Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-11-Speech-3-092"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040211.4.3-092"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
I welcome the criticisms made in the report of the Commission’s draft, especially with regard to the temporary measures to define the provision of services and to the possibility of avoiding making social security contributions.
In Portugal, the key element of the regulation and limitation of access to certain professions is Article 47 of Constitutional law. Restriction is only possible by means of National Assembly legislation. Access can only be restricted when other fundamental rights are at stake – life, health and the safety of persons and effects – whilst always respecting the criteria of proportionality, of need, and of ensuring that the measure is appropriate.
The idea of consolidating all professional regulations in one single directive, taking account of the particular characteristics of each of these – doctors, veterinary surgeons, nurses, obstetricians, architects and dentists – is acceptable, since life, health and the safety of persons and effects are at stake.
It is, however, unacceptable, and indeed incomprehensible, that the Directive does not include other healthcare professionals, who play a vital role in the health and safety of workers, such as health and safety officers at work, biologists, senior health technicians and diagnosis and therapy technicians. The draft Directive, by not setting out explicitly that in order to recognise professional qualifications training must be based ...
(
)"@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples