EUROPEAN COMMISSION EMPL/01029/07 - EN
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
MINUTES – 19.10.2006
Orig. EN-FR
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ON SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS
Minutes of the 37th meeting
Brussels, 19 October 2006
CONTENTS PAGE
1. Adoption of the agenda 2
2. Approval of the minutes of the 36th meeting 3
3. Report by the Chair of the Advisory Committee on amendments made, or in the process of being made, to Community law 4
4. The new Implementing Regulation - Report on the work carried out in the Council's Working Party on Social Questions 5
5. Report by the Chair of the Administrative Commission on Social Security for migrant workers (CASSTM) on the work of the CASSTM 7
6. Report on the decisions of the Court since the previous meeting of the Advisory Committee 8
7. Report on the activities of the Technical Commission on Data Processing, July 2005 – June 2006 10
8. Cross-border health care, state of play 11
9. The European Health Insurance Card – monitoring of its introduction 12
10. Presentation of Solvit 13
11. Report on the state of play with regard to the enlargement process 14
12. Activities of trESS (training and reporting on European Social Security) 2005/2006 15
13. Other business 16
Annex List of participants 17
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
Adoption of the agenda
1. Adoption of the agenda
Note SS.TM. 1/06
The agenda was adopted.
Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
Approval of the minutes of the 36th meeting
2. Approval of the minutes of the 36th meeting
Note SS.TM. 2/05
All language versions of the minutes were approved.
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
Report by the Chair of the Advisory Committee on amendments made, or in the process of being made, to Community law
3. Report by the Chair of the Advisory Committee on amendments made, or in the process of being made, to Community law
Note SS.TM. 3/06
The Chair described the changes made to Community law over the past year, together with proposals for regulations currently being examined by the co-legislators (see Note 3/06). He reported that the Parliament had nominated the rapporteurs for the proposal for the implementing Regulation, Ms Jean Lambert, and for the proposal on Annex XI, Ms Emine Bozkurt.
The Chair informed the Committee that the Regulation amending Regulation 1408/71 and its Annexes (Miscellaneous amendments 2005) would probably be adopted by the end of 2006, while the proposal on Miscellaneous amendments 2006 would be submitted at the beginning of 2007. He pointed out that this proposal would be the last of its kind before the entry into force of Regulation 883/2004.
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
The new Implementing Regulation - Report on the work carried out in the Council's Working Party on Social Questions
4. The new Implementing Regulation - Report on the work carried out in the Council's Working Party on Social Questions
Note SS.TM. 4/06
The Secretariat outlined the objectives of the proposal for a Regulation laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems, which had been presented by the Commission on 31.1.2006 (COM (2006) 16 final).
There were four objectives:
- to take advantage of the updating of Regulation 883/04 by organising more effective and closer cooperation between social security institutions; to this end, the use of modern electronic methods for exchanges between institutions would become widespread;
- to simplify the Implementing Regulation by making the applicable general principles a common factor in all the chapters of the Regulation and identifying more clearly the rights and obligations of those involved in applying the coordination rules (institutions and insured parties);
- to improve the transparency of financial procedures between institutions and vis-à-vis the persons covered by the Regulation;
- to leave room for the flexibility needed to allow the Member States to make provision among themselves, if necessary, for different procedures that took greater account of the special features of their relations, on condition that persons' rights were not affected by these agreements between Member States.
Under the Austrian Presidency, Titles I (General provisions) and II (Applicable legislation) had been examined. On 1 June 2006 the Council had agreed on a partial general approach to these two Titles of the proposal. It was to be noted that the Council's agreement was provisional, i.e. that the texts were not completely set in stone as long as there was no agreement on the whole of the Regulation (document No 9584/06 available on the Council's Internet site www.consilium.europa.eu). Under the Finnish Presidency, the Chapter on pensions had been examined. The proposal would continue to be examined under the German Presidency, with the Chapter on sickness. Initial contacts had also been made with the European Parliament's Rapporteur for this proposal, Ms Jean Lambert. It was hoped that the new coordination rules would actually come into force in 2009.
For its part, the European Economic and Social Committee had already made considerable progress on this dossier and its opinion on the proposal would be delivered at its October plenary meeting.
The ETUC representative stressed the importance of implementing the new coordination rules as quickly as possible and welcomed the fact that a probable date for implementation had been announced.
The Netherlands workers' representative was concerned that Form E101 was no longer issued automatically to the worker, even though it enabled the posted worker to prove that he was still affiliated to the social security system of his Member State of origin. He considered it essential to keep Form E101, which made it possible to actually exercise the freedom to provide services. The French employers' representative shared this concern.
The Secretariat explained that, at present, the burden of proof of membership of the social security system often lay with the worker, who had to be in possession of his E101 to prove that he was still affiliated in his Member State of origin. In the context of the new proposal generalising electronic exchange and provision of information between institutions, once an institution was informed that a worker had been posted to another Member State the information was made available to the institution of that other Member State. Thus, if there were a check on the worker, the information on his membership could be obtained directly from the institution. It was primarily a question of simplifying the formalities for the worker.
The representative of the Austrian Government commented that materialisation of the attestation could conceivably be maintained, particularly in certain sensitive areas where the risks of abuse were frequent, but that it would not necessarily be an identical form to the current E101.
The representative of the French Government said that there were already plans for dematerialisation of E101 Forms, notably between Belgium and the Netherlands. France too had such a plan in the pipeline.
The Chair concluded the discussion with an assurance that the Advisory Committee would continue to be informed about the progress of the procedures for the adoption of the proposal for a Regulation.
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
Report by the Chair of the Administrative Commission on Social Security for Migrant Workers (CASSTM) on the work of the CASSTM
5. Report by the Chair of the Administrative Commission on Social Security for Migrant Workers (CASSTM) on the work of the CASSTM
Note SS.TM. 5/06
The Chair of the Administrative Commission, Ms Carin LINDQVIST-VIRTANEN, informed the Advisory Committee about the activities of the Administrative Commission on Social Security for Migrant Workers (CASSTM) during the period from October 2005 to June 2006 (i.e. the 298th to the 301st meetings), covering the work under the UK and Austrian Presidencies.
She referred in particular to the Working Party meeting on long-term care benefits of 9 February 2006, as a result of which a questionnaire had been sent out to Member States, in order to establish the list of benefits referred to in Article 34(2) of Regulation 883/2004. She highlighted the adoption of a number of Decisions of the Administrative Commission, such as on the notion of "partially" or "wholly" unemployed with regard to frontier workers (Decision 205), on the methods of operation and the composition of the Audit Board (Decision 206) and on the replacement of Decision 119 following the judgment of the Court in the Dodl and Oberhollenzer Case (Decision 207).
Finally, the Chair of the Administrative Commission informed the Advisory Committee about the work programme on electronic data exchange for the years 2006-2009, which aimed at creating all the necessary technical and procedural preconditions for replacing all the existing paper forms by a system of electronic data exchange by the time the new Regulations became applicable.
In reply to a question from the Netherlands trade union representative whether, under Regulation 883/2004, the Miethe judgment would continue to be relevant or not, the Secretariat explained that the Council and the European Parliament did not follow the Commission proposal on this point. According to Regulation 883/2004, it was therefore still the Member State of residence which was, in principle, responsible for the payment of unemployment benefits for frontier workers; however, these persons also had the possibility of using the unemployment services of their last State of employment in order to seek a job there. In any event, the Commission representative was of the view that the judgment of the Court in the Miethe Case (C-1/85) would continue to be relevant.
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
Report on the decisions of the Court since the previous meeting of the Advisory Committee
6. Report on the decisions of the Court since the previous meeting of the Advisory Committee
Note SS.TM. 6/06
The Secretariat presented the judgments delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Communities in the most important cases in 2005-2006. It outlined the facts and the legal implications with a view to subsequent developments in the following cases:
I. Judgments relating to the interpretation of Regulation 1408/71:
1. Applicable legislation.
1.- Case C-2/05, “Rijksdienst voor Sociale Zekerheid versus Kiere”, of 26 January 2006. Provisions examined: Article 14(1)(a) of Regulation 1408/71 and Article 11(1)(a) of Regulation 574/72.
2.- Case C-493/04, “Piatkowski versus Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst grote ondernemingen Eindhoven”, of 9 March 2006. Provisions examined: Article 14c of Regulation 1408/71 and Articles 39-43 EC.
3.- Case C-50/05, “Nikula”, of 18 July 2006. Provisions examined: Article 33 of Regulation 1408/71 and Article 39 EC.
2. Material scope (non-contributory special benefits).
4.- Case “Hosse versus Land Salzburg” of 21 February 2006, C-286/03. Provisions examined: Articles 4(2b) and 19 of Regulation 1408/71.
5.- Case "Kersbergen-Lap versus Raad van Bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut Werknemersverzekeringen” of 6 July 2006, C-154/05. Provisions examined: Articles 4, 10a, Annex IIa of Regulation 1408/71.
3. Sickness benefits.
6.- Case "Acereda Herrera versus Servicio Cántabro de Salud” of 15 June 2006, C-466/04. Provisions examined: Article 22 of Regulation 1408/71.
4. Unemployment benefits – Citizenship.
7.- Case “De Cuyper versus Office national de l’emploi” of 18 July 2006, C-406/04. Provisions examined: Articles 4, 10, 69 of Regulation 1408/71 and Article 18 EC.
5. Family benefits.
8.- Case "Rockler versus Försäkringskassan” of 16 February 2006, C-137/04. Provisions examined: Article 39 EC.
9.- Case "Öberg versus Försäkringskassan, länskontoret Stockholm” of 16 February 2006, C-185/04 (39 EC).
II. Judgments relating to the freedom to provide services (Article 49 EC):
1. Health care.
10.- Case "Watts versus Bedford Primary Care Trust” of 16 May 2006, C-372/04. Provisions examined: Article 22 of Regulation 1408/71 and Article 49 EC.
2. Posting of workers.
11.- Case “Commission versus France” of 15 June 2006, C-255/04. Provisions examined: Articles 13 and 14a of Regulation 1408/71 and Article 49 EC.
12.- Case “Commission versus Germany” of 19 January 2006, C-244/04. (49 EC).
III. Judgments and order on international agreements:
13, Order in Case C-336/05, “Echouikh versus Secrétaire d’État aux Anciens Combattants”, of 13 June 2006. Provision interpreted: Article 65 of the EC-Morocco Agreement.
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
Report on the activities of the Technical Commission on Data Processing,
July 2005–June 2006
7. Report on the activities of the Technical Commission on Data Processing, July 2005–June 2006
Note SS.TM. 07/06
The Chair of the Administrative Commission, Ms Carin LINDQVIST-VIRTANEN, informed the Advisory Committee about the activities of the Technical Commission on Data Processing during the period from July 2005 to June 2006, covering the work under the UK and Austrian Presidencies.
She referred in particular to the work of the Committee on matters such as the EUlisses (ex-COWEBS) Portal, the Code List Database (CLD) and the electronic European Health Insurance Card. She highlighted the need for close cooperation between the Administrative Commission and the Technical Commission on the implementation of the work programme on electronic data exchange.
SS.TM. 02/06Minutes of the 37th meeting of the Advisory Committee
Cross-border health care, state of play
8. Cross-border health care, state of play
The Secretariat gave a rundown of the work being carried out in this area. The rulings on reimbursement of the costs of health care abroad were being applied. DG SANCO's High-Level Group on Health Services had carried out its work from the wider point of view of public health, covering complementary aspects such as patient safety or patient information.
The Secretariat commented that, when the proposal for a Services Directive was being examined, the European Parliament had wanted to exclude health services from the text. The Commission had decided to examine the appropriate action to be taken with regard to cross-border health care at Community level. This was the subject of the consultation that the Commission had launched on 26 September 2006, to which DG EMPL had actively contributed. The Secretariat reiterated the importance of replying to this consultation, the deadline for which was 31 January 2007.