their state of health.
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive shall apply to requirements under the legal systems of the Member States restricting access to a regulated profession or its pursuit, or one of its modes of pursuit, including the use of professional titles and the professional activities allowed under such title, falling within the scope of Directive 2005/36/EC, without prejudice to paragraph 1a.
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The activities covered by this Directive should concern the regulated professions falling within the scope of Directive 2005/36/EC, without prejudice to Recital (7a). This Directive should apply in addition to Directive 2005/36/EC and without prejudice to other provisions laid down in a separate Union act concerning access to, and the exercise of a given regulated profession.
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. This Directive shall not apply to any requirements restricting access to, or the pursuit of regulated health professions in relation to the provision of healthcare services, including pharmaceutical services and the prescription, dispensation and provision of medicinal products and medical devices, whether or not they are provided via healthcare facilities, and regardless of the ways in which they are organised and financed at national level or whether they are public or private.
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) The right to determine the level of protection that Member States wish to provide to public health as well as the means and methods to reach that level lies solely with the Member States. This has been recognised by the European Court of Justice as well as the European Parliament and Council. Furthermore, both have also held that health and life of humans come before any other interest protected by the TFEU1a. Hence, the provisions of this Directive should exclude health professions from its scope. This exclusion should include professions embracing activities related to the provision of healthcare services. Furthermore, this exclusion would also cover pharmaceutical services and the prescription, dispensation and provision of medicinal products and medical devices, to patients to assess, maintain or restore their state of health. __________________ 1a Recital 22 of Directive 2011/62/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2011 amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as regards the prevention of the entry into the legal supply chain of falsified medicinal products; and judgement of the Court of 19 May 2009 in joint cases C-171/07 and C- 172/07 Apothekerkammer des Saarlandes and Others v Saarland (para. 19 and 31)
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 b (new)
Recital 7 b (new)
(7 b) This Directive is without prejudice to national education and training structures and to the competence of Member States to define the organisation and the content of their systems of education and professional training;
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Regulation of professions plays a key role in protecting public interest objectives and should, inter alia, contribute to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health and to environmental and consumer protection; effective professional regulation is furthermore of paramount importance in order to ensure high quality products and services;
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
(8 b) It is for the Member States to determine the level of protection which they wish to afford to the public interest objectives and the proportionate way in which that level is to be achieved. The fact that one Member State imposes less strict rules than another Member State does not mean that the latter Member State’s rules are disproportionate and therefore incompatible with EU law;
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Where the taking-up and pursuit of certain employed or self-employed activities are conditional on complying with certain provisions relating to specific professional qualifications, laid down directly or indirectly by the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that such provisions are justified by public interest objectives, such as those within the meaning of the Treaty, namely public policy, public security and public health or by overriding reasons of general interest, recognised as such in the case-law of the Court of Justice. It is important to ensure that public interest objectives are adequately identified in order to determine the intensity of the regulation. For example, in order to ensure a high level of protection of public health, Member States should enjoy a margin of discretion to decide on the degree of protection which they wish to afford to public health and on the way in which that protection is to be achieved. It is also necessary to clarify that among theIt is also useful to provide certain examples of overriding reasons of general interest, which have been recognised by the European Court of Justice, arewhose case-law may continue to evolve. Such examples include: preserving the financial equilibrium of the social security system; the protection of consumers, recipients of services and workers; ensuring safe, healthy and secure working conditions; the safeguarding of the proper administration of justice; fairness of trade transactions; combating fraud and, prevention of tax evasion and avoidance; road safety and effectiveness of fiscal supervision; transport safety; guaranteeing the quality of products and services; promotion of research and development; ensuring high standards of education; the protection of the environment and the urban environment; the health of animals; intellectual property; the safeguarding and conservation of the national historic and artistic heritage, social policy objectives , including the encouragement of employment and recruitment and the maintenance of employment, and cultural policy objectives. According to settled case-law, purely economic reasons, having essentially protectionist aims, as well as purely administrative reasons, such as carrying out controls or gathering statistics cannot constitute an overriding reason of general interest. Control measures should be considered justified if they are needed in order to ensure compliance with provisions justified by public interest objectives.
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) When assessing the proportionality of the provisions, Member States should consider the criteria which are relevant for the provisions being analysed. Where a Member State intends to regulate a profession or to amend existing rules, account should be taken, where relevant, of the nature of the risks related to the public interest objectives pursued, in particular the risks to service recipients, including consumers, to professionals or third parties, also where those risks are not certain or not fully apparent, taking into account the precautionary principle. It should also be borne in mind that, in the field of professional services, there is usually an asymmetry of information between consumers and professionals. Professionals display a high level of technical knowledge which consumers may not have and consumers therefore find it difficult to judge the quality of the services provided to them.
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Additionally, when making their assessments of non-discrimination, justification and proportionality Member States should also, where relevant, give full consideration to citizens' rights of access to justice, as guaranteed pursuant to Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Where a Member State regulates a profession, account should be taken, where relevant, of the fact that technological developments may reduce or increase the asymmetry of information between consumers and professionals. In view of the speed of technological change and scientific progress, up-dates in access requirements may be of particular importance for a number of professions. Where developments, including technological changes, carry a risk for the public interest objectives, it is for the Member States to provide for stricter regulation ensuring that professionals keep up with those developments.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The economic impact of the measure, including a cost-benefit analysis with particular regard to the degree of competition in the market and the quality of the service provided, as well as the impact on the right to work on the quality of the service provided and on the free movement of persons and services within the Union should be duly taken into account by the competent authorities. Based on this analysis, Member States should ascertain, in particular, whether the extent of the restriction of access to or pursuit of regulated professions within the Union is proportionate to the importance of the objectives pursued and the expected gains.and on the freedom to choose an occupation should be duly taken into account, where relevant, by the Member States;
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Member States should carry out a comparison between the national measure at issue and the alternative and less restrictive solutions that would allow the same objective to be attained but would impose fewer restrictions. Where the measures are justified by consumer protection and where the risks identified are limited to the relationship between the professional and the consumer without negatively affecting third parties, the objective could be attained by less restrictive means than reserving activities to professionals, such as protection of the professional title or enrolment on a professional register. Regulation by way of reserved activities should be used only in cases where the measures aim at preventing a risk of serious harm toonsider, where relevant, the possibility to use less restrictive solutions to achieve the same public interest objectives.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) The need to assess the effects of additional requirements combined with existing measures does not mean that the new requirements are disproportionate, since those can have a positive effect for the public interest objectives.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Directive lays down rules on a common framework for conducting proportionality assessments before introducing new, or amending existing, legislative, regulatory or administrative provisions restricting access to or pursuit of regulated professions, or amending existing ones, with a view to ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market. It does not affect Member States’ prerogative and margin of discretion to decide, in the absence of harmonisation at EU level, whether and how to regulate a profession while respecting the principles of non- discrimination, justification and proportionality.
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive shall apply to requirements under the legal systems of the Member States restricting access to a regulated profession or its pursuit, or one of its modes of pursuit, including the use of professional titles and the professional activities allowed under such title, falling within the scope of Directive 2005/36/EC, without prejudice to paragraph 2.
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. This Directive shall not apply to any requirements restricting access to, or the pursuit of regulated health professions in relation to the provision of healthcare services, including pharmaceutical services and the prescription, dispensation and provision of medicinal products and medical devices, whether or not they are provided via healthcare facilities, and regardless of the ways in which they are organised and financed at national level or whether they are public or private.
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the assessment of proportionality referred to in paragraph 1 is carried out in an objective and independent manner including through involvement of independent scrutiny bodies.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The relevant competent authoritiMember States shall consider in particular whether those provisions are objectively justified on the basis of public policy, public security or public health, or by overriding reasons in the public interest, such as, for example, preserving the financial equilibrium of the social security system, the protection of consumers, recipients of services and workers, ensuring safe, healthy and secure working conditions, the safeguarding of the proper administration of justice, fairness of trade transactions, combating fraud and, prevention of tax evasion and avoidance, road safety and effectiveness of fiscal supervision, transport safety, guaranteeing the quality of products and services, promotion of research and development, ensuring high standards of education, the protection of the environment and the urban environment, the health of animals, intellectual property, the safeguarding and conservation of the national historic and artistic heritage, social policy objectives, including the encouragement of employment and recruitment and the maintenance of employment, and cultural policy objectives.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Grounds of a purely economic nature having essentially protectionist aim or effects or purely administrative reasons shall not constitute overriding reasons in the public interest, justifying a restriction on access to or pursuit of regulated professions. Control measures shall be considered justified if they are needed in order to ensure compliance with provisions justified by public interest objectives.
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. When assessing the necessity and the proportionality of the provisions, the relevant competent authoritiMember States shall consider in particular, where relevant:
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall inform the Commission of the competentpublic authorities responsible for transmitting and receiving information for the purposes of applying paragraph 1.