Activites

• 1997/07/22 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Decision 1997/1400
  • OJ L 193 22.07.1997, p. 0001
• 1997/06/30 Final act signed
• 1997/06/30 End of procedure in Parliament
• 1997/06/10 Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading
  • T4-0281/1997 summary

    The European Parliament approved the joint text and the draft declaration drawn up by the conciliation committee.�

• 1997/06/09 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

    While regretting that the Council had not fully taken over Parliament’s proposal to create a health observatory, the rapporteur acknowledged that the idea of its creation had been accepted in the form of a feasibility study on a permanent ‘monitoring’ structure. The Council had accepted the term ‘monitoring’ instead of ‘observatory’ because this formula did not seem to involve new financial constraints. As regards the programme’s funding (over a five-year period: 1998-2002), the difference of opinion between Parliament and Council was significant: the former advocated ECU 20 million, the latter ECU 13 million. The Council ultimately did not want to exceed ECU 13.8 million which corresponded to the Commission’s proposal. The Parliament delegation had agreed to this after noting the Commission’s commitment to introduce actions in the health sector, in the next statistical programme for 1998-2002, in order to strengthen the current programme. Parliament had in turn said that it was prepared to support this approach during the budgetary procedure. Commissioner Fischler confirmed that the Commission could achieve the objectives set out in this programme. It would also ensure that health statistics would be extended in the next statistical programme.

• #2013
• 1997/06/05 Council Meeting
• 1997/05/29 Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading
  • A4-0202/1997
• 1997/05/14 Joint text approved by Conciliation Committee co-chairs
  • 3612/1997
• 1997/04/16 Formal meeting of Conciliation Committee
• #1970
• 1996/11/26 Council Meeting
• 1996/10/23 Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading
  • T4-0520/1996 summary

    In adopting the report by Mr Danilo POGGIOLINI (PPE, It), the European Parliament approved, with various amendments, the common position with a view to the adoption of a programme of Community action on health monitoring. One of the amendments sought to reinstate the budget of ECU 20 m, rather than the ECU 13 m provided for by the common position. Other amendments concerned: -the monitoring system and the scientific definitions on which it was based; -stepping up cooperation with international organizations, particularly the WHO and OECD, appropriate NGOs and health workers; -submission by the Commission of an interim report by 30/06/1999 and a final report by 30/06/2002; -granting of financial aid to the Member States to set up or improve a health data gathering system (databases); -carrying out of feasibility studies for the setting-up of a European Health Observatory which would be responsible for monitoring and analysing health data and indicators within the Community; -setting up an advisory committee to assist the Commission. �

• 1996/10/22 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

    The rapporteur, Mr Poggiolini (EPP, I), was not satisfied with the common position presented by the Council, which had only taken over in full 2 of the 44 amendments tabled by Parliament at first reading; one of his criticisms was aimed at the extreme frugality being shown by the Council when it come to the financial allocation. However, he did express support for the need: to harmonise on a step by step basis the methods used for gathering national health data; to extend the funding for the five-year programme from ECU 13 million to ECU 20 million; to establish a European Health Observatory for analysing health data and operating costs in each country; and, finally, to lend a consultative role to the committee charged with assisting the Commission in this work. Commissioner Flynn said that he could accept most of the amendments tabled, or to be precise 10 out of the 19 tabled. As regards the amendment on the budget, Mr Flynn declared that he agreed in principle with increasing the allocation, but also referred to the very limited room for manoeuvre when it came to budget line 3; according to the Commissioner, it would therefore be left to the conciliation procedure to resolve this matter.

• 1996/09/25 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
  • A4-0285/1996
• 1996/07/04 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #1937
• 1996/06/18 Council Meeting
  • 07404/2/1996 summary

    In its common position, the Council made a series of changes to the text of the Commission proposal, while adhering to the same general approach (particularly as regards the substance of the programme as shown in Annex I to the decision). The main changes concerned: -the financial framework: slightly less than proposed by the Commission (ECU 13 m rather than 13.8 m), -commitology: a joint committee, proceeding as a regulatory committee when taking important decisions and as an advisory committee in other cases (including when deciding details of coordination), -data protection: the arrangements must comply with existing provisions on data protection, -the objective of the programme: the programme must have the aim of assessing health status, trends and determinants in the Community, facilitating the planning and monitoring of Community measures and providing Member States with health information such as to enable comparisons to be carried out, -consistency and complementarity with other Community measures, -international cooperation (particularly with international health organizations), -monitoring and evaluation of the programme with a view to its possible continuation, -systematic collection of data to make health data comparable (extension and improvement of the formulation in the Commission proposal). As regards the fate of the EP's amendments, the Council accepted the essential points of the amendments adopted by the EP at first reading and incorporated in the amended proposal. However, it did not accept the amendments concerning: .cooperation between the fields of health and occupational health and safety, .setting-up of a permanent monitoring body (particularly in the form of a European health observatory), .measures to prevent duplication of effort in the forwarding of data, .excessively strict measures regarding the confidentiality and security of data. It did however incorporate Parliament's amendments concerning the critical analysis of health indicators and budgetary provisions, which had not been accepted by the Commission.�

• 1996/05/15 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(1996)0222 summary

    In its amended proposal, the Commission incorporated, in full or in part, 28 of the 44 amendments adopted by the European Parliament at first reading, namely those seeking to: - clarify or broaden certain recitals: . existing health monitoring capabilities to be enhanced so as to monitor trends in public health and determine priorities in this field; . a health monitoring system to be established to provide material for regular reports on health status in the Community and analyses of health trends; . cooperation in the field of occupational health to be increased with the aim of drawing up a table of occupational diseases and accidents and improving the comparability of data; - the actions covered by the programme to be broadened, in particular by including a feasibility study of a health observatory and by listing in a second Annex fields in which health indicators may be established. The Commission also accepted Parliament's amendments concerning the advisory committee and maintaining consistency in the actions proposed by the Commission (without the Member States). However, the Commission did not accept the amendments concerning: - the appropriation for the action programme (ECU 20 million rather than 13.8 million); - stepping up cooperation with NGOs in this field; - holding meetings of the committee in public; - Member States' setting up objectives for improving public health in compliance with a timetable; - financial support for the establishment or improvement of national systems for collecting health data and a guarantee that the data supplied by Member States are comparable; - requirement that evaluation reports be drafted and the results of EC health programmes submitted to the European Parliament.�

• #1924
• 1996/05/14 Council Meeting
• 1996/04/17 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T4-0172/1996 summary

    In adopting the report by Mr Danilo POGGIOLINI (PPE,I), Parliament approved the proposal for a decision with the following amendments: - in order to complement this programme, healthcare authorities and providers should set measurable, time-based targets for health improvement, - the total budgetary appropriation should be ECU 20 m instead of ECU 13.8 m; - the Commission should be assisted by an advisory committee whose meetings would in principle be public (publication of its agendas and minutes); - in the course of implementing this programme, cooperation should be developed with health professionals and NGOs active in the field; - in the course of implementing this programme, reports should be submitted on the results of the Community health programmes, and the results of the implementation of the programme should be sent to all the EC institutions and Member States; - in the Annex to the programme, emphasis should be put on better monitoring and control of Community public health and on the cooperation of Member States in this area, - it proposed a non-exhaustive list of health indicators which might be established under a future Community health monitoring system. This list contained inter alia indicators relating to health status, life-style and health habits, living and working conditions, health protection, demographic and social factors, etc.; - the collection of data should be made comparable by the harmonization of definitions and methods of collecting national health data, and this comparability should be guaranteed by the Member States. Moreover, financial support should be granted to the Member States in connection with the establishment or improvement of their health data collection systems; - it also called for the carrying out of feasibility studies on setting up a European Health Observatory responsible for monitoring health data and indicators in the Community area, and for the development of a Community network for transferring and sharing health data; - finally, it called for the drafting of reports on health status and health systems in the Union and their cost-effectiveness and the dissemination of these reports to the Member States, the NGOs, health professionals and the general public. �

• 1996/04/16 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

    The rapporteur, Mr Poggiolini (EPP, I), said that while the Community action programme on health monitoring could appear somewhat technical, it was nonetheless of paramount importance for promoting health awareness, for assessing the current situation and probable developments in the health sector and for taking stock of the health systems in place throughout the Community. Better information on health indicators and the introduction of harmonised definitions and data acquisition procedures would be beneficial for establishing a European Health Observatory, which, according to the rapporteur, would constitute a more appropriate allocation than that being proposed. Even so, Mr Poggiolini pointed out, the monitoring system in question would not lead to the harmonisation of Europe’s health systems, as this would not be permitted under the terms of Article129 of the Maastricht Treaty; what should in fact be standardised, he added, was the scientific language on which the monitoring system was to be based. Commissioner Flynn thought that this proposal aimed to introduce a very high level of health protection monitoring. The Commissioner pointed out that he would accept 28 of the 47 amendments tabled. Of the amendments that the Commission was not prepared to take over, he mentioned those relating to databases, as in his opinion these ran contrary to the principle of subsidiarity; he also rejected a number of other amendments for legal reasons, or because they were incompatible with other health programmes, or again in order to avoid repetition, ambiguity or restrictions. Furthermore, as regards the budget allocation, he expressed the hope that this might be increased during the course of the conciliation procedure.

• 1996/03/20 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A4-0092/1996
• #1890
• 1995/11/30 Council Meeting
  • 1890
• 1995/10/23 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 1995/10/16 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(1995)0449 summary

    1) OBJECTIVE To establish statistical tools relating to disease prevention and health protection so as to facilitate the planning, monitoring and assessment of Community programmes and activities. 2) CONTENTS 1. Particularly since the entry into force of the Treaty on European Union, the Community has been called upon to play an increasingly important role in the field of public health. 2. For its contribution to have maximum effect in terms of quality, the Community must have at its disposal quantitative measurement criteria and a system for assessing the development of health and health determinants and the impact on health of policies, programmes and measures implemented at both national and Community level. 3. The health monitoring system envisaged should be based on indicators already available at European level (WHO, OECD, etc.) and avoid duplication of work. 4. Annex A shows the different domains selected by the Commission for which indicators should be established. 5. Community indicators would be of two types: * core indicators essential for the purposes of Community measures in the field of public health; * background indicators relating to other Community policies indirectly linked with public health. These indicators will have to be assessed and updated constantly in order to ensure that they meet the current needs of the Community and Member States. 6. A precise methodology needs to be followed to ensure that the data from the Member States are comparable, i.e. the same definitions and a similar quality level must be used. There are three possible solutions: * creation of data dictionaries to establish equivalence between data defined in different ways; * conversion of national data to Community network definitions according to a common set of rules; * harmonisation of the definition and methods of collecting national health data. 7. Data needed for the core indicators should be collected on a regular basis (in most cases annually) and processed and transmitted rapidly in order to ensure availability of the most recent data possible. 8. The Community health monitoring system should take the form of a network of distributed databases. Apart from its technical advantages (flexible, less costly compared with traditional collection methods, no duplication, minimal administrative structure, compatibility in terms of multilingualism), this solution makes it possible to work as close as possible to information sources. This network could be based on the infrastructure currently being developed under the IDA programme. 9. For maximum usefulness, the information collected will have to be the subject of a variety of regular and coordinated analysis operations. 10. The Commission believes that the development of a Community health monitoring system covering three strands of action (the establishing of Community health indicators, the development of a Community-wide network for data collection and dissemination, and the creation of adequate analysis capacity) should be initiated by means of a five-year Community action programme. 11. The programme will be assessed in two reports, including a mid-term report. Source : European Commission - Info92 - 02/96�

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(1995)0449
• Debate in Council: 1890
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A4-0092/1996
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T4-0172/1996
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(1996)0222
• Council position published: 07404/2/1996
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A4-0285/1996
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T4-0520/1996
• Joint text approved by Conciliation Committee co-chairs: 3612/1997
• Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading: A4-0202/1997
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading: T4-0281/1997
• : Decision 1997/1400
• : OJ L 193 22.07.1997, p. 0001

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)