Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
29 May 2017
E-003554-17
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 130
Franck Proust (PPE)

 Subject:  Proposal for a directive on the proportionality test and the subsidiarity principle
 Answer(s) 

In January 2017, the Commission presented a proposal for a directive on the need for a proportionality test before adoption of new regulation of professions. The proposal seeks to establish a legal framework for the use of the proportionality test in Europe, in order to put an end to disproportionate restrictions on regulated professions and to address the fragmentation of the internal market in this regard.

In France, this proposal has been the subject of two reasoned opinions, by the Senate and the National Assembly, concerning non-compliance with the subsidiarity principle. The French Parliament believes that, as it stands, the directive undermines the Member States’ competence in the areas of health and tourism, where, according to the treaties, the EU can only complement the action of the national authorities.

1. Is the Commission aware of the reasoned opinions? Does it plan to adapt its proposal to bring it into line with the subsidiarity principle?

2. If not, can the Commission assure the Member States and stakeholders in the relevant sectors of the economy that the directive will not undermine national competence in the areas of tourism and health?

Original language of question: FR 
Last updated: 15 June 2017Legal notice