WRITTEN QUESTION E-0074/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Lack of a European register of medical errors committed by people who successively work in different states.
Date: 2003-01-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: access to information, centralisation of information, free movement of workers, health care, health care profession, medical error, professional qualifications

3.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155 E/211

It is the intention of the Commission to make every effort to develop further its communication and
4.
consultation policy aiming at ensuring, in an equal manner, a larger participation of citizens, consumers
and stakeholders in the Community activities in the field of food safety as well as animal health and
welfare, plant health, etc. The Commission is currently preparing a concrete proposal establishing a formal
consultation procedure at European level and creating a Consultation Committee on the food chain and
animal health.

(1) OJ L 31, 1.2.2002.

(2003/C 155 E/231)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0074/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 January 2003)

Subject: Lack of a European register of medical errors committed by people who successively work in

different states

1.
Has the Commission heard that one of the findings of the assessment of five years’ experience of the
Dutch Individual Health Care Professions Act, which is intended to provide patients with information
about the expertise and qualifications of health professionals, is that people who have been punished
abroad for making professional errors can exercise their profession without any restriction in the
Netherlands because the disciplinary measures taken in their countries of origin are not recorded in the
public register of medical practitioners provided for by the Individual Health Care Professions Act, which
records any disciplinary measures imposed by the Dutch Ministry of Health?

2.
Does the Commission share the fear expressed by the research bureau ZonMW, which performed the
assessment, that, particularly after enlargement, freedom of establishment in the field of health care within
the EU will result in more foreign medical practitioners coming to the present EU Member States and that
additional measures are required to ensure that patients can ascertain whether they are also adequately
protected against inexpert service provision by these practitioners?

3.
Does the Commission have any information about similar experiences in Member States other than
the Netherlands where medical errors can be committed because people are working whose past record in
the medical profession remains unknown?

4.
Are there wide variations in the ways in which medical errors and punishments for them are
recorded in the various present and future EU Member States? Are there Member States where no register
is kept or where the public do not yet have access to registers of errors? Will there be any change in this
respect in the near future?

5. What view does the Commission take of the researchers’ proposal that a European information
system should be set up by means of which the qualifications of medical practitioners who have previously
worked in another Member State and/or been trained there can easily be checked? Will the Commission
take measures to bring this about?

Source: ‘De Volkskrant’ (Dutch newspaper), 21 and 23 December 2002.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 2003)

1. Member States are competent for legal provisions as to good character or good repute including
provisions for disciplinary action in respect of serious professional misconduct or conviction of criminal
offences. The directives on professional recognition covering medical professions and professions allied to
medicine allow host Member States to require proof of good repute and related information from the
home Member State, with due respect for confidentiality and data protection rules. Host Member States
can insist on obtaining this information before granting recognition.

2.

Community law, including the above-mentioned obligation, will be applied in all new Member States.

C 155 E/212

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

The Commission organises regular meetings of the Committee of Senior Officials on Public Health
3.
and the Group of General System Co-ordinators for the purposes of the exchange of information and
discussion of
to free movement. The Commission does not dispose of any specific
information of the kind referred to.

issues relevant

4.
The Commission is generally aware of varying national practices. Registers or records of different
kinds tend to exist in all Member States. The way in which access of the public is allowed to all or part of
such registers or records is organised within the Member States in line with Community legislation on data
protection. The Commission is currently working on developing an informatic system to reinforce the
inter alia, the on-line exchange of the necessary
current network of national authorities to facilitate,
information. The recent proposal for a Directive on the recognition of professional qualifications (1) also
seeks to reinforce the role of national contact points.

The issue of disciplinary measures is covered by the proposal for a Directive on the recognition of
5.
professional qualifications. This proposal requires communication of information on such measures when
health professionals intend to establish themselves in another Member State. Annex VII of the proposed
Directive refers to the documents which may be required by the host Member State when deciding on the
recognition of the relevant professional qualifications.
In particular, evidence may be required to be
provided concerning the absence of serious professional misconduct or criminal offences which might
have led to suspension or prohibition of the pursuit of the relevant profession in the Member State of
origin. Article 46(2) reinforces the system for the cases in which there is more than one Member State of
origin. Any measure taken to ensure exchange of information on disciplinary has to respect the existing
Community principles on data protection.

(1) OJ C 181 E, 30.7.2002.

(2003/C 155 E/232)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0090/03

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(20 January 2003)

Subject: Hair dyes and cancer

It is not safe for European citizens to use hair dyes given that they contain harmful chemical substances.
Use of hair dyes is rising. Unfortunately, no-one knows the real extent of the damage as the adverse effects
of using the dyes are only apparent several years later when it is too late to intervene. The Commission
should therefore apply the cautionary principle and introduce further market regulation.

By far the most oxidative hair dyes contain paraphenylenediamine (PPD) or toluene-2.5-diamine. These
substances are very potent contact allergens and are allowed in hair dyes in concentrations which are
known to sensitize consumers and produce eczema reactions in people who are allergic to hair dye.

Since the EU’s scientific committee on cosmetics (SCCNFP) has linked oxidative hair dyes with the presence
of bladder cancer in women, will the Commission say whether it will ban PPD and related substances until
data is available to establish what concentrations of these substances do not cause any short-term or long-
term harm to human health (e.g. cancer and contact allergies)?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(13 February 2003)

The Commission is aware of the concerns expressed in relation to the use of hair dyes. The Commission is
considering all aspects of the use of hair dyes in cosmetic products and their impact upon consumer
health. In particular, the Commission points out that in the specific area of oxidative hair dyes the majority