Just two years after the adoption of the Homoeopathic Directive, a report was issued that called for legislation to ensure freedom of choice in medicine for consumers; how could the NMS ignore such a call? It couldn't, and the Society, once again, took up the consumer banner and became involved....

   In the May of 1994 a report on the status of complementary medicine was presented by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection to the European Parliament, known as the Lannoye Report, after it´s originator, a Belgian MEP called Paul Lannoye. M. Lannoye presented his findings and called for a resolution for the recognition of complementary medicine, and its practice throughout Europe.

   The report failed to get a hearing in the Parliament because there was no time to debate it before the parliamentary session ended for the European elections. However, after being re-elected, Mr Lannoye was granted permission, in December 1994, to revise and re-submit his paper.

   Whilst this report was the most positive document regarding complementary medicines and therapies ever to have come from any parliamentary source, it did not reflect the more open situation found in the UK. So, in January 1995 the NMS spearheaded the formation of the UK Forum for Alternative & Complementary Medicine to co-ordinate a unified UK response to the revised European Lannoye Report. The Forum successfully initiated changes to incorporate a more open approach to practitioners and this was reflected in the revised report.

   Unfortunately, its journey from the Environment Committee to the European Parliament was not without difficulties and there were many objections to the recognition of non-medically qualified practitioners. Eventually, a much altered, but still acceptable, report was presented to the Parliament in May 1997. Unfortunately, amendments presented on the day virtually demolished the report so that the version adopted was little more than a request to the Commission to carry out studies into the effectiveness of complementary medicine. Because it no longer bore any resemblance to his very positive and enlightened report, M. Lannoye withdrew his name from the Resolution altogether.

   But this is not the end of the story - the NMS is working with other organisations through the UK Forum to adapt M. Lannoye´s report for potentially positive legislation to be developed in the UK - and work continues to promote the resurrection of the original concept within a European context. Perhaps beginning with the establishment of a European Forum for Alternative and Complementary Medicines.