Doctors: free movement and mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and others formal qualifications

Mrs FONTAINE recalled the precedents to the draft Directive, in particular the legislation of April 1993. It was precisely the absence from this last Directive of rules on comitology that was the subject of Amendment No 1, which referred to the agreement on comitology of the previous December. Furthermore, Mrs Fontaine felt that the Directive should include a reference to the involvement of members of the industry in the management committees. Commissioner MONTI stated that he could take over the amendments on the scope of implementation (Amendments Nos 4, 5, 6 and 7). He could also take over Amendment No 1 as it referred to the ‘modus vivendi’ relating to comitology. However, according to the Commissioner, Amendment No 2, which implied almost automatic recognition of qualifications awarded in third countries, would pose difficulties for certain Member States. In addition, the recognition in question was not directly linked to the proposal. As a result, Amendment No 2 could not be taken over. Nor could Amendment No 3, because by seeking to require that the Commission consult the committees of experts appointed by the Member States (before consulting the Committee of Senior Officials on Public Health) it extended the comitology procedure; even the Council would be involved, which would completely contradict the flexible nature of the committee procedure. Amendments Nos 8, 9 and 10 were rejected as they posed the same problem, in relation to the ‘arrangements’, as Amendment No 3, which related to the ‘grounds’.