WRITTEN QUESTION E-1785/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(19 June 2001)

Subject: Deteriorating safety at sea caused by under-crewing of ships

1. Can the Commission confirm that cutbacks on the crewing of sea-going ships registered in EU Member States has in recent decades led not only to the disappearance of labour-intensive maintenance, loading and unloading jobs - work that on European ships is usually done by crew members from South-East Asia or the Caribbean - but also to reductions in duties involving planning, technology and safety, typically discharged by nationals of EU Member States?

2. To what extent do such circumstances as over-tiredness, loss of attention and making way on calm seas with no crew member on wheelhouse duty contribute to shipping accidents and maritime pollution?

3. Will the Commission endorse the view of the Netherlands Seafarers Trade Union (FWZ) that European ships are running 10 % short of crew members, and that for safety reasons at least two additional crew members are needed per ship.

4. To what extent, in the Commission's opinion, are shipping inspections by EU Member States understaffed? Does the rate vary by Member State or is there a general shortfall?

5. On the basis of what arguments do ship owners oppose the enlargement of crew numbers? Which such arguments are convincing in the Commission's opinion and which are not?

6. What supplementary measures does the Commission still consider necessary in addition to action taken subsequent to the Erika accident to ensure that shipping safety is not compromised by under-crewing?

Source: TV Nederland 1, 3 May 2001, Netwerk current-affairs broadcast

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2001)

1. The Commission does not have at its disposal the specific data asked for by the Honourable Member. In its communication of 6 April 2001 on the training and recruitment of seafarers(1), the Commission said that the number of European seafarers has fallen by 40 % in 15 years. This fall cannot be attributed solely to the decrease in the number of crew members on board vessels registered in EU Member States. It is also due to the financial considerations of shipowners who have replaced their Community seafarers with labour from non-member States with lower wage costs, and also to the fact that young Europeans regard maritime occupations as less socially and financially attractive than jobs on land.

On the other hand, the Commission considers that the European fleet has shrunk to the benefit of flags of convenience, and fewer and fewer people want to become seafarers. Accordingly, in order to boost the employment of Community seafarers, the Commission proposed in its recent White Paper on European transport policy for 2010 (COM(2001) 370) to promote the reflagging of as many ships as possible to Community registers, taking its inspiration from best practice in the social insurance and taxation fields, and to study in particular the possibility of tonnage tax type incentives in the next revision of Community guidelines on State aid to maritime transport.

2. The Commission knows of some specific accidents where enquiries have shown fatigue or human error to have been a determining factor, but does not have any general statistical data on the percentage of accidents that are due to overtiredness, loss of attention or no crew members being on wheelhouse duty.

3. At present there are no harmonised Community measures governing the number of crew members required on board ships. This is the responsibility of each Member State. The Commission shares the concern of the Dutch trade union seeking to ensure that the fall in the number of seafarers on board does not prejudice maritime safety. However, it is the specific situation of each vessel which counts in each case and it is not possible to declare from the outset that two additional crew members are needed on each ship.

4. The data the Commission has on the number of port State control inspectors in the Member States show substantial variations from one Member State to another. It is, however, difficult to draw any final conclusions from this since most inspectors also have other administrative duties, in particular those of safety inspection as flag State inspectors. However, with annual inspection statistics the Commission has a very reliable indicator of the efforts being made by the maritime authorities of the Member States. The Commission has thus found that in the year 2000 four Member States were unable to comply with their obligation under the port State inspection Directive to inspect 25 % of ships entering their ports in the course of a representative year. The Commission has instituted infringement proceedings for established cases of default.

Incidentally, in the framework of the Erika I package the Commission adopted a proposal to amend the port State control Directive 95/21/EC, envisaging an expansion of the system of detailed inspections of certain categories of ships, including oil tankers more than 15 years old. Implementing this measure should result in an appreciable increase in the number of port State control inspectors in the Member States from the end of 2003 onwards.

5. For the reason given in point 3 above, the Commission is unable to comment on shipowners' arguments regarding the enlargement of crew numbers.

6. The Community clearly attaches particular importance to the human factor, which it considers to be closely linked to safety at sea. The Commission therefore considers it necessary for the port State inspections of living and working conditions on board ships (compliance with International Labour Organisation - ILO - conventions) to be carried out more frequently and to be better harmonised.

(1) COM(2001) 188 final.