You are on page 1of 1

28.12.

2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374 E/207

(2000/C 374 E/244) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1079/00
by Francesco Turchi (UEN) to the Commission

(7 April 2000)

Subject: Professional recognition of dental technicians

In view of the professionalism required to practise as a dental technician and the fact that in many EU
Member States such technicians have already been granted professional status, can the Commission say
what steps the Italian Government has taken to recognise the profession of dental technician?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 2000)

The Commission has no information on the steps mentioned by the Honourable Member. Since the
profession of dental technician has not, in fact, been subject to any Community harmonisation, the
Member States alone remain responsible for granting official status to, and regulating, this profession
(conditions governing training, access to and pursuit of the profession). Furthermore, Council Directives
89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 (1) and 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 (2) on the general system for the
recognition of higher-education diplomas, which can be applied to recognition among Member States of
qualifications obtained by dental technicians, do not impose any obligations on the Commission to carry
out detailed studies into all the professions to which these Directives may apply. In this context, the
Commission would draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that the profession of dental
technician (‘odontotecnico’) is already regulated in Italy, as it has been included for Italy in the list in
Annex C of Directive 92/51/EEC.

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.
(2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.

(2000/C 374 E/245) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1106/00
by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 April 2000)

Subject: The Spanish Government’s failure to comply with Law No 31 of 8 November 1995 on the
prevention of hazards at work

Council Directive 89/391/EEC (1) on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety
and health of workers at work was transposed by the Spanish Government in Law No 31/95 of
8 November 1995 on the prevention of hazards at work.

One of the obligations laid down in the law is that the health committee of any firm with more than
100 employees should consist of four members appointed by the trade union and four others appointed
by the authorities. However, the prison of A Lama, in Pontevedra, Galicia, which has more than
100 employees, does not comply with this requirement, since the health committee does not have any
members appointed by the authorities, which adversely affects its efficiency. As a result the officials
appointed by the trade union complained to the Director of the prison, the Director-General for Prisons,
the Ministry for the Civil Service and the Ombudsman, without managing to obtain a solution to the
problem.

In view of this failure to fulfil obligations, what steps will the Commission take to ensure Spanish central
government’s compliance with laws such as the aforementioned Directive and remedy this current form of
discrimination?

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.