Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-02-Speech-2-180"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011002.8.2-180"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, in reply to the Oral Question by Mr Alavanos, the letter of formal notice sent to Greece to which the honourable Member refers, concerns a recently initiated infringement procedure regarding the failure of Presidential Decree No 165 of 23 June 2000 to comply with Directive 89/48 in certain areas. On the other hand, the procedure referred to in question E-1336/01 earlier more specifically concerns problems surrounding the misapplication of Directive 89/48 to the psychology profession. The Commission considers that diplomas awarded in Greece by another Member State and the refranchising agreements do not relate to training provided from or by Greece, but to training provided from or by the other Member State, since the Greek establishment in which the training in question has been provided is merely an intermediary without any autonomy.
In other words, it is not the Greek establishment that awards diplomas, but rather the university in the other Member State, and consequently, if those diplomas relate to professional training within the meaning of Directive 89/48, they are covered by that Directive. The purpose of the letter of formal notice is to obtain the Member State's observations on specific questions. Greece has not yet replied to that letter of formal notice and, therefore, no firm grounds for infringement procedings have been established as yet. Consequently, the Commission is not able to reply to that part of the question from the honourable Member.
Given the similarity of the subject matter, I shall now continue, if I may, by answering the question by Mr Hatzidakis. In the judgment to which the honourable Member refers, the Court of Justice of the European Communities condemned Greece for its failure to communicate measures taken to implement Directive 89/48 – the Directive I referred to in my reply to the previous question. The Commission thus initiated a new infringement procedure against Greece with a request for the fixing of penalty payments. This second procedure was closed when Greece complied.
It complied with the Court's judgment by forwarding Presidential Decree No 165 of 23 June 2000 to the Commission. As I pointed out in my reply to the previous Oral Question put by Mr Alavanos, the Commission considers that certain provisions of Directive 89/48 have not been implemented correctly. The Commission has also received complaints from individuals who, even since the implementation of the directive, have not seen their rights respected. The Commission has, therefore, initiated a new infringement procedure, this time for incorrect implementation and application of the directive, and the letter of formal notice to which I referred just now has been sent to Greece. We expect to receive the observations of the Greek authorities very soon. A specific procedure for recognition of the psychology profession is currently being introduced, and that profession, together with a number of others, has been the subject of specific implementing legislation on problems concerning the application of Directive 89/48 that have also been drawn to the Commission's attention in that context. That is my reply to the question put by Mr Hatzidakis."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples