WRITTEN QUESTION E-3381/02 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Pilotage in shipping: incorporating preventive security.
Date: 2002-11-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU waters, common ports policy, harbour installation, maritime safety, provision of services

3.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155 E/147

Further checks will be made.

Where the Community rules incorporate a ‘full payment’ requirement any direct or indirect levy when the
aid is paid is automatically incompatible with Community law. In the case of outstanding debts to the
banks that have not arisen in connection with management of the aid scheme, the recipient in question
would have to authorise the bank explicitly in writing to offset his outstanding debts to it against an
amount due to him direct aid scheme. If the debts have arisen out of the bank’s administration of the aid
scheme offsetting is not consonant with Community law.

(2003/C 155 E/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3381/02

by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 November 2002)

Subject: Pilotage in shipping: incorporating preventive security

The terror attacks of 11 September 2001 and, more particularly, the attack on the French supertanker
‘Limburg’, clearly demonstrate the threat also posed by terrorists to international shipping. That applies in
equal measure to international and to territorial waters. It puts not only maritime safety, intended to
prevent shipping accidents and the resultant environmental damage, on the agenda, but also maritime
security, in terms of preventive efforts to combat terrorism.

I put the following questions to the Commission:

1. What options are open to the Commission for taking maritime security into account at European level

in the future?

2.

Is there the option of incorporating aspects of maritime security into the current negotiations on the
‘port-package’?

3. Does the Commission share the view that great importance attaches to the availability of a public
pilotage service in this connection, since it can assume the function of discharging sovereign
responsibilities?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 2003)

Maritime security has been one of the Commission’s concerns since well before 11 September 2001, as
may be seen from the Transport White Paper, which already referred to the need to step up the security of
passengers embarking on ships offering European cruises.

The Commission backs an approach involving an overall response to the problem of maritime security
through the adoption of international instruments. An International Ship and Port Facility Security Code
was adopted at the International Maritime Organisation’s Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Security on
13 December 2002. The Commission will shortly be presenting a communication including a proposal for
legislation to incorporate these provisions into Community law to ensure they are applied uniformly and
effectively throughout the Community.

Meanwhile, in 2002 the Commission carried out a study on tightening up the security of cruise passengers
in the Union’s Mediterranean ports. Its findings, together with those due from a broader study of the
whole problem of security in ports and its financial consequences, will, together with consultation of the
Member States, allow the necessary additional measures to be identified to improve security in all EU ports.

C 155 E/148

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

Since the proposal for a Directive on Market Access to Port Services deals with services exclusively within
port areas, it would not appear to be appropriate to include detailed security aspects in this directive.
However, the question of security-related conditions for service providers in ports is being examined by
the Council and the Parliament in the framework of the legislative procedure on this proposal.

The Commission does not believe that the diversity of the ports, their local specificities and requirements,
the variety of shipping services, experience in Member States together with the application of the
subsidiarity principle warrant the introduction of general rules on public service obligations for pilots.

(2003/C 155 E/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3392/02

by Astrid Thors (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 November 2002)

Subject: Unsolicited advertising in Windows, protection of personal data in telecommunications networks

In recent months, Windows programme users have been annoyed by advertising windows which pop up
on screen. These windows do not come as e-mail or over the web but come in through the user system’s
back door. The process has been described by the Finnish newspaper IT-viikko in its edition of
14 November 2002. It reports that the advertising is carried out with the aid of a programme developed
by a company called Direct Advertiser.com. The programme uses features in the Windows Messenger
programme, the intended purpose of which was to enable users to send messages to the webmaster. The
Messenger features are found in Windows 2000, NT and XP programmes.

Does the Commission consider that the recently adopted directive on protection of personal data in
telecommunications networks offers consumers sufficient protection against such windows?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 2003)

Commercial messages sent via the programme of ‘Direct Advertiser.com’, as referred to by the Honourable
Member, do not fall within the definition of electronic mail as included in Directive 2002/58/EC of the
Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the
protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic
communications) (1). This definition only covers messages that can be stored in terminal equipment until
they are collected by the addressee. Messages that depend on the addressee being on-line and that
disappear when this is not the case, are not covered by the definition of electronic mail. As a consequence,
the new Directive does not impose an opt-in for such messages (as under paragraph 1 of Article 13), but
instead allows Member States to choose between an opt-in and an opt-out (paragraph 3 by Article 13). In
accordance with the Directive, the national opt-in or opt-out rules will have to be in place by 1 November
2003 at the latest.

At its website, ‘Direct Advertiser.com’ explains how users of Windows software can block messages from
entering their terminal equipment by switching off the Windows Messenger programme. This information
would also have to be provided as part of the messages that may be sent via the programme in order to
offer recipients an opt-out facility as imposed by the new Directive, without prejudice to more stringent
national opt-in requirements.

Moreover, it would appear that the Windows Messenger programme is in any case not intended for use by
third parties to send unsolicited messages and that the ‘Direct Advertiser.com’ software inappropriately
uses it as a backdoor into the terminal equipment of potential customers. In its ongoing dialogue with