WRITTEN QUESTION E-0427/03 by Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The status of pension entitlements.
Date: 2003-02-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, competence of the Member States, health care system, health expenditure, hospital expenses, hospitalisation, pension scheme, social-security benefit, social-security contribution

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/217

In this respect

to an appropriate remuneration.

contractual and social security arrangements, the above-mentioned annex explicitly stipulates that this
training is subject
the
Honourable Members is drawn to the ruling of the European Court of Justice in case C-131/97 (Carbonari)
where it was stated that the obligation resulting from the above Directive that the trainee specialists receive
remuneration is unconditional. The Court equally pointed out that it is common ground that the Doctors
Directive does not contain any Community definition either of the remuneration which is to be regarded
as appropriate or of the methods by which that remuneration is to be fixed. Such definitions are in
principle a matter for the Member States, which must adopt specific implementing measures in the field.
At the same time Member States enjoy a broad discretion in determining the body liable to provide
remuneration for the periods of training in medical specialities.

the particular attention of

It follows that a Member State might decide either to remunerate the trainee specialists with a ‘borsa di
studio’ (study bursary) or in accordance with ‘contratto di formazione’ (training contract) while respecting
the above principles. On the basis of available information, the Commission does not see any ground for
intervention as it cannot be concluded that Italy is currently breaching the principles resulting from the
jurisprudence of the Court

(2003/C 161 E/227)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0427/03

by Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(18 February 2003)

Subject: The status of pension entitlements

It has recently been brought to my attention that, in the UK, pensioners have a proportion of their pension
withdrawn from them for every week over 6 weeks that they spend in hospital. As a result of pressure
from various groups, that period will be increased to 11 weeks in October 2003.

This creates problems for many pensioners, since time spent in hospital does not necessarily reduce
monthly outgoings (e.g. rent payments).

It appears to me that, since pensions constitute social security payments, and are thus an entitlement based
on a percentage of wages paid in over the years rather than a social welfare benefit which is awarded
according to need, there is no justification for reducing pension payments during time spent in hospital.

Does the Commission agree that pensions are entitlements based on contributions made to the social
security system rather than social welfare benefits?

Does the Commission agree that stopping pensions payments during time spent in hospital penalises
pensioners in this position and may therefore be deemed to be discriminatory?

Can the Commission give its view on this UK practice?

Is the Commission aware of any similar rules in place in other Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 2003)

In most Member States, the link between contributory benefits and the total amount of contributions is
not fully actuarial and there are elements of solidarity built into contributory social protection schemes.
These solidarity elements may operate both on the contribution (e.g. no upper limit to contributions even
though earnings-related benefits are capped) and on the benefit side (e.g. taking into account individual
needs). The United Kingdom state pension is a flat-rate pension benefit financed from earnings-related
contributions. A supplement is paid for dependents. Both the basic state pension and the supplement for
dependents can be reduced in the event of a hospital stay.

C 161 E/218

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

Member States are free to define which social security benefits are available and under which conditions
(subject to certain anti-discrimination requirements laid down by Community legislation). The Commission
does not consider that the reduction of the basic state pension in the event of a hospital stay is contrary to
Community law. Moreover, the amount of the reduction in the United Kingdom is comparable in its
amount to daily fees that are charged to patients in various Member States as a contribution to the cost of
a hospital stay.

For details on such charges, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the following
website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/missoc/2002/index_en.htm (Table II (cid:1) Health Care:
Benefits (cid:1) 2.2. Hospitalisation: Patient’s participation).

(2003/C 161 E/228)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0440/03

by Ulrich Stockmann (PSE) to the Commission

(18 February 2003)

Subject: Support to promote town-twinning actions

On 17 September 2002, the Commission published a Call for Proposals (GD EAC No 50/02) on support
to promote town-twinning actions (1). Amongst other measures,
it increased the minimum grant for
projects to EUR 2 000. At first glance this increase may seem a positive step, but many municipalities find
it difficult even to reach this figure and thereby qualify for financial support. A four-day meeting involving
12 people travelling from Magdeburg to Warsaw, 750 km away, for example, would not be subsidised, as
the costs eligible for financial assistance would only come to EUR 909,84.

A further problem is posed by the requirement that a minimum of ten participants from each municipality
take part, a figure that is rarely reached, particularly in preparatory discussions for international twinning
relations.

In the process of EU enlargement
to the east, these problems may have a negative effect on the
development of town-twinning actions in Central and Eastern European countries. The low correction
coefficients of applicant countries would make it necessary to constitute abnormally large groups or to
undertake unrealistically long visits in order to fulfil the criteria for financial assistance.

Is the Commission aware of
these difficulties in meeting the minimum requirements for financial
assistance? Can the Commission say whether, and in what form, changes in the calculation of financial
assistance are planned for international town-twinning actions? Does the Commission feel it would be
useful to provide financial assistance for a preparatory discussion involving three to four people?

(1) OJ C 220, 17.9.2002, p. 6.

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2003)

The Commission attaches the utmost importance to town-twinning and continues to maintain and
improve its support for it.

Two kinds of actions are currently funded under the Community action:

(cid:1) meetings of citizens of twinned towns and municipalities,

(cid:1) conferences on European themes relating to twinning, training and information seminars for town-

twinning officers.

The question of
for which a
simplified grant system is applied since the year 2002. The key element of the new system is the
calculation of grants for organisation and travel expenses on the basis of fixed rates.

the Honourable Member concerns the category ‘meetings of citizens’