WRITTEN QUESTION E-2224/00 by Béatrice Patrie (PSE) to the Commission. Recognition of the denturologist's (or denturist's) profession.
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: paramedical profession, recognition of vocational training qualifications

6.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 72 E/187

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

The Auto-Oil II programme is now finished. The reports are being finalised, and the Commission intends
to adopt in September 2000 a communication presenting the outcome of the programme.

Auto-Oil II was characterised by the involvement of a wide range of parties. Automobile manufacturers
were represented in particular by the European association ACEA. The Japanese car manufacturers were
not directly involved, and did not express a pressing desire to be involved. They should nevertheless be
involved in future similar programmes, not least in view of their increased presence as vehicle manufac-
turers in Europe.

An important initiative was recently launched in the context of climate change: the European climate
change programme (ECCP). This follows up the Commission communication on policies and measures to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions (1). It will be responsible for developing a series of options in the field of
energy, transport and industry. A specific ECCP transport working group has been established. Again
Japanese car manufacturers did not show any wish to participate directly in the initiative. Japanese car
manufactures have, however, along with their European and Korean counterparts, committed themselves
to quantitative targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from cars, and are involved in the monitoring of
these commitments and all related issues. Furthermore, Japanese manufacturers are fully involved in the
motor vehicle working group and motor vehicle emissions group which advise the Commission on
vehicle-related regulatory questions.

(1) COM(2000) 88 final.

(2001/C 72 E/241)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2224/00

by BØatrice Patrie (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Recognition of the denturologist(cid:146)s (or denturist(cid:146)s) profession

Denturology, a medical profession which is recognised in several European countries (Denmark, Finland,
the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain), consists in producing and fitting full or partial removable dentures
and providing the full range of related dental services. In countries where it is recognised, denturology is a
fully-fledged profession, distinct from dental surgery and stomatology.

The denturologist(cid:146)s (or denturist(cid:146)s) profession is not recognised in France. This has given rise to disparities
not only on the dental services market but also in terms of recognition of occupations and equivalence of
qualifications at European level.

Is the Commission aware of such disparities in the European Union?

Does it intend to ensure that all Member States recognise the denturologist(cid:146)s profession and the relevant
qualifications?

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

The Commission is aware that denturology is not a recognised profession in all the Member States. The
fact that this situation may lead to certain disparities on the dental services market and in terms of
recognition of qualifications does not affect the fact that giving official status to that profession and
drawing up regulations governing it are matters
for which the Member States are competent.
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its reply to Written Question E-2564/99 by
Mr B. Staes (1), on the same profession.

C 72 E/188

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.3.2001

As regards possible Community-level harmonisation of the profession through specific directives coordi-
nating training and mutual recognition of diplomas, the Commission, in accordance with the approach set
out in the directives on a general system for the recognition of diplomas (89/48/EEC (2) and 92/51/EEC (3)),
will not consider proposing harmonisation measures that are specific to a given profession unless the
circumstances are entirely exceptional and only if the following conditions are met: first, the proposal for a
directive in question would need to substantially improve the scope for free movement by the practitioners
concerned, Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC having proved inadequate to ensure recognition of
diplomas and freedom of establishment for these persons, and second, the underlying principle and the
main components of the proposed harmonisation measures would have to win an adequate consensus
among those working in this field in all the Member States and between the Member States themselves.

(1) OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000.
(2) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.
(3) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.

(2001/C 72 E/242)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2242/00

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) and Maria Martens (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Member States(cid:146) legislation on the loan of museum exhibits

(5 July 2000)

Is the Commission aware that it is particularly difficult for museums in some Member States to organise
joint exhibitions because Member States have very restrictive legislation on the loan of exhibits?

For example, the Friesian Museum in Leeuwarden needed two years ago to organise its (cid:145)Koningin van de
Noordzee(cid:146) (Queen of the North Sea) exhibition because of this restrictive legislation.

Is the Commission prepared to investigate whether the legislation in question could be harmonised in
order to facilitate the loan of exhibits and the holding of joint exhibitions within the Union?

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(8 September 2000)

Indeed,

The Commission would like to point out to the honourable Member that transfers of works of art between
museums located in the Member States may be hampered by the application of national laws designed to
protect national treasures.
in accordance with Article 30 (ex Article 36) of the EC Treaty,
prohibitions or restrictions on imports, exports or goods in transit are allowed if justified on grounds of
the protection of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value, provided such
measures are proportionate to the stated objective. The Commission would emphasise that since 1 January
1993 these measures cannot involve any check at the internal borders of the Community. It is for this
reason that the Community adopted Council Regulation (EEC) No 3911/92 of 9 December 1992 on the
export of cultural goods (1) and Council Directive 93/7/EEC of 15 March 1993 on the return of cultural
objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State (2).

The Commission informs the honourable Member that,
in connection with the establishment and
operation of the internal market, it is ready to accord special attention to the difficulties of transfers
between museums, although it has not yet begun to consider possible harmonisation of laws relating to
loans of works between museums.

The Commission would also like to point out that the organisation of joint exhibitions by museums
can be supported by Community actions in the cultural field. However, in accordance with Article 151
(ex Article 128) of the EC Treaty, such actions cannot include any harmonisation of the laws and
regulations of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 395, 31.12.1992.
(2) OJ L 74, 27.3.1993.