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
PDF 104kWORD 16k
1 June 2017
Question for written answer P-003659-17
to the Commission
Rule 130
Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE) , Claude Moraes (S&D) , Seb Dance (S&D) , Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE) , Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea (ALDE) , Cecilia Wikström (ALDE) , Catherine Bearder (ALDE)

 Subject:  Infringement proceedings against the UK on the application of Free Movement Directive
 Answer in writing 

In 2012, the Commission launched infringement proceedings against the UK regarding the application of Directive 2004/38/EC and stated: ‘Under the Free Movement Directive, EU citizens who settle in another EU country but do not work there may be required to have sufficient resources and sickness insurance.

The United Kingdom, however, does not consider entitlement to treatment by the UK public healthcare scheme (NHS) as sufficient. This breaches EC law.’ Five years later, there is still no final decision from the Commission. Meanwhile, we are receiving multiple signals from European citizens that they are still being refused permanent residence as their entitlements to the NHS are not considered as comprehensive sickness insurance (CSI).

Could the Commission confirm whether the statement quoted above means that the entitlements to the NHS have to be considered as CSI for the purposes of securing residence rights?

If yes, why does the Commission refrain from adopting a final decision on the infringement proceedings against the UK, given that the practice identified as a breach of EC law has not ceased to exist?

Given the formal Article 50 notification and the statements of the UK Government, does the Commission consider that an ‘amicable’ settlement of these infringement proceedings with the UK is still possible?

Legal notice - Privacy policy