EN Official Journal of the European Union C 108/52

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No. 1406/2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency’

(COM(2003) 440 final - 2003/0159 (COD))

(2004/C 108/07)

On 8 September 2003, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 80(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 8 January 2004. The rapporteur was Mr Chagas.

At its 405th plenary session of 28 and 29 January 2004 (meeting of 28 January), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 107 votes with two abstentions.

1. The Commission proposal

1.1 The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) was set up under Regulation (EC) No. 1406/2002 (1) following the ‘Erika’ oil tanker disaster in late 1999, with the purpose of ensuring ‘a high, uniform and effective level of maritime safety and prevention of pollution by ships within the Community’. The Agency will provide Member States with technical and scientific assistance in order to ensure that Community legislation on maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by ships is properly applied.

1.2 The Agency is also responsible for collecting information and exploiting databases on maritime safety; evaluating and auditing classification societies; and organising inspection missions in the Member States to monitor the conditions for ship inspections by the port State.

1.3 In particular, the Commission proposes: — providing the Agency with the legal competence and the necessary means to respond to accidental or unlawful pollution caused by ships, and offering the possibility of chartering specialised ships and the necessary equipment to respond to maritime pollution; — expanding the Agency's objectives to include maritime transport security, as justified by the rise in terrorist threats against ships and port facilities, and the need to ensure that the security measures laid down in the Commission Communication on enhancing maritime transport security (2) are properly applied; — clearly defining the Agency's role in recognising the qualifications of third country seafarers, in line with Community legislation on the minimum level of training of seafarers.

2. General comments

2.1 Given the scope of its responsibilities, the European Maritime Safety Agency clearly plays an essential role in ensuring that Community and international rules on maritime safety and the prevention of accidental or unlawful pollution by ships are applied in an effective and uniform manner.

2.2 For this reason, and in particular following the Prestige disaster in late 2002, the Commission decided in December of that year to speed up the creation of the EMSA and not wait for the Council decision on the future location of the Agency, which was finally taken by the European Summit in December 2003.

2.3 This has speeded up the entire administrative process of recruiting staff (still underway), appointing an Administrative Board and gradually getting all of its services up and running.

2.4 As regards the proposed amendments to the EMSA Regulation, the EESC supports the Commission proposal, subject to the comments made below.

2.5 It is a known fact that not all the Member States implement Community legislation in the same way and at the same time, in particular that relating to the safety of Community shipping. However, the Commission's efforts to constantly improve the harmonisation of procedures and implementation, and thereby improve the safety of people and goods, as well as environmental protection, are acknowledged. The EESC therefore welcomes these amendments, as they strengthen and clarify the EMSA's role in assisting the Commission in the following areas: drafting and updating Community legislation and monitoring its implementation; organising training actions; compiling and maintaining information databases on maritime safety, maritime security, prevention of pollution and response to pollution; cooperation with third countries in these areas; improving the quality of state port control; and evaluating and recognising the certification and implementation of relevant legislation by third parties.

2.6 It is nonetheless important to recall the EESC's opinion on establishing the EMSA (3), in which it pointed to the need to make a clear distinction between the remit of the EMSA (which has no legislative or regulatory powers) and that of the Committee on Safe Seas (which has a regulatory role).

2.7 The EESC therefore calls on the Member States to speed up the process of drawing up contingency plans, reviewing and updating existing national plans (including regularly conducting practical exercises), and acquiring the equipment needed to respond properly to major accidents.

2.8 The EESC also believes that the Agency should play a role that supplements actions by the Member States, i.e. by providing technical and scientific assistance in the event of accidental or deliberate pollution by ships. However, each Member State will continue to be responsible for drawing up pollution prevention and response plans and for providing appropriate resources for this task. The EESC regrets that, despite the fact that the Member States are already responsible in this area, some are still not properly prepared to respond to accidents such as the Erika and Prestige disasters.

2.9 The EMSA must cooperate with the Member States in drawing up consistent and coordinated maritime pollution prevention and response plans, as well as managing the technical resources available (specialised ships or other equipment). It would therefore be advisable for the EMSA to be able to play an active role in emergency situations, without this in any way diminishing the responsibility of the Member States. This is the logic behind the introduction of a new point c) iii) in Article 2.

2.10 The EESC also believes that, when ships are chartered to carry out these tasks, it must be ensured that the owner(s) in question respect(s) the relevant Community and international legislation, in particular that governing safety conditions on ships and the living and working conditions (and certification) of crew members.

2.10.1 It would be useful to clarify who will be responsible for the operational management of the ships and equipment provided for pollution response assistance. The EESC is of the view that the competent national authorities should manage the resources available during the intervention.

2.11 Given that some of the States joining the EU in May 2004 are coastal States and that, according to the monitoring reports on the progress towards accession published in November 2003, all fall seriously short in terms of administrative and technical capacity, the EESC recommends drawing up special plans to help equip these countries. This would help prevent certain areas not being covered by any plan or not having the resources needed to provide assistance in the event of an accident. Consideration should also be given to possible forms of cooperation in this area with third countries bordering Member States.

2.12 As regards including maritime security among the Agency's responsibilities, the EESC acknowledges that in this area too it is necessary to ensure that the national plans drawn up by the Member States are effective. This is an area in which the EMSA could assist the Commission. It must be noted, however, that these national plans sometimes include military components to which even the EMSA inevitably has only limited access. In order to prevent some Member States blocking such access, it is important to find flexible solutions that ensure national plans – both individually and as a whole – are effective, and which take account of restrictions that some Member States may introduce.

2.13 Above all, it is important to ensure that rules on improving ship and port facility security are transposed and implemented in a harmonised and consistent manner, without jeopardising their objectives.

2.14 The EESC would like to point out that the Council of Transport Ministers already agreed in principle on this proposal at its meeting in December, without taking account of either the EESC's opinion or the European Parliament's report, both of which are still being drafted. Given that this situation frequently arises, the EESC calls for referrals submitted to it to be given sufficiently long deadlines to allow its opinions to be adopted in good time.

2.15 The Committee also believes that the idea of setting up an EU Coastguard should be discussed further. Although this is a delicate matter owing to the fact that it raises questions of sovereignty and maritime authority, such a coastguard could supplement the EMSA's role in the areas of prevention and monitoring.

3. Conclusions

3.1 The EESC welcomes the Commission proposal and stresses the EMSA's key role in improving maritime safety in the Member States. It nevertheless points to the need to make a clear distinction between the remit of the EMSA and that of the Committee on Safe Seas.

3.2 The EMSA's role in pollution response must supplement and not replace actions by the Member States.

3.3 The EESC profoundly regrets that, in spite of the Erika I and II packages, several Member States still do not have the equipment and human resources necessary to respond to major accidents. Priority must be given to this.

3.3.1 Moreover, the Member States are still behind in drawing up contingency plans. The EESC therefore calls for this process to be speeded up so that a comprehensive network covering all Community waters can swiftly be set up.

3.4 Particular attention must be given to helping equip the future Member States in human resources and equipment for pollution prevention and response.

3.5 The EESC recommends discussing further the idea of setting up an EU coastguard, which could supplement the EMSA's role in the areas of prevention and monitoring.

Brussels, 28 January 2004. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Roger BRIESCH

(1) OJ L 208 of 5.8.2002, p. 1

(2) Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on enhancing maritime transport security, COM(2003) 229 final.

(3) OJ C 221 of 7.8.2001, p. 54.