EU LEGISLATION
hence the further delay of 18 months. However, it is hoped that the remaining
How are EU laws made?
Te treaties that govern the EU empower the European institutions to make laws, or ‘directives’, that are binding on all member states in various policy areas. Te way in which these laws are made varies, but in the case of health and safety legislation, like the EMF Directive, a process called ‘co-decision’ is used. • The European Commission, the executive of the EU, decides to propose a new direc- tive. Only the Commission has this power to initiate legislation.
• There is a process of consultation with member states and other stakeholders, impact assessment, expert input, and ‘inter-service’ consultation within the Commission itself.
• The proposed directive is then formally adopted by the College of Commissioners, and is passed to the European Parliament and the Council of the EU for discussion.
• Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are directly elected by citizens of EU member states. Like national parliaments, it is organised along party-political lines, and has a complex system of committees and groups.
• The Council is made up of representatives of member state governments; when meet- ing at the most senior level these are the government ministers responsible for the relevant area, but most work takes place in committees of civil servants.
• Both the Parliament and the Council have to agree for a directive to be passed. There is a complicated process of interaction between the two bodies, allowing for amend- ment of the Commission proposal and conciliation between the two bodies in order to reach agreement.
• In the Parliament, a simple majority is needed to adopt legislation. In the Council, a ‘qualified majority’ is needed: the proposal must command the support of at least half of the member states, and also a majority of votes. Te number of votes cast by each member state depends on its size.
In the case of the EMF Directive, concerns about impact on MRI were raised by some MEPs, but the Commission did not accept that there would be a problem. Te medical imaging community was not consulted. Once the directive had been passed in 2004 there was no legal means to amend it to exclude MRI, or for member states to opt out, without a new directive being adopted. Even postponement of the transposition dead- line in 2008 and again in 2012 required adoption of new directives by the Parliament and Council.
Book review
MRI in Practice, 4th Edition by C Westbrook, C K Roth & J Talbot (Senior Lecturer at Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK) Pub by Wiley-Blackwell 2011, Paperback 456 pages € 39.60
Since the first edition was published in 1993, this book has become the standard text for radiographers, technologists, radiology resi- dents, radiologists and even sales representa- tives on the subject of magnetic resonance imaging. This text is essential reading on post- graduate courses. Furthermore MRI in Prac- tice has come to be known as the number one reference book and study guide in the areas of MR instrumentation, principles, pulse sequences,
image acquisition, and imaging parameters for the advanced level examination 12 DI EUROPE
for MRI offered by the American Registry for Radiologic Technologists (ARRT) in the USA. The book explains in clear terms the the-
ory that underpins magnetic resonance so that the capabilities and operation of MRI systems can be fully appreciated and maximised. This fourth edition captures recent advances, and coverage includes: parallel imaging techniques and new sequences such as balanced gradient echo. The book also now has a companion website which hosts animated versions of a selection of illustrations in the book.
APRIL/MAY 2012
disagreements can be settled in a much shorter time than that. The succession
of Denmark to the rotating presidency of the EU in January 2012 resulted in a more constructive approach, and a commitment to resolve the issue defini- tively. It is hoped that this comes to fru- ition, and that the uncertainty brought about by this unnecessary obstacle to the development of MRI can be laid to rest within the next few months.
For the latest updates on the EMF Directive and MRI, see
http://www.alli-
ance-for-mri.org/cms/website.php?id=/ en/eu_affairs_research/al l iance_
for_mri.htm.
REFERENCES 1. Directive
2004/40/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields). Official Journal of the European Union L 159 of 30 April 2004 (and corrigenda L 184 of 24 May 2004). [Online at http://eur-lex.
europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L: 2004:159:0001:0026:EN:PDF (accessed 23rd April 2012)]
2. Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council on the mini- mum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (elec- tromagnetic fields). [Online at http://
eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=COM:2011:0348:FIN:EN:PDF (accessed 24th April 2012)].
3. ICNIRP. Health Physics 2004; 66: 100-106. 4. ICNIRP
. Health Physics 1998; 74: 494.
5. Keevil SF et al. Br J Radiol 2005; 78: 973. 6. ICNIRP
. Health Physics 2010; 99: 818-836.
7. Crozier S et al. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2007;26:1261-1277.
8. Crozier S et al. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2007;26:1236-1254.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56