WRITTEN QUESTION P-0394/00 by Marielle de Sarnez (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Request for information on two complaints lodged with the Commission against certain provisions of the French Law of 27 July 1999 establishing universal health cover.
3. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 280 E/211 (2000/C 280 E/250) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0394/00 by Marielle de Sarnez (PPE-DE) to the Commission (8 February 2000) Subject: Request for information on two complaints lodged with the Commission against certain provisions of the French Law of 27 July 1999 establishing universal health cover The French Parliament has adopted a law, promulgated on 27 July 1999, one purpose of which is to introduce complementary health cover for the least well-off. This complementary health cover can be obtained either from a ácomplementary organisationí, i. e. a mutual society, an insurance company or provident institution, or from a sickness insurance fund. Examination of the legislative texts reveals that these two categories of provider of this complementary service are not treated equally by the Law of 27 July 1999. Two provisions appear contrary to the provisions of the Treaty of Rome. Firstly, the law stipulates that complementary organisations in the private sector must pay a 1,75 % levy on their contributions, in order to finance a fund to finance universal health cover, whereas sickness insurance funds are not subject to that levy. Secondly, the law stipulates that refunds of amounts committed by complementary organisations will be capped at FF 1500 per year per person covered, whereas all expenditure committed by sickness insurance funds will be covered, without capping, by the universal health cover fund. they be quickly given clarification concerning conformity of Given that complementary organisations must say by 31 March 2000 whether or not they will be taking part in this scheme, and to ensure that they do not run the risk of suffering irreparable harm, it is essential that the Law of 27 July 1999 with Community provisions. Accordingly, can the Commission provide information on the procedure put in hand, and on its position, with regard to the issues raised, and say when an official reply might be forthcoming? Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 March 2000) The Honourable Member has requested information on the procedure put in hand by the Commission following two complaints lodged against the Law of 27 July 1999 on universal health cover and would like to know whether the Commission views as compatible with the Community rules two provisions of the said Law which appear to treat sickness insurance funds more favourably than the providers of complementary health cover. As regards the procedure, the Commission asked the French Government for details so that it could collect all the information needed for an assessment of the legislation concerned. The French authorities replied that in their view the arrangements introduced by the Law in question were based on the principle of national solidarity and did not therefore constitute a competitive economic activity within the meaning of the EC Treaty. The complainant has recently provided additional information on this subject and has drawn attention to aspects other than those mentioned by the Honourable Member, with the result that the situation is being assessed in the light of the competition rules and not simply the rules on state aid. It will be difficult to assess the economic nature of the complementary health cover arrangements introduced by the French Government, given that several types of agency are involved in the practical application of those arrangements. This being the case, the Commission should take a stance within the next few months. It has informed the complainant that every effort will be made to adopt a position within a year of the complaint being lodged