Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-07-Speech-2-359"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050607.31.2-359"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, it would be an oversight on my part if I too failed in turn to congratulate Mr Bowis who, through his report, has expressed his knowledge and experience on these matters.
The opinion of the European Parliament on the serious issue of patient mobility is important as a lever for exerting pressure on the European Commission to take clearer measures on this issue. European patients have rights which must also be protected by law, so that they can have the corresponding social cover wherever they may be in the Europe of free movement.
It is important, I believe, to promote simple, daily information for patients as regards their rights and to recognise the peculiarities of groups of patients such as the elderly, the illiterate and pensioners, as Amendment 37 also emphasises.
In addition, the protection of patients' personal data is important. Provision is made for the creation of a database of medical information on patients; however, as provided for in Amendments 48, 49, 50, 67 and 68, certain protective measures must be taken to prevent abuse.
I also consider it necessary to clarify the situation in cross-border areas. In other words, patients must be treated in hospitals as close to their place of residence as possible. Numerous European countries which border each other, such as France, Belgium, Luxembourg and Germany, have developed close cooperation mechanisms, mechanisms which start with road transport and extend to health issues. It is only natural that certain citizens resident in cross-border areas should be able to go for treatment to hospitals in neighbouring countries which are closer to home than treatment centres in their own country. I call on you, therefore, to support Amendment 41, paragraph 8.
Finally, I should like to stress that health services cannot be compared with goods offered for sale. I therefore consider that the question of patient mobility and of services in general should not be included in a general services directive. Nonetheless, we do need a proposal for action on mobility, with a specific timetable, which takes account of the conclusions of the High Level Group on Health Services and Medical Care."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples