WRITTEN QUESTION E-0673/04 by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission. Third level education charges for EU citizens.
Date: 2004-03-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Ireland, accession to the European Union, citizens' Europe, equal treatment, foreign student, school fees, student mobility, university

C 84 E/652

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 2004)

First of all, the Commission would like to explain that the provision to which the Honourable Member
refers does not allow Member States to refuse pharmacists who have obtained their qualifications in
another Member State the right to work in dispensing pharmacies which have been open for less than
three years. This provision only makes it possible to prevent these pharmacists from being the owner (in
Member states where ownership is reserved for pharmacists only), controller or managing pharmacist/
technical supervisor (i.e. the person who assumes the ultimate responsibility for running the pharmacy) of
such a pharmacy. As a result, the pharmacists in question have the right to work in a dispensing pharmacy
which has been open for less than three years, even if they can only work there as employees.

The Commission has not received any complaints about this matter. It has, however, received mail on this
topic, mainly from Parliamentary representatives. A petition concerning this derogation, which has since
been closed, was also submitted to the Parliament’s Committee on Petitions.

As the Commission stated in its replies and communications regarding the above-mentioned letters and
petition, the purpose of the derogation laid down by the first subparagraph of Article 2(2) of Directive 85/
433/EEC (1) is explained in the seventh recital of that Directive: to avoid problems which may result from
the differences between Member States which restrict the number of new pharmacies that may be
established and those which have no such restrictions.

The second subparagraph of Article 2(2) lays down that the derogation should be reviewed five years after
the entry into force of the Directive. However, it emerged from this review which took place in 1993 that
around half of the Member States made use, at that time, of the derogation. This is why no proposal was
then put forward to remove it.

As is clear from the wording of the provision in question, this derogation is simply an option which the
Member States may or may not use. Should a Member State therefore decide to amend its legislation by
removing the restriction in question, and thus expanding the freedom of establishment for pharmacists,
there would be no infringement of Directive 85/433/EEC.

In its proposal for a Directive on the recognition of professional qualifications of 7 March 2002 (2), the
Commission did propose that this derogation be removed. However, at its first reading, the Parliament
adopted amendments to reinstate this provision in the proposal. The Commission has rejected these
amendments.

(1) Council Directive 85/433/EEC of 16 September 1985 concerning the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates
and other evidence of formal qualifications in pharmacy, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the
right of establishment relating to certain activities in the field of pharmacy, OJ L 253, 24.9.1985.

(2) COM(2002) 119 final.

(2004/C 84 E/0735)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0673/04

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Third level education charges for EU citizens

(9 March 2004)

In Irish third level education, students considered as non-EU citizens often pay three times more in fees
than their EU citizen counterparts.

Is the Commission aware that the Irish Government has not yet informed citizens of accession states,
currently hoping to begin third-level education in Ireland next academic year, whether they will be eligible
for reduced EU-citizen fees? The final date for submission of applications to third level institutions has
already passed, yet many prospective students at Irish universities and colleges have had no indication
from the Department of Education and Science as to what their status will be when the new academic year
begins in September.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/653

As they will be EU citizens from 1 May, does the Commission agree that the charging of non-EU fees to
citizens of new Member States constitutes a clear act of discrimination? Has the Commission been in
contact with the Irish Government on this issue? What has been its response? Has the Commission
received similar complaints from other Member States on this issue? What action does it propose to take?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2004)

As far as conditions of access to education are concerned, the Member States are obliged to respect the
principle of ‘equality of treatment’. According to this principle the university or college of a Member State
where an EU citizen wishes to study must accept him/her under the same conditions as nationals.

Consequently, for the next academic year 2004/2005, Ireland and the other Member States must apply the
principle of equality of treatment to nationals of the new Member States who will be entitled to pay home
fees.

The Commission has not received any complaints regarding this issue and has, therefore, not contacted the
Irish Government as yet.

The Commission departments will contact the Irish authorities in order to remind them of the rights of
citizens of the new Member States regarding access to education.

(2004/C 84 E/0736)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0679/04

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Bushmeat (cid:1) border controls

Following the European Parliament’s support for the De Rossa report on Petition 461/2000, and with
reference to the Commission’s response to Written Question E-2445/03 (1)
(22 July 2003), what
representations has the Commission made to Member States about the need for improved border controls
to prevent this trade?

What action does the Commission propose to take to prevent illegal imports of bushmeat into Europe and
coordinate efforts to encourage the tightening-up of external Community frontier controls and end this
illegal trade?

(1) See page 492.

(2004/C 84 E/0737)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0680/04

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Bushmeat (cid:1) disease transmission

Following the European Parliament’s support for the De Rossa report on Petition 461/2000, what action
has the Commission taken to conduct a risk assessment of the potential for disease transmission to
humans from illegal bushmeat imports into the European Union?