10 Amendments of Othmar KARAS related to 2016/0404(COD)
Amendment 63 #
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. 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. While professional regulation of healthcare services, consisting of activities intended to assess, maintain or restore the state of health of patients, remains, according to Article 59 of Directive 2005/36/EC, subject to compliance with the proportionality principle, it should be excluded from the scope of this Directive. This exception should also cover commercial health professions (opticians- optometrists including those specialising in contact lenses, hearing aid technicians, orthopaedic technicians, orthopaedic shoe makers and dental technicians).
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The burden of proof of justification and proportionality lies on the Member States. The reasons for regulation invoked by a Member State by way of justification should thus be accompanied by an analysis of the appropriateness and proportionality of the measure adopted by that Member State and by specific evidence substantiating its arguments. Although a Member State does not necessarily have to be able to produce a specific study or a specific form of evidence or materials establishing the proportionality of such measure prior to its adoption, it should carry out a review capable of demonstrating that there is a genuine need to achieve public-interest objectives in view of the specific circumstances of that Member State.
Amendment 154 #
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 beforewhen 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. The Directive shall be without prejudice, however, to the prerogative of Member States as to whether and how they regulate professions, subject to the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality, and to their margin of appreciation in that regard. The adoption by a Member State of protective measures more extensive than those of other Member States shall not necessarily be disproportionate.
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
This Directive shall not apply to healthcare services consisting of activities intended to assess, maintain or restore the state of health of patients whether or not they are provided via healthcare facilities. This shall also include commercial health professions (opticians-optometrists including those specialising in contact lenses, hearing aid technicians, orthopaedic technicians, orthopaedic shoe makers and dental technicians).
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Where specific arrangrequirements concerning the regulation of a given profession are established in a separate Union act, the corresponding provisions of this Directive shall not apply. Nor shall the provisions of the Directive apply in respect of Member States’ provisions on the organisation or content of professional education and training or on delegating the organisation and supervision of such education and training to professional organisations.
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The reasons for considering that a provision is justified, necessarynon-discriminatory, justified and proportionate shall be substantiated by qualitative and, wherever possible, quantitative evidence, taking into account the reasonable margin of appreciation allowed to Member States. An absence of quantitative evidence shall not be grounds for concluding that a provision is disproportionate.
Amendment 203 #
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 279 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point k
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point k
Amendment 287 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of paragraph 2(j), where the measures are justified only 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 relevant competent authoritiMember States shall assess in particular whether the objective can be attained by protected professional title without reserving activiless restrictive means than reserving activities. Compulsory chamber membership shall also be an appropriate requirement in respect of professions covered by this Directive where the State has made professional organisations responsible for safeguarding the relevant public-interest objectives.
Amendment 301 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point d