WRITTEN QUESTION E-1729/99 by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Compulsory health insurance for German students having their primary residence in Germany and studying in France.
Date: 1999-09-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, Germany, application of EU law, health insurance, student, student mobility

18.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 203 E/33

Besides, a research project on analysis of the dioxin risk is currently being negotiated in the context of the
programme (cid:145)Quality of life and management of living resources(cid:146) under the Fifth R and D Framework
Programme; the aim is to define better methodologies for evaluating the health effects of dioxins.

It is quite possible that in implementing harmonised limits at Community level the Commission may adopt
different levels than those applied in the case of the Belgian crisis, if this is in the interest of public health
protection. This will be done taking into account all the available scientific data.

(1) OJ L 175, 10.7.1999.
(2) OJ L 209, 7.8.1999.

(2000/C 203 E/040)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1729/99

by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 September 1999)

Subject: Compulsory health insurance for German students having their primary residence in Germany and

studying in France

Is the Commission aware that, under Section 5(1)(9) of Volume V of Germany(cid:146)s Social Security Code,
students at foreign universities are not included in the category of persons covered by the compulsory
sickness insurance scheme for students (KVdS) and that, as a result, students at foreign universities are
required to pay a higher voluntary sickness insurance contribution and are hence placed at a disadvantage?
Is this provision compatible with EU law?

In the case before me, a German student from Freiburg has enrolled with a technical university in Belfort,
France, some 70 km away. He still has his residence in Germany and commutes to Belfort. The sickness
insurance fund has invoked the above provision in the Social Security Code to deny him access to the
cheaper sickness insurance scheme for students. Instead, he must take out voluntary insurance (higher
contributions) (cid:129) even although he is domiciled and ordinarily resident in the territory covered by the
Social Security Code (Federal Republic of Germany) (cid:129) on the grounds that he is enrolled with a foreign
university. Under the provisions of
the Social Security Code, matriculation at a foreign university
automatically means that membership of the cheaper sickness insurance scheme for students is denied.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 1999)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that Council Regulation (EC) No 307/1999 of
8 February 1999 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to
employed persons,
their families moving within the
Community and Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation
(EEC) No 1408/71 with a view to extending them to cover students (1), which extended the personal scope
of Regulation (EEC No 1408/71 as updated and amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of
2 December 1996 (2) to include students, entered into force on 1 May 1999.

to self-employed persons and to members of

Nevertheless, the specific case of German legislation not affiliating students at non-German universities
who reside in Germany to the compulsory German sickness insurance scheme for students does not fall
under the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71. As the Regulation does not harmonise the social
security systems of Member States, Member States are free to determine the details of their own social
security systems, e.g. the right or duty to be insured with a social security scheme. The determination of
conditions to be fulfilled in order to be affiliated to a certain social security system therefore falls within
the sole competence of Member States.

C 203 E/34

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2000

However, the Court of justice has held that Member States must nevertheless comply with Community law
when exercising that power (3).

As the German provision seems to constitute an obstacle to the freedom of movement of people,
specifically of students, the Commission will therefore examine the question in more detail.

The Commission is also aware of the situation of students who have taken out private insurance to fulfil
the conditions regarding sickness insurance so as to obtain a residence permit and who are hence not
covered by the above Regulation. A draft recommendation requesting Member States to make efforts to
eliminate obstacles in this particular area is under preparation.

(1) OJ L 38, 12.2.1999.
(2) OJ L 28, 30.1.1997.
(3)

See case C-18/95 Terhoeve v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Particulieren/Ondernemingen Buitenland [1999]
ECR I-345, paragraph 34.

(2000/C 203 E/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1730/99

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(29 September 1999)

Subject: Export of cattle to third countries

How many live cattle were exported from the EU to third countries in 1998, and how much was paid out
in export refunds for live cattle exports to third countries in the period 16 October 1997 to 15 October
1998?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 1999)

In 1998 the Community exported 266 256 live cattle to third countries. For the budget year 1998,
16 October 1997 to 15 October 1998, € 93,5 million was granted in export subsidies for live cattle.

(2000/C 203 E/042)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1733/99

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 September 1999)

Subject: Cost of missions to Strasbourg

About once a month, the institutional and administrative entity known as the European Parliament, plus
significant contingents from the Council, the Commission and the other bodies comprising the European
Union, transfers en masse for four to five days from Brussels to Strasbourg or, to put it another way,
transfers for around 15 days from Strasbourg to Brussels.

What are the figures and costs involved in this operation?

How many people, apart from the 626 MEPs and their 1 000 or so assistants, commute between the two
cities?

Exactly how many people are on mission?

What is the cost of the missions by employees of the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission
and other internal and related bodies?

What is the overall expenditure on missions and the transfer operation as a whole (including means of
transport, external firms etc.)?