# CE2004065EN.01010902.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/109 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/109

---

(2004/C 65 E/122)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2072/03

by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 June 2003)

Subject:   Rules on ships' crews

Subject:

National legislation in Denmark on the national fleet makes it impossible for a German master, for instance, to find employment on a Danish-flagged vessel. For mariners, this very much constrains the freedom of movement for workers which is enshrined in the European Treaties. Many European mariners, particularly those from countries with small fleets, have no alternative but to switch to vessels flying flags of convenience, with corresponding loss of prestige and poorer working conditions and pay.

The Commission:

| 1. | Is it aware of the precarious competitive situation with regard to European mariners? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it aware of the precarious competitive situation with regard to European mariners?

| 2. | What does it intend to do to eliminate such distortions of competition in Europe? |
| --- | --- |

2.

What does it intend to do to eliminate such distortions of competition in Europe?

| 3. | Would the introduction of an EU flag and/or a European register be a suitable measure to improve matters in this connection? What are the pros and cons? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Would the introduction of an EU flag and/or a European register be a suitable measure to improve matters in this connection? What are the pros and cons?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(29 August 2003)

(29 August 2003)

The Commission would like to give the following information:

| — | in relation to the question on free movement of workers, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its reply to Written Question E-1740/02 of Mr Pronk, Mrs Martens, Mrs Peijs and Mr Maat (1). As the two preliminary questions (2), in which the nationality condition for captains and first officers is concerned, are still pending before the Court of Justice, the Commission continues to refrain from making any form of prediction as to their possible outcome; |
| --- | --- |

—

in relation to the question on free movement of workers, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its reply to Written Question E-1740/02 of Mr Pronk, Mrs Martens, Mrs Peijs and Mr Maat (1). As the two preliminary questions (2), in which the nationality condition for captains and first officers is concerned, are still pending before the Court of Justice, the Commission continues to refrain from making any form of prediction as to their possible outcome;

1

2

| — | the Commission considers that the introduction of a Community register would, inter alia, have contributed to the free movement of seafarers within the Community. However, its related proposal on the creation of the ‘Euros’ register for sea-going merchant vessels (3) was not accepted by the Member States and was subsequently abandoned. Since then, the Commission proposed other measures aimed at fostering the competitiveness of the European shipping industry, in particular the Community guidelines on State aid to maritime transport, which are in the process of being revised. |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission considers that the introduction of a Community register would, inter alia, have contributed to the free movement of seafarers within the Community. However, its related proposal on the creation of the ‘Euros’ register for sea-going merchant vessels (3) was not accepted by the Member States and was subsequently abandoned. Since then, the Commission proposed other measures aimed at fostering the competitiveness of the European shipping industry, in particular the Community guidelines on State aid to maritime transport, which are in the process of being revised.

3

---

(1)  OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002.

1

(2)  Case C-405/01 Colegio de Oficiales de la Marina Mercante Española v. Administración del Estado and Case C-47/02 Albert Anker v. Federal Republic of Germany; the Advocate General gave her conclusions on both cases on the 12.6.2003.

2

(3)  COM(89) 266, OJ C 263, 16.10.1989 - COM(91) 483, OJ C 19, 25.1.1992.

3

---