|
· The Society
· The Council
· Free movement in Europe
· Mystery shopping
· The profession
Letters to the Editor
|
Free movement in Europe
Update on language testing for EU pharmacists
From Mr J. Ferguson, FRPharmS
Further to my letter last week (PJ, 12 June, p740), I have now discussed
language testing for EU pharmacists with the new head of unit in the
Internal Market Directorate-General, who will be responsible for steering
the draft directive through the legislative process.
First, there will be a delay until the text on which political agreement
was reached last month at the Competitiveness Council is translated into
all 20 official languages of the EU. This will not be until late autumn
at the earliest. Then the text will go to the European Parliament (EP)
for second reading. However, since this will be a new EP, there is a
possibility that it will say that it is not bound by the views of its
predecessor and wishes to start the process anew.
Secondly, the new text indicates that the Commission has recorded a “reservation” on
the Article dealing with language tests. The Commission proposes that
the following words should be added: “The competent bodies may
ask applicants to provide proof of language knowledge within the limits
of the principle of proportionality which, in particular, rules out systematic
examination of such knowledge.”
Translating Eurospeak, this probably means that it will be possible to
require a language test, provided that this condition is not applied
indiscriminately to all applicants from other EU countries. There is
a precedent in that the Royal Pharmaceutical Society used to require
all applicants from EU countries who did not meet the precise conditions
for automatic recognition of qualifications, set out in the current pharmacists’ directives,
to pass the registration examination. The Commission advised that this
must not be done “systematically” but the position of each
applicant should be considered on its individual merits, taking into
account such matters as qualifications and total experience of practice.
My discussion with the head of unit led me to believe that the Commission
accepts that, in the health field, the interests and safety of patients
must be the priority.
Finally, on a general point, I should mention that the UK, like France
and Denmark, has indicated that acceptance of the final text will be
subject to the scrutiny of the UK Parliament.
John Ferguson
Haywards Heath,
West Sussex
What is a sufficient knowledge of a language?
From Ms E. A. Mishon, MRPharmS
In response to John Ferguson’s letter (PJ, 12 June, p740), I write
as one who has put to the test the concept that there is pan-European “free
movement” of pharmacists. In my experience it is, at best, patchy.
Mike Burden is right to be concerned that there should be a safeguard to
ensure that European pharmacists in Britain should have a working
knowledge of English (PJ, 29 May, p685). However, what of British pharmacists who
wants to work in Europe? I have been approached by other British pharmacists
who, knowing that I live in France, believed that I had already registered
with the French pharmaceutical society and therefore thought I might be
able to advise. I did try to register but failed, so was unable to help.
It is a pity that Article 49 of the new European directive states only: “Persons
benefiting from the recognition of professional qualifications should have
a knowledge of languages necessary for practising the profession in the
host member state.” That is fine as it stands but what is “a
knowledge of languages necessary for practising”? The statement is
akin to the requirement of the French society demanding “a sufficiency” in
their language for those who wish to join. The French in this respect are
a law unto themselves. Neither the French society nor our Society is prepared
to communicate what “a sufficiency” is, or who will decide.
Hopefully clarification on this point is coming.
Knowledge of languages is only one aspect of communication. Scottish, Welsh
or Geordie accents can be incomprehensible to Home Counties speakers. I
once had to ask a Scottish GP “What is a cleg?”.
In Britain there is usually one hard-pressed pharmacist per pharmacy, therefore
the opportunities for European pharmacists to learn the job, improve their
language skills and work at the same time are nil. A recognised postgraduate
placing of a European pharmacist with another Society member for about
three months — a sort of pharmaceutical “au pair” — might
work, although it is easy to see that this would not be popular with those
employers who are looking for cheap labour.
Anne Mishon
Laurac le Grand, France |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal