WRITTEN QUESTION P-1545/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Amendments to the Netherlands Exceptional Medical Expenses Act and freedom of movement of persons in the EU.
Date: 2000-05-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, application of EU law, free movement of persons, health insurance

6.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 72 E/73

according to the orientations set by the special European Council
growth potential of our economies.

in Lisbon, thus increasing the

In this context, we share a common concern about the present level of the euro which does not reflect
the strong economic fundamentals of the euro area.

(1) OJ L 217, 17.08.1999, p. 34.

(2001/C 72 E/086)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1545/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 May 2000)

Subject: Amendments to the Netherlands Exceptional Medical Expenses Act and freedom of movement of

persons in the EU

The answer to Written Question P-0706/00 (1) does not indicate clearly whether the amendment to the
Netherlands Exceptional Medical Expenses Act (AWBZ) is a violation of the free movement of persons
within the Union. In the Netherlands everyone is covered by the provisions of the AWBZ. However, with
effect from 1 January 29000 Netherlands nationals living in other EU Member States are no longer
covered by the provisions of the AWBZ.

Does the decision by the Netherlands government to exclude Netherlands nationals resident overseas from
the provisions of the AWBZ, with effect from 1 January, violate the basic European principle of the free
movement of persons within the EU? If so, what action will the Commission take to ensured that the
AWBZ is brought back in line with the basic European principle of the free movement of persons within
the EU? If not, what are the Commission(cid:146)s (legal) arguments for stating that the Netherlands AWBZ is fully
in accord with the basic European principle of the free movement of persons within the EU?

(1) OJ C 303 E, 24.10.2000, p. 207.

Answer given by Ms Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2000)

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that the right of residence in another
Member State of Netherlands nationals who reside or wish to reside there without working (pensioners,
students or other non-active persons), which, pursuant to Council Directive 90/364/EEC of 28 June 1990
on the right of residence (1), Council Directive 90/365/EEC of 28 June 1990 on the right of residence for
employees and self-employed persons who have ceased their occupational activity (1) and Council Directive
93/96/EEC of 29 October 1993 on the right of residence for students (2), is contingent on their having
health insurance covering all the risks in the Member State,
is not called into question because the
abolition planned by the Netherlands legislation concerns exceptional medical expenses, which are not
covered in several Member States. Furthermore, as these persons are exempt from the payment of
contributions for exceptional medical expenses, they may, if they so desire, take out additional insurance
(of a private or other kind) in the Member State in order to cover these exceptional medical expenses, by
paying as insurance premiums the contributions that were previously paid to the Netherlands social
It follows that the amendment to the Netherlands legislation in question does not
security scheme.
constitute a violation of the freedom of movement of non-active Netherlands nationals.

(1) OJ L 180, 13.7.1990.
(2) OJ L 317, 18.12.1993.