WRITTEN QUESTION E-2297/01 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Recognition of homeopathy in Greece.
Date: 2001-07-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, alternative medicine, approximation of laws, equal treatment, free movement of workers, recognition of vocational training qualifications, right of establishment

C 40 E/234

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(21 September 2001)

The Commission(cid:146)s purpose in setting up the Enterprise Policy Group within the Directorate-General for
Enterprise is to make enterprise policy more transparent and effective and assign it a greater role in coping
with the challenges of the knowledge-based economy through consultation, deliberation and discussion
with high level experts from the business world and representatives of the Member States. The Enterprise
Policy Group was therefore set up in the form of two representative bodies: the first is made up of
representatives from the Member States, the second (the (cid:145)Professional Chamber(cid:146)) is composed of members
appointed by the Commission. It began its activities on 11 June 2001.

The 35 members of the Professional Chamber were chosen following an open selection procedure (1),
during which the Commission also took proposals from professional associations or Member States into
account. The Commission received 453 applications of a very high or high level. In total the applications
for the 35 posts were supported by 800 international or national associations. Priority was given to the
equal treatment of all applications, by conducting a thorough and detailed analysis to examine each
application in accordance with objective criteria which looked first and foremost at the personal qualities
and profiles of the applicant, and took into account extensive sectoral and geographical coverage. Germany
is up alongside France, Italy and the United Kingdom with four representatives on this body. In order to
represent the broadest possible spectrum of the economy, the representatives were chosen from small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), large enterprises and the ranks of the self-employed, as well as from
various industrial and services sectors.

The Enterprise Policy Group was set up as part of the drive to rationalise and combine the work carried
out by the Commission on best practice through coordination with the Member States. Working parties
can be set up on a contractual basis to tackle specific topics. The Commission can invite experts or
observers to take part in the activities of the working party, its representative bodies or sub-groups. There
are no plans to reinstate the former Directorate-General DG XXIII Committee on Commerce and
Distribution, as its work is now covered by the Enterprise Policy Group.

(1) OJ C 326, 17.11.2000.

(2002/C 40 E/254)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2297/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Recognition of homeopathy in Greece

(31 July 2001)

The Greek Association of Homeopathic Medicine is protesting at the fact that doctors specialised in
homeopathic medicine are not officially recognised in Greece so that they face professional problems not
encountered by their colleagues in other countries.

In its Resolution R4-0075/1997 (1) of 29 May 1997 the European Parliament called on the Commission to
initiate a procedure for recognising the various branches of non-conventional medicine, while the Council
of Europe in its resolution of 11 June 1999 supported a common European approach to non-conventional
medicine.

Given that homeopathic medicine is recognised in many Member States as a sub-specialisation of general
medicine, how does the Commission intend to ensure terms of equality for doctors practising this
speciality, recognition of their professional qualifications and freedom of movement and freedom to pursue
this speciality for practitioners in a Member State other than their own?

(1) OJ C 182, 16.6.1997, p. 15.

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/235

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 September 2001)

In the absence of harmonisation of the homeopathic profession at Community level, each Member State is
free to regulate the conduct of this activity on its territory. The Greek authorities are thus entitled not to
recognise this discipline in Greece.

With regard to the possibility of Greek homeopaths practising their profession in another Member State,
the Commission would like to point out that the Court of Justice concluded in its judgment on the
Bouchoucha case delivered on 3 October 1990 (Case C-61/89) that (cid:145)in the absence of harmonization at
Community level regarding activities which fall solely within the scope of the practice of medicine,
Article 52 of the EEC Treaty does not preclude a Member State from restricting an activity ancillary to
medicine (cid:133) exclusively to persons holding the qualification of doctor of medicine.(cid:146)

As a result, if persons qualified as homeopaths in Greece have not been trained as doctors of medicine
they will not be entitled to practise as homeopaths in Member States where this activity is reserved for
doctors of medicine. Conversely, they should, in principle, be able to freely carry out this activity if their
qualification as a doctor of medicine is recognised by the authorities of the Member State in which they
seek to practise this profession.

Finally, with regard to the possibility of harmonising the conditions for practising the profession of
homeopath at a European level, the Commission would stress that it does not take steps to draft a specific
Directive unless three conditions have been met: a high level of consensus among the representative
professional associations, support from a large majority of Member State authorities and certainty that
such an initiative will significantly add value to the existing system of recognition.
In the present
circumstances, none of these three conditions has been met. It should also be emphasised that unanimity
within the Council would also be required before a text can come into force at European level.

(2002/C 40 E/255)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2309/01

by Massimo Carraro (PSE) to the Commission

(20 July 2001)

Subject: Second Forest-Based Industries (FBI) Forum

The second Forest-Based Industries Forum was held in Stockholm on 21 June 2001. Given the importance
of this sector to the economy of many Member States, why did the Commission fail to provide Members
of the European Parliament with adequate information on this event?

In view of this lack of information, can the Commission say what emphasis the Forum gave to the
furniture industry, which in terms of production represents 60 % of the total timber/furniture macrosector
in Europe (Eurostat figure for 1999)?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 2001)

While the Commission has always been very pleased to mention such events on the web-site of the
Enterprise Directorate General, dissemination of information about the Forum of the Community Forest-
based and Related Industries (F-BRI) is essentially a matter for the industries concerned. In practice industry
is increasingly taking over the role of organising and funding the Forum. Accordingly, in the case of the
Stockholm Forum in June 2001, a steering group was formed from amongst the Community-level
federations concerned (cid:129) including the European furniture industry federation (UEA) in order to oversee its
planning and execution. It is understood that the group, which met several times prior to the Forum,
decided on the themes to be covered at the Forum and the final invitation list.