WRITTEN QUESTION E-3618/01 by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission. Comparisons of prices of important medicines.
Date: 2002-01-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, comparative analysis, fixing of prices, health costs, medicinal product, price list

C 147 E/212

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

is not

As a general rule, the effect of Article 12 of the EC Treaty, making illegal any discrimination on grounds of
nationality,
in the Commission’s view to preclude entirely the processing of personal data
concerning nationality for purposes of credit agreement. From the data protection point of view there is
some room for nationality to be a relevant factor and therefore for its processing (together with other
many factors) to be adequate, relevant and not excessive within the meaning of Article 6.1.c) of Directive
95/46/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with
regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (1).

For example, a person’s nationality may be relevant to that person’s capacity to conclude a valid contract
in certain limited circumstances, and may also be relevant to questions of devolution of property on
marriage or death. In these limited circumstances, the possible incidence of foreign law is something that
creditors might need to consider as an additional risk for the credit operation and the processing of
nationality information could therefore be lawful.

However, taking into account the limited incidence that data about nationality may have, the Commission
takes the view that companies and institutions should make all possible efforts to avoid the processing of
this personal data of individuals, in particular because scoring by nationalities might conceal scoring on
the basis of race or origin, special categories of data for which the Directive’s rules are much stricter.

Finally, the Commission would recall that Directive 95/46/CE provides specific safeguards as regard
decisions based solely on the automatic processing of personal data, in Article 15 and Article 12 (a) third
indent.

(1) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.

(2002/C 147 E/223)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3618/01

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Comparisons of prices of important medicines

Prices of medicines are not transparent, and are difficult to compare.

Can the Commission provide a comparative overview of the price differences for:

1. 20 major medicines for cardiovascular diseases in the 15 Member States of the European Union?

2. 10 major medicines for diabetes in the 15 Member States of the European Union?

3. 10 major medicines for psychiatric diseases in the 15 Member States of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2002)

The Commission does not collect information on the prices of medicinal products. Some Member States
are in the process of developing databases of comparative international prices. In addition, the World
Health Organization has recently collected pricing data in 29 European countries for 25 innovative
medicines. The results are set out in the brochure ‘Policies on Pricing and Reimbursement of Medicines in
Europe ? Networking for Information Exchange among Policymakers, 16-17 November 2000. Annex:
Comparative Review of Drug Prices’.

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/213

Council Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 relating to the transparency of measures regulating
the prices of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of national health
insurance systems (1) requires there to be a certain transparency of national decisions on prices of
medicinal products and their reimbursement within the Community.

It is envisaged to proceed in 2002 with an evaluation of this Directive in order to investigate whether it
needs to be amended.

(1) OJ L 40, 11.2.1989.

(2002/C 147 E/224)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3627/01

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Measures to support crisis distillation in Sicily

(8 January 2002)

The wine-growing sector in Sicily is going through a serious crisis because of the problems facing
cooperative wine-growers’ associations and individual producers.

Distillation can provide an immediate, albeit temporary, solution to the problem that will ward off a total
collapse of the sector pending the necessary specific and definitive measures to secure the future of wine-
growing in Sicily, which can compete in terms of quality but is penalised by fierce competition from Spain
in terms of cost and quantity.

The Italian government has asked the European Commission for authorisation to introduce crisis
distillation for 8 million hectolitres of wine.

Does the Commission not consider that
it should authorise the Italian Ministry of Agriculture to
supplement the intervention price with a national subsidy to bring it up to the price for optional
distillation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2002)

The Commission has already been informed of the difficulties on the wine market in Sicily and thanks the
Honourable Member for drawing its attention to the seriousness of the situation. On 17 January 2002 the
Italian authorities asked the Commission to open crisis distillation. This request will be closely examined in
the light of the information needed to take a decision on the matter.

As regards the state aid referred to by the Honourable Member, designed to increase the Community
distillation price should crisis distillation take place, the Commission can only take a decision after
considering the facts of the case. As a general rule the Commission considers aids of this kind to be an
operating aid, i.e. one that is incompatible with the single market and interferes with the mechanisms
governing the common organisation of the markets.

(2002/C 147 E/225)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3630/01

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Council

(8 January 2002)

Subject: President of the Convention

Is the correct that at the EU summit in Laeken the Council took only a few minutes to discuss and agree
on the appointment of Mr Valéry Giscard d’Estaing as president of the Convention and is it also true that
only one name was put forward for the office of president and that the name of Wim Kok was therefore
not even mentioned?