WRITTEN QUESTION P-3484/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 November 2002)

Subject: The sinking of the Prestige and the inspection of ships

While the oil tanker Prestige was breaking-up on the high seas the Commission issued a series of separate statements apparently blaming Gibraltar for failing to inspect the ship. In fact, the twenty-six-year-old Liberian tanker, registered in the Bahamas, managed in Greece and chartered by a company in Switzerland on behalf of a Russian oil trader, had docked in Gibraltar only once during the last five years (for refuelling) and had during the same period docked in many European ports including Cork, Dunkirk, Kalamata, Rotterdam (where it was inspected by government agencies in September 1999) and Wilhelmshaven, as well as Algeciras and Las Palmas in Spain (where the ship was declared seaworthy), Latvia and Singapore. The ship had been inspected four times in the US without being detained, and was surveyed in Dubai this year under the auspices of the American Bureau of shipping, the ship's classification society.

Can the Commission confirm that the United Kingdom and its colonies fulfil the obligation to inspect at least 25 % of ships, but that a number of EU Member States, including Denmark, France, Greece and Ireland do not? That being the case, does the Commission now regret its statements attributing blame to Gibraltar, which seem to have been made in order to damage the reputation of Gibraltar rather than to address the serious problems to coastal areas such as Galicia posed by the break-up of oil tankers such as Prestige, and will the Commission undertake to be more considered in its responses in future?

With regard to inspections, does the Commission accept that structural damage of the kind afflicting vessels such as Erika and Prestige is not detected by the kind of inspection which Member States are currently required to undertake, and that better targeting and greater provision of information are in themselves insufficient to solve the problem unless there is a proper regime for structural inspections (normally undertaken by naval architects under the aegis of a ship's classification society)? Does the Commission have any plans to introduce structural inspection regimes for ships docking at EU ports, and what are the obligations of flag states in this regard?

Under recent legislation, single-hull ships can continue to be used until 2015. Prestige was carrying extremely heavy oil, which is extremely polluting and which will cause severe problems for those people living on the Galician coast. Does the Commission plan to introduce legislation requiring very heavy oils or other especially polluting materials to be carried in double-hull vessels from now on?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2003)

As the Honourable Member indicates, the loss of the Bahamian-flagged oil tanker Prestige off the Galician coast triggered a major ecological disaster.

The Prestige's last inspection under the port State control rules appears to have been in September 1999 in Rotterdam. It revealed minor anomalies, which were put right before the ship set sail.

After this, the Prestige barely called in at Union ports, with the exception of Kalamata and Gibraltar. It did call into port in Latvia and Russia, though no further inspections were performed on those occasions, either under the Paris Memorandum or pursuant to Directive 95/21/EC on port State control(1).

The Commission has written to the authorities of various States for information on the inspections carried out during the ship's recent calls into ports under their jurisdiction.

Eschewing simple one-off measures, the Commission proposed a series of measures in its communication of 3 December 2002 on action to be taken in response to the Prestige accident(2).

In its conclusions, the Transport Council of 6 December 2002 supported most of the initiatives the Commission put forward in the communication. Thus, as the Honourable Member advocates, a regulation prohibiting the transport of heavy fuel oil by single hull tankers bound for or leaving Union ports and speeding up the replacement of single hull ships by double hull ships was adopted by the Commission on 20 December 2002(3) and is now being examined by the co-legislators.

In accordance with its communication of 3 December 2002, the Commission will invite the Council to grant it without delay a negotiating mandate to ensure that candidate countries, as well as neighbouring countries which are relevant for the heavy fuel oil trade in EU waters, will apply the same principles, through administrative agreements to be concluded within existing cooperation frameworks, such as the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on port State control and Euro-Med.

On the subject of port State control, the Commission communication reminds the Member States of their inspection obligations. It asks them to recruit enough inspectors to check at least 25 % of ships, as required by current European rules. It also requests them to achieve a sufficient level of inspection in all their ports and anchorage areas to prevent them becoming ports of convenience.

The Commission intends to remain particularly vigilant regarding this point. It has already made submissions to the Court of Justice regarding France and Ireland, which are failing to meet the 25 % threshold.

(1) Council Directive 95/21/EC of 19 June 1995 concerning the enforcement, in respect of shipping using Community ports and sailing in the waters under the jurisdiction of the Member States, of international standards for ship safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living and working conditions (port State control), OJ L 157, 7.7.1995.

(2) COM(2002) 681 final.

(3) COM(2002) 780 final.