Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Progress report on the GALILEO research programme as at the beginning of 2004’ (COM(2004) 112 final)
Date: 2004-06-30
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU programme, research programme, satellite communications, telecommunications

7.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 302/35

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Progress report on the GALILEO
research programme as at the beginning of 2004’

(COM(2004) 112 final)

(2004/C 302/08)

On 5 May 2004, the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the EC Treaty on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
the Commission's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 10 June 2004. The rapporteur was Mr
Buffetaut.

At its 410th plenary session of 30 June and 1 July 2004 (meeting of 30 June 2004), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 161 votes, with three abstentions:

1. Preamble

its economy and, primarily,

1.1
The GALILEO programme represents a major challenge
for the European Union, its independence, its technological and
its space and
scientific capacity,
telecommunications industries. Over the last few years,
the
development of the space industry in the EU has been based
mainly on commercial activity linked to satellite telecommuni-
cations. The difficulties which have afflicted the telecommuni-
cations industry have had serious repercussions on the space
industry, which has been given insufficient institutional and
in particular in comparison with its main
political support,
competitors.

1.2
The GALILEO programme, which was delayed because
of the discussions on the allocation of ‘fair returns’ from the
programme between the various states which are members of
the European Space Agency and because of pressures from
outside Europe,
starting phase
finally entered the actual
following the agreement on 26 May 2003 in the Council of the
European Space Agency (ESA) on the respective financial
contributions of the ESA Member States.

1.3
feature
The GALILEO programme has an important
when compared with the GPS system, namely that it is a civil
programme. This major infrastructure project is of decisive
strategic importance to Europe and the independence of
Europe, as has already been pointed out by the EESC, the Euro-
pean Parliament and the European Council. The GALILEO
programme ties in perfectly with the Lisbon Strategy. The
importance of such a large-scale project
to the cause of
promoting European integration should also be strongly
emphasised.

1.4

The GALILEO system will provide five services:

— the ‘open service’ (comparable to the GPS basic service);

— the ‘safety of life service’ intended primarily for use by air,

rail and maritime transport bodies;

— the ‘commercial service’, which is more accurate than the
open service and is designed for commercial applications;

— the ‘public regulated service’;

the use of

this service is
reserved for public authorities and their police, customs
and civil protection services. High-precision, encrypted
signals will be used for these activities; they will also be
able to used for military purposes and the necessary
measures will be taken to prevent any malicious interfer-
ence.

1.5
As GALILEO is a civil system, its main use is nonethe-
less for everyday purposes, particularly in the field of transport.
It will therefore have to be able ensure a continuous and secure
service, and, in the event of a breakdown, its civil liability may
be engaged, which is not the case with the GPS system.

1.6
Finally, GALILEO will be slightly more precise than GPS
and, above all, have a range covering the whole of the planet.
It can also provide for real time verification of the integrity of
the signal; this is a vital requirement for certain applications,
particularly in the field of civil aviation.

1.7
The basic aim of the communication under review is to
report on the progress made with the GALILEO programme, to
outline the prospects for the future and to pinpoint a number
of ongoing uncertainties in respect of a project which is
expected to cost EUR3.2 bn. and to involve three phases,
namely:

— a development and validation phase, running from 2002 to

2005;

— a deployment phase from 2006 to 2007;

— a commercial operating phase, due to begin in 2008.

2. Structure and gist of the Commission document

The communication revolves around the following three
points:

— the progress of the development phase;

— the development of international cooperation;

— the ‘search and rescue service’;

— the transition to the deployment and operating phases.

C 302/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.12.2004

2.1 The development phase

2.2 The development of international cooperation

2.1.1 T h e J oi nt Unde r ta ki ng

that

The agreement reached in May 2003 in the Council of the ESA
made it possible to resolve the outstanding issues, with the
the GALILEO Joint Undertaking has been fully
result
operational since last summer. The director of the Joint Under-
taking has been appointed, the establishment plan has been
accepted and its budget for 2003 and 2004 has been adopted.
EGNOS,
the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay
Service, should be placed under the control of the Joint Under-
taking. The remaining problem is the question of the Joint
Undertaking's fiscal and social status. This matter is being
discussed with the Belgian Government. The sums involved are
by no means negligible (EUR 5 million per year). The aim is to
secure for the 32 persons working at the Joint Undertaking
arrangements of the same nature as those applicable to the
members of the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Euro-
pean Commission. The Belgian authorities are not opposed to
this request but wish to ensure that the staff of the Joint Enter-
prise enjoy social security cover. The problem is therefore
more of an administrative nature than a substantive nature.

2.1.2 T e ch ni ca l stu di e s a nd r e se a r c h w or k

These concern:

— the latest work on the definition phase;

— basic infrastructure;

— the EGNOS system, which will soon be operational;

2.2.1
As the Council has stressed on several occasions, inter-
national cooperation is an essential element for ensuring that
maximum benefits are derived from the GALILEO programme.
Furthermore, requests from third countries to be associated
with the project are becoming more and more numerous. In
this context, the Commission wishes to pursue, at one and the
same time, a bilateral approach and a regional approach.

2.2.2
An initial agreement was signed with China on 30
October 2003 and talks have got under way with India and
Israel. Similar steps are being taken in the case of South Korea,
Brazil, Japan, Canada, Australia, Mexico and Chile.

2.2.3
with the Mediterranean region, Latin America and Africa.

As regards regional cooperation, dialogue has started

Negotiations are also under way with the two states
2.2.4
which already have a satellite navigation system, namely Russia
and the United States. These negotiations are particularly
important as they are designed to ensure technical compat-
ibility and interoperability between the systems used by these
latter states and the GALILEO programme. It should be pointed
out that, initially, the United States questioned the very justifi-
cation of
consultation
the GALILEO programme. The
mechanism currently under discussion must be based on a
the partners has symmetrical
system under which each of
rights and duties in respect of the other partner, particularly in
connection with the exercise of a possible right of veto.

2.3 Transition to the deployment and operating phases

This is the crucial issue. The deployment and operating phases
of the system will start in 2006 and 2008 respectively.

— a European radio navigation schedule.

2.3.1 Conc e ssi on p r oce du r e

2.1.3 T h e Wor ld R a di o Commu ni c a ti on Confe r e nc e ,

held in Ju ne 2003

2.1.3.1
EU, which had two objectives:

The issues at stake were extremely important for the

— to obtain confirmation of the spectrum of frequencies allo-

cated in 2000;

— to ensure, within that

frequency spectrum, distribution
amongst the different systems should not prove disadvanta-
geous to the European system and to ensure that access to
the frequency spectrum was both equitable and based on
the principle of interoperability.

2.1.3.2
The discussions took place against the background
of the historical monopoly of the American GPS system. The
EU did, however,
in fact secure the outcome which it had
hoped for, both as regards the conditions for utilising the
frequency spectrum and as regards its demand that
there
should be impartial multilateral coordination.

2.1.4 Inte g r a ti on of th e ne w M e mb e r S ta t e s a nd th e

ca ndi date c ountr i e s

Initiatives have been elaborated on an industrial scale so as to
ensure the full participation of the abovementioned countries
in the GALILEO programme, as desired by the Commission.

2.3.1.1
The concession procedure is managed by the Joint
Undertaking. The procedure was launched in October 2003.
Four tenders were registered and declared to be eligible. The
tenders were submitted by consortia consisting of a number of
lead partners, backed up by a cluster of associated companies.
All of the bidders considered that the future European system
could generate substantial commercial revenue and each was
willing to fund a considerable proportion of its contribution
from its own assets.

2.3.1.2
This factor is all the more important in view of the
fact that the Council wishes that Community funding should
the financing for the deployment
not exceed one-third of
phase. Under the second phase of the concession procedure,
known as ‘competitive negotiation’, three consortia have been
shortlisted
EADS/Thalès/Inmarsat,
Eutelsat).

(Alcatel/Alenia/Vinci,

2.3.1.3

Six types of resources have been identified, namely:

— the sale of the services generated by the GALILEO system;

— licences and intellectual property rights;

— EU financing;

— loans from the European Investment Bank (EIB);

— financial contributions from some third countries;

— if it should be necessary, a levy on satellite radionavigation

receivers.

7.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 302/37

2.3.2 F r a me w or k str u ctu r e for th e sy ste m

— the building-in of the security requirements at the design

2.3.2.1
The Commission has forwarded to the Council and
the European Parliament a proposal for a Regulation on the
establishment of structures for the management of the Euro-
pean Satellite Radionavigation Programme.
It had been
proposed to establish a Supervisory Authority and a Centre for
Security and Safety; the latter body would be placed under the
direct responsibility of the General Secretary of the Council/
High Representative for the Common Security and Foreign
Policy.
It ultimately transpired that a Supervisory Authority
should indeed be established and would be given responsibil-
ities in respect of security. The Centre for Security and Safety
would not be set up; the Council itself would take decisions in
real time in the event of a crisis.

that

It should be pointed out

2.3.2.2
Another key issue with regard to the framework
structure for the system is the issue of possible threats to indivi-
the GALILEO
dual privacy.
system does not, in itself, pose any threat to privacy since it
does not receive any information from users (there is no
‘uplink’). On the other hand, information received by the user
can be retransmitted by another system — e.g. mobile phones
— thereby making it possible to pinpoint the location of the
user. Responsibility for regulating such use of
information
provided by the GALILEO system does not in any way lie with
the EU programme management structures but rather with
national authorities. The attention of the national authorities
should be drawn to the measures which they are responsible
for taking in order to regulate the use of the GALILEO system
and — forthwith — the use of the GPS system.

3. General comments

the decisive

The Committee

3.1
approach
appreciates
adopted by the Commission in its Communication in view of
the fact that the project in question is clearly of the utmost
importance and involves considerable difficulties. In this spirit
— marked by a determination to succeed — sustained attention
should be paid to the following issues:

Brussels, 30 June 2004.

stage of both the system and its management;

— the conclusion of negotiations with the USA with a view to
reaching an agreement based on symmetrical commitments
and the goal of interoperability;

— the endeavour to find adequate private funding and the

guaranteed provision of long-term loans by the EIB;

— the need to keep the cost of realising the programme

within the confines of the estimated budget.

3.2
The success of this major project depends upon the
clear affirmation of political and financial will by the Council
and its resolute adherence to this stance. By committing itself
to the GALILEO project,
the Council has demonstrated its
ambition for both the EU and its space policy.

4. Conclusion

4.1
In its conclusions, the Commission appears to demon-
strate some anxiety or uncertainty as regards the issue of finan-
cing. This is a matter of fundamental importance; if the finan-
cing were to be called into question, the whole programme
could be placed in jeopardy. The EESC can only reaffirm the
fact that the GALILEO project is of major strategic importance
to the EU, to the future of its space industry and to the cause
of promoting European integration; The EESC already strongly
in its
emphasised this point, setting out a detailed case,
opinions on the Commission's Green Paper and White Paper
on the European space policy (1). The EESC shares the Commis-
sion's satisfaction with regard to the very real progress which
has been achieved in getting this project underway and hopes
that the optimism displayed by the Commission will not be
lessened by last-minute difficulties.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

(1) Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the
White Paper entitled Space: a new European frontier
for an
expanding Union — an action plan for implementing the European
Space Policy (COM(2003) 673 final).
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the
Green Paper on European Space Policy (COM(2003) 17 final — OJ
C 220 of 16.9.2003)