Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas COM(2006) 275 final
Date: 2007-04-26
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, coastal protection, maritime area, maritime surveillance, shipping policy, sustainable development

C 168/50

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the
Commission to the Council,
the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union:
A European vision for the oceans and seas

the European Parliament,

COM(2006) 275 final

(2007/C 168/11)

On 7 June 2006, the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 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 22 March 2007. The rapporteur
was Dr Bredima Savopoulou and co-rapporteurs Mr Chagas and Mr Nilsson.

At its 435th plenary session, held on 25 and 26 April 2007 (meeting of 26 April), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 157 votes with two abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1
The Green Paper creates a new understanding of the sea
in the EU, which should be welcomed. It is the first time that
the land based mentality of EU policies is reversed. The symbolic
message of the Green Paper that Europe is and has been above
all a maritime nation turns a new page in the EU regarding the
seas.

1.2
The Green Paper promotes a holistic, cross sectoral, stra-
tegic approach vis-à-vis the oceans. The rationale of replacing
fragmentation by a broad vision deserves widespread support.

The positive elements of the Green Paper outnumber by
1.3
far the potential negative ones. The EESC endorses most of the
proposals contained in the Green Paper (on fisheries, ports,
shipbuilding, maritime
regions, offshore
energy, R&D, environment, tourism, blue biotechnology) subject
to specific comments.

transport,

coastal

1.4
The EESC endorses the essential role acknowledged for
It
EU maritime services and ports in a globalised economy.
welcomes the recognition in the Green Paper that shipping is
international requiring global rules. Positive action is required
by the EU to reverse the negative public image of shipping and
the lack of appreciation for the contribution of ships and
seafarers to society. The EESC shares the view that Member
should promptly ratify key international maritime
States
Conventions (IMO/ILO) and ensure that
they are properly
enforced.

1.5 Maritime clusters should occupy a central position in the
future EU maritime policy. The EESC believes that
the EU
to define them and
should commission a study in order
compare them to maritime clusters of other areas. Maritime
clusters will be instrumental in maintaining the maritime know-
how in the EU.

An integrated maritime policy must have at its heart an
1.6
increase in investment in maritime education and training to
underpin the delivery of safe, efficient and high-quality services.
The potential scarcity of skilled seafarers presents alarming
consequences for the EU's marine safety infrastructure and will
increase without concerted efforts by the EU and governments
to address it. Without such a supply, Europe will increasingly
lack the knowledge and experience required for key safety-
critical maritime activities (ship inspection, surveying, law, insur-
ance, vessel traffic services, salvage, coastguards and pilotage).
Moreover, entire maritime clusters may fragment or relocate to
other regions.

The EESC notes the exclusion of fishermen and seafarers
1.7
from European social legislation on a number of issues (e.g. the
Directive on collective redundancies (1), on transfer of undertak-
ings (2), on information/consultation (3) and for posting of
workers in the framework of the provision of services (4)). Irres-
pective of the reasons behind these exclusions, it is important to
put an end to that discrimination where appropriate. It, there-
fore,
invites the Commission to reassess these exclusions in
close cooperation with the social partners.

1.8
Global warming and the consequent climate change
entails scenarios whereby islands might disappear, coastal areas
be flooded, fish stocks be depleted, marine micro-organisms be
extinguished with an impact on the food chain, and the seawater
level might rise by 7 metres by 2050. The EESC urges the
Commission to address the overall issue in the context of inter-
national organisations. The Commission itself should lose no
time in taking on board an integrated environmental approach
in all of its actions — not only in those which concern mari-
time issues, but also in all of the proposals which it submits to
the Parliament and the Council.

(1) Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 relating to collective

redundancies OJ L 225, 12.8.1998, p. 0016-0021.

(2) Directive 2001/23EC relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights
in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of under-
takings or businesses.

(3) Directive 2002/14 EC establishing a general framework for informing
and consulting employees in the European Community [Official
Journal L 80, 23.3.2002].

(4) Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of

16 December 1996. OJ L 18, 21.1.1997, p. 0001-0006.

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/51

The EESC maintains that the tackling of air emissions
1.9
may
and inconsistencies
create unintended consequences
between policies. Air pollution is a complex issue and reducing
one pollutant may have a negative effect on other pollutants
such as green house gases (GHGs). A holistic international
approach to find an overall environmental benefit for the long
term is the preferred solution.

1.10
The EESC notes that the shipping industry burns as
bunkers the lower end of oil due to non availability of better
quality of bunkers by refineries. It invites the Commission to
address the quality for bunkers in order to make a breakthrough
in the issue of air emissions from ships.

1.11
The EESC understands that the idea of ‘common Euro-
pean maritime space’ refers only to a virtual maritime space in
which there will be a simplification of administrative and
customs formalities for intra EU maritime services giving them
a similar regime as transport by truck or train within the
the Commission,
internal market. Following clarifications of
expressing this clearly in the Communication, the concept can
be supported by the EESC provided that it respects in interna-
tional waters (High Sea) the UNCLOS and IMO Conventions
including the ‘freedom of navigation’ and ‘right of
innocent
passage’ within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

The EESC strongly advocates

1.12
the establishment of
‘quality coastal’ states which are the missing link in the quality
chain. ‘Quality’ coastal states should deliver essential services to
ships: adequate waste reception facilities, places of refuge for
ships in distress, innocent passage, fair treatment of seafarers,
and aids to navigation. This concept should be raised by the EU
in IMO in order to develop appropriate measurable criteria of
coastal state performance.

1.13
The EESC welcomes recognition in the Green Paper of
the role it can play in the implementation of maritime policy-
making including spatial planning. It can also be instrumental
in promoting the EU maritime identity and maritime cultural
heritage and to sensitize the public opinion on global warming.

1.14
The Green Paper is the first attempt in the EU policy-
making shifting emphasis from land to sea. The EESC wishes to
congratulate the Commission for this restoration of balance and
to respond by paraphrasing the saying of Themistocles ‘Europe
will have a future as long as it has ships and seas’ (‘we will have
a land and homeland as long as we have ships and seas’).

1.15
its future Action Plan on the Green Paper.

The EESC requests the Commission to be consulted on

2. Introduction

Over a life span of fifty years, the EU has developed
2.1
several policies involving the seas: maritime transport, ports,
shipbuilding,
regions,
offshore energy. However, these policies have developed sepa-

fisheries, marine environment, coastal

rately without capitalising on their synergies. The time has come
to bring all these elements together and forge a new broad
vision for the future.

2.2
On 7 June 2006 the European Commission published a
Green Paper entitled ‘Towards a future Maritime Policy for the
Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas’. The initiative
of President Barroso should be seen in the context of the Stra-
tegic Objectives of
the European Commission (2005-2009)
which noted the need for an all-embracing maritime policy
aimed at developing a thriving maritime economy and the full
potential of sea-based activity in an environmentally sustainable
manner. Commissioner Borg was entrusted to steer a Maritime
Policy Task Force of Commissioners to this effect.

2.3
The Green Paper raises crucial questions in a variety of
areas using an integrated holistic approach which allows inter-
linkages between sectors. Already the result of a consultation
process with stakeholders, the Green Paper launched one of the
largest consultation exercises in the EU history asking citizens
how they want to deal with oceans and seas.

Since the early eighties, the EESC has followed closely the
2.4
EU's path in establishing these sectoral policies and has contri-
buted with its consistent opinions in their shaping up. It now
shares the Commission's assessment that there is need for a new
strategic vision for the future.

3. General comments

3.1 Context

3.1.1
The Green Paper creates a new understanding of the
sea in the EU, which should be welcomed. ‘How inappropriate
to call our planet Earth, when in essence it is an ocean’. The
subtitle of the Green Paper is significant and indicative of the
intentions of the Commission in launching the Green Paper. It
is the first time that the land based mentality of EU policies is
reversed. The symbolic message of the Green Paper initiative is
the most important: Europe is above all a maritime nation. The
EU has a rich maritime culture which should not be overlooked.
Since antiquity we have witnessed the emergence of several
seafaring nations having their cradle in Europe: Greeks, Italians,
Spanish, British, Portuguese, Scandinavian nations (Vikings),
Germans (Hanseatic League), Dutch. Nowadays, Greece, Cyprus
and Malta are in the top ten list of ship registers worldwide.

The Green Paper comes at a time of profound struc-
3.1.2
tural changes in the movement of world trade by sea: Giant
ships, giant ports and terminals, modern logistics, paperless
trade, continued development of cellular containerships, but
increased formalities for crews to be expedited in record time in
ports, modern piracy/terrorism on the increase and mounting
pressures on corporate social responsibility. Globalisation with
all
is evident in this
sector.

its ramifications (positive and negative)

C 168/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

3.1.3
The Green Paper must also be seen against the back-
ground of emergence of new trading powers (BRICs — Brazil,
Russia, India, China), the collapse of WTO talks, the ownership
of 40 % of the world fleet by Pacific rim countries and another
40 % by Europeans. The whole debate comes at a time of
surging oil prices, continuous talk about security of energy
supplies, alternative sources of energy and fears of global
warming.

3.2.4
Although it is recognised that nearly 90 % of the EU
external trade is seaborne, that the percentage of intra-Com-
munity trade is higher than 40 % and that European residents
control more than 40 % of the world's merchant fleet, emphasis
in the Green Paper is given only to the short sea shipping and
to the concept of ‘Motorways of the Sea’. However, the increased
participation of
the EU shipping in cross-trading activities
between third countries and other continents should not be
underestimated.

3.1.4
There are multiple aspects and human activities related
transport, R&D, sea bed
to the sea (fisheries, environment,
exploration, energy, shipbuilding, ports, tourism). The Green
Paper
complicated interrelationship between
marine and maritime activities and advocates a more integrated
form of policy making.

examines

the

3.2 Economic aspects

3.2.1
The EESC welcomes the increasing importance of the
maritime dimension of Europe in the Green Paper, which turns
a new page in the EU regarding the sea. The Communication
stresses the essential role that shipping services have for the
European economy and for the daily life and wealth of EU citi-
zens often ignored by them. The EESC supports the assertion
regarding the international competitiveness of shipping and
ports in a globalised environment and the need for an interna-
tional level playing field in a global market. Maritime transport
and ports are recognised as key elements in the logistic chains
which link the single market to the world economy. Indeed,
they are world leaders and not sunset industries. Both are identi-
fied as key elements of the Lisbon Policy making Europe the
most competitive trading entity in the world. The EESC notes
that recently EU shipbuilding has become a success story in
specialized categories of ships.

3.2.2
The Green Paper will also have positive ramifications
for the image of shipping and the development of maritime
clusters which are the biggest in the world. Maritime clusters
should occupy a central position in the future EU maritime
policy. The EESC believes that the EU should commission a
study in order to define them and compare them to maritime
clusters of other areas. Maritime clusters will be instrumental in
maintaining the maritime know-how in the EU.

3.2.3
The EU should stimulate initiatives aimed at creating a
positive image of shipping and ports with the general public.
Congestion in ports and other bottlenecks that hinder efficient
services should be taken care of. Investments in ports and in
hinterland connections should be made giving Europe efficient
and seamless logistic chains. The growth of short sea shipping
during the last decade should be further enhanced in an inte-
grated European transport system.

3.3 Social aspects

3.3.1
Globalisation presents particular challenges in the area
of maritime employment. The EESC fully recognises the impor-
tance of maintaining European maritime know how; it is essen-
tial for both the industry itself and for the maintenance of the
maritime clusters that are vital to the economic and social inter-
ests of the Community. There are a number of actions being
pursued both at national, EU and international level which can
usefully be built upon; and there is an important role for the
social partners in this regard. Together, they can make a signifi-
cant contribution to enhancing European maritime know how
and the employment opportunities of EU seafarers. The EESC
urges the Commission to join forces with Member States with a
view to raising awareness and improve the profile of
the
industry and of its workers.

3.3.2
An integrated maritime policy must have at its heart
an increase in investment in marine education and training to
underpin the delivery of safe, efficient and high-quality services.
The potential scarcity of skilled seafarers presents alarming
consequences for the EU's marine safety infrastructure and will
increase without concerted efforts by the EU, governments and
the industry to address it. Without such a supply, Europe will
increasingly lack the knowledge and experience required for key
safety-critical maritime activities (ship inspection, surveying, law,
insurance, vessel traffic services, salvage, coastguards and pilo-
tage). Without such a supply, entire maritime clusters may frag-
ment or relocate to other regions.

3.3.3
The possibilities of shore-side employment for former
seafarers is an important factor in attracting persons into a
seafaring career. The European Community Shipowners Associa-
tion's (ECSA) and the European Transport Workers Federation
(ETF) Career Mapping project would be helpful in demonstrating
for European
career planning opportunities
the possible
seafarers in order to make shipping an attractive career option.
The concept should be promoted and used nationally.

3.3.4
An appropriate EU framework promoting European
maritime know-how and training, will have positive effects for

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/53

the entire maritime cluster (5). Action is required to provide
further support to encourage the training of ratings that wish to
become officers and investment in nautical colleges (Maritime
Education & Training) throughout the EU, to ensure the delivery
of ‘best practice’ training and skill sets that match technological
development (e.g. ‘e-navigation’).

that the maritime environment is under increasing threat from
human activities and natural disasters. Its protection is a sine
qua non for the long term sustainability of our planet. The
EESC believes that an integrated cross sectoral approach could
be an important tool for all stakeholders to handle the environ-
mental management in a sustainable way and maximize syner-
gies between sub-sectors.

3.3.5
The ILO Maritime Labour Standards Convention 2006
(MLC) (6) adopted unanimously and replacing 30 key ILO
Conventions, will provide a solid, comprehensive and global
basis for seafarer labour standards. The EESC supports the
ongoing negotiations between the EU social partners with a
view to having EU legislation transposing the MLC via a Social
Partners Agreement
the non-regression
taking into account
clause included in the ILO Convention. Future EU maritime
policy should require Member States to ratify and implement
the MLC, the Bill of Rights of Seafarers. Similarly, the Commis-
sion is encouraged to develop all possible contacts in order to
ensure the adoption in 2007 of
the ILO Convention on
working conditions on board fishing vessels which failed to be
adopted in 2005.

3.3.6
The EESC believes that there is scope for improving the
general perception of shipping and seafarers profession by
appropriate campaigns tailored to meet the national circum-
stances. The EESC can be instrumental
in promoting the EU
maritime identity and cultural heritage. On the occasion of the
European Year of Intercultural Dialogue (7), the creation of a
European Maritime Day or European Day of the Oceans could
contribute to a better awareness of Europeans regarding the
importance of this sector.

3.3.7
The idea of having the different parties in maritime
clusters financing the creation of training schemes in order to
ensure the maintenance of an adequate offer of European mari-
time know-how which can later be employed in related activities
ashore should be further explored.

3.3.8
The EESC regrets the absence in the Green Paper of the
social aspects concerning workers employed in various marine
activities, apart
It urges the
Commission to address social aspects of other marine activities
(e.g. shipbuilding, pilotage, ports, energy, sea bed explorations).

from transport and fisheries.

3.4 Environmental aspects

3.4.1
The EESC shares the view in the Green Paper that the
preservation of Europe's marine resources is vital for improving
its competitiveness and employment. It expresses its concern

(5) According to a BIMCO/ISF (BIMCO: Baltic and International Maritime
Conference/ISF:
the age
profile of officers in traditional maritime nations is continuing to rise
even though there is no evidence to suggest that demand for their
services will decline.

International Shipping Federation) study,

(6) http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/norm/mlc2006/index.htm.
(7) UK Presidency paper (December 2005), there are many innovative
initiatives being taken throughout the EU, and a greater emphasis on
the exchange of best practices would be worthwhile.

for all

stakeholders,

The biological diversity in maritime environment must
3.4.2
be safeguarded by coherent EU policies, which provide responsi-
bilities
responsibility chain. The
Commission is invited to undertake a research to provide scien-
tific knowledge on how the maritime environment and biolo-
gical diversity could better contribute to human life. A holistic
international approach to find an overall environmental benefit
for the long term is the preferred solution.

the

In the context of

the holistic approach,

3.4.3
the EESC
invites the Commission to address maritime pollution from land
based sources (industrial, urban, rural activities) which account
for 80 % of the overall pollution of the seas. Moreover, the
Green Paper seems to ignore the important share of pollution of
the seas due to leisure crafts. This should be urgently addressed.
The EESC considers that there is a need to establish an EU
policy to combat the trafficking of toxic waste by sea (exported
to third countries). Implementation of the HNS Convention, the
ship monitoring Directive and the proposed Directive for
protection of the environment through criminal law go in this
direction

3.4.4
One of the unintended consequences and inconsisten-
cies between policies relates to the tackling of air emissions. The
G8 identified (July 2006) the air emissions from transport as a
priority area for urgent action in order
to address global
warming. The recent Communication on Limiting Global
Climate change (8) provides specifically limiting transport emis-
sions and other greenhouse gas emissions. Air pollution is a
complex issue and reducing one pollutant may have a negative
effect on other pollutants such as green house gases (GHGs).
The EESC supports reductions in CO2 emissions by ships.
However,
little consequence unless
equivalent reductions are achieved in shore-based activities,
which are by far the greatest contributor to global warming.
According to the recently released UK Stern Report (9), transport
accounts only for 14 % of green house gas emissions, out of
which maritime and rail transport equate 1.75 % of world emis-
sions.

their impact will be of

(8) (COM(2007)2 (10.1.2007). NAT/310: Opinion on the challenges of
climate change — The role of civil society (27.9.2006). NAT/276:
Opinion on Sustainable development in agriculture, forestry and fish-
eries and the challenges of climate change (27.1.2006).

(9) http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_e-

conomics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm.
The Stern Review estimates that the cost of inaction amounts to 5-20 %
of the global GDP.

C 168/54

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

transport,

the EESC supports

3.4.5
In a string of past opinions, the EESC has stressed that
EU Member States should promptly ratify international Conven-
tions on maritime safety and environmental protection and
they are properly enforced. Although maritime
ensure that
is the most energy efficient and environmentally
transport
friendly mode of
the view
prevailing internationally for lower limits of air emissions than
those recently made mandatory by MARPOL Convention (10)
Annex VI. Measures to reduce maritime emissions must be cost-
effective and not result in a modal shift in Europe from water-
borne transport to a less environmentally credible mode of
transport. The EU — after consultation with the social partners
— should encourage a policy of establishing dismantling yards
for ships (both merchant and military) that have reached the
end of their lives.

The EESC supports the objective of

the Thematic
3.4.6
Strategy on the Protection and Conservation of
the Marine
Environment. From an environmental point of view, it may be
sensible to subdivide the overall marine area of EU into regions
in order to establish what is required for each region (marine
spatial planning), acknowledging that what is necessary or best
in one region may not be necessary in another region. The
EESC welcomes recognition in the Green Paper of its role as a
forum of exchange of views
regarding implementation of
general principles of maritime policymaking including spatial
planning.

4. Specific comments

4.1 Better regulation

4.1.1
The recognition of the need for better regulation in
order to avoid inconsistencies among common policies (e.g.
transport/environment, transport/competition) and the intention
to work for an international level playing field in the regulatory
and enforcement sphere are commendable. Moreover, the idea
of self-regulation as a supplement
to legislation should be
supported.

4.1.2
The EESC fully endorses the approach of the Green
Paper that action at EU level should be undertaken only when it
contributes value-added. The EU has been criticised for the
tendency to Europeanise several issues which can be dealt with
adequately nationally or internationally. This criticism should be
taken seriously into account when thinking of future policies in
the context of ‘better regulation’.

4.2 External relations

4.2.1
Regarding the proposal for future participation of the
EU in international maritime organizations as an entity in

parallel to its Member States, the expertise input of EU member
states in international organizations (such as IMO, ILO) is of
high repute and this should not be undermined but rather
enhanced. At present, there is scope for an enforced coopera-
tion/coordination of EU Member States in the context of inter-
national organizations. The EESC supports the goal of exercising
the EC clout vis-à-vis third countries with a view to encourage
them to enforce and ratify major
international maritime
Conventions (e.g. Bunkers Convention, HNS Convention, LLMC
1996 Convention).

4.2.2
An efficient and effective EU maritime external rela-
tions policy should safeguard a good working international
framework for shipping services. The WTO negotiations on
to guarantee market
services (GATS) have been important
access. Though the Doha Round negotiations have been
suspended, the maritime standstill agreement (preventing new
protectionist measures by WTO member states) should remain
in force. The maritime bilateral agreement with China has estab-
lished a good working framework for constructive relations
with China and a similar one with India should be agreed upon.

4.2.3
The Green Paper maintains that the legal system based
on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (11)
needs to be further developed to face new challenges. The EESC
believes that the UNCLOS Convention is the request of a deli-
cate balance of interests which should not be upset, in particular
the concepts of ‘freedom of navigation’ and ‘right of innocent
passage’ within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Other
coastal states could follow suit and override ‘freedom of naviga-
tion’ for less benign motives. This could have serious conse-
quences for maritime trade in some of the world's major stra-
tegic waterways.

4.3 Common European Maritime Space

The idea of considering the EU as one country for
4.3.1
customs/administrative purposes only
can be welcomed,
provided that it respects in international waters (High Seas) the
UNCLOS and IMO Conventions including the ‘freedom of navi-
gation’ and the ‘right of innocent passage’ within the Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ). The EESC understands that the idea of
‘common European maritime space’ refers only to a virtual
maritime space in which there will be a simplification of admin-
istrative and customs formalities for intra EU maritime services
giving them a similar regime as transport by truck, train or
inland navigation in the internal market. Following clarifications
of the Commission, expressing this clearly in the Communica-
tion the idea can be supported by the EESC (12).

(10) International Convention for

the Prevention of Pollution from
Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto
(MARPOL 73/78) see:
http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?doc_id=678&topic_id=258.

(11) http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_o-

verview_convention.htm.

(12) Cf. TEN/258, Opinion on European Seaport Policy (OJ C 325,

30.12.2006).

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/55

4.4 Marine environment

Regional and local air quality should be addressed
4.4.1
through the mechanisms provided by the MARPOL Convention
via the possible creation of additional Sulphur Emission Control
Areas (SECA). Low sulphur fuel requires additional investment
in refineries and energy to remove sulphur which may increase
CO2 emissions and contribute to global warming. Moreover, it is
unsustainable to apply a myriad of differing levels of emission
control in different areas and ports around the world.

4.4.2
Regarding air pollution from vessels the assertion that
‘NOx air emissions from vessels will be higher compared to all
land-based activities together in 2020’ is questionable. The EESC
invites the Commission to take into account the repercussions
from climate change to navigation and examine the routing of
vessels in the Arctic.

4.4.3
Protecting the marine environment and biodiversity in
waters beyond national jurisdiction has become an important
priority for the international community. In this context, the
relationship between UNCLOS and the Convention on Biolo-
gical Diversity needs clarification. The EU and its Member States
should participate actively in developing the UN global marine
assessment.

4.4.4
The European Commission has proposed a long-term
environmental strategy for cleaning up and protecting the Medi-
terranean Sea. This unique ecosystem is deteriorating as environ-
mental pressures increase threatening the health of people and
economic activities depending on the sea,. Similarly, the Baltic
Sea and the Black Sea, virtually closed seas, merit special atten-
tion in view of the large quantities of Russian oil transported
through them, an overall increase of traffic and eutrophication
from land based sources and rivers. There is also a sensitive
debate regarding the environmental
the proposed
pipeline in the Baltic Sea (Russia/Germany). The above problems
are exacerbated by the activities of military vessels — escaping
from the scope of EU rules — which are increasingly detri-
mental to the environment and tourism.

impact of

4.5 Fisheries

The fisheries sector (13)

4.5.1
is deeply depending on a
sustainable maritime environment and its future should be an
optimal
from the biologic,
economic and social point of view.

functioning maritime eco-system,

4.5.2
The ‘Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries’ (FAO)
could serve as a background for all fisheries administrations.
The fisheries sector must develop better tools (e.g. equipments,
fishing gears) to increase selectivity and reduce damage to the
seabed. In the context of an integrated approach, there is need
to establish maritime protected areas to save biotope threats
from unregulated and illegal fishing, and have better statistics
fisheries. A better spatial planning could
on the catch of

(13) NAT/333: Opinion: Sustainability in EU fisheries. NAT/316: Opinion
(25.9.2006): Improving the economic situation in the fishing industry.
NAT/280: Opinion (16.12.2005): The Common Fisheries Policy and
Law of the Sea. OJ C 318, 23.12.2006 and OJ C 65, 17.3.2005.

develop sea tourism, safeguard fisheries and create regional
development and higher employment within the maritime
sector in rural areas.

4.6 European Coast Guard

4.6.1
The EESC wonders about the added value in promoting
at this stage the idea of a European Coast Guard. The feasibility
study that will be presented soon will provide valuable informa-
tion about the Commission's thinking in this respect. Taking
into account the existing differences as to the structure, func-
tions and responsibilities of
the different national bodies of
Member States, the EESC believes that the desired objectives can
equally be obtained by an enhanced cooperation of the appro-
priate authorities of Member States in particular
regarding
security, illegal immigration, trafficking and joint investigation
of accidents.

4.7 European register

4.7.1
The proposal for a complementary and optional Euro-
pean register (e.g. EUROS) is a matter of concern. Whilst attrac-
tive as a symbol of European unity and excellence, the EU flag
is a premature move when the economic, tax and social policies
of the Member States are not harmonised. Such a proposal
could be envisaged as the capping stone of a general EU harmo-
nisation in the remote future, which currently is not yet visible.
In addition,
the word ‘complementary European
register’
is confusing, begging the question what additional
advantages such a register might provide beyond the national
register
to shipping. Positive
measures and other incentives may be streamlined through the
Guidelines and may be available to all national registers. In any
event, the creation of a specific European register would need to
be accompanied by a recognition and strengthening of Euro-
pean social legislation applicable to this new register.

through the EC Guidelines

the use of

4.8 ‘Quality’ Coastal State

4.8.1
The EESC strongly advocates the establishment of
‘quality’ coastal states which are the missing link in the quality
chain. ‘Quality’ coastal states should deliver essential services to
ships. For instance, a ‘quality’ coastal state: fulfils its interna-
tional obligations by ratifying and implementing internationally
agreed conventions, follows the IMO/ILO Guidelines on the fair
treatment of seafarers, provides adequate waste reception facili-
ties, maintains
to navigation and nautical charts,
provides ships in distress with a place of refuge (rather than
risking environmental disaster by denying it), ensures that all
steps are taken to facilitate the safe innocent passage of ships
through its waters and gives incentives to quality ships calling at
its ports or navigating within its waters. Unfortunately, there
seems to be a general lack of commitment to this important
role by some coastal states.

its aids

C 168/56

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

4.8.2
The Green Paper offers the opportunity to develop
measurable criteria and ‘best practice’ for coastal states. This
concept should be raised by the EU Member States in IMO with
a view to developing appropriate measurable criteria in evalu-
ating coastal state performance.

4.8.3
The EESC supports the proposal of the Committee of
Regions (14) to establish a European Costal and Island Fund
encompassing several maritime activities.

directives: on collective redundancies, on transfer of undertak-
ings, on information/consultation on posting of workers). Such
an exclusion was originally justified due to the fact that the
social legislation was primarily designed for land based indus-
tries rather than the particularities of the employment at sea.
The EESC, invites the Commission to reassess these exclusions
in close cooperation with the social partners.

4.9 Coastal tourism

4.11 Ship boarding agreements

Enhanced security considerations have prompted
4.11.1
several EU Member States to conclude bilateral ship boarding
agreements with third countries. The EESC believes that a coor-
dinated approach of EU Member States to such initiatives is
desirable as well as a coordinated division of labour between
Member States including their navies in the application of such
rules. An alternative could be the early ratification of
the
Suppression of Unlawful Acts (SUA) Protocols by EU Member
States. The SUA Protocols have similar objectives to the Pro-
liferation Security Initiative but include important safeguards to
protect the legitimate commercial interests of shipping operators
and the human rights of seafarers.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

4.9.1
The EESC notes that Europe is the first tourist destina-
tion in the world. It supports the idea of developing alternative
quality tourism in coastal areas. The Green Paper acknowledges
that sustainable tourism will differentiate tourist services with
the goal of decongesting the sea shores, provide alternative
sources of income to fishermen and develop activities main-
taining the cultural heritage. The EESC cannot but subscribe to
the above initiatives.

4.10 Social affairs

4.10.1
seafarers from European social

The EESC notes the exclusion of

fishermen and
legislation on the following

Brussels, 26 April 2007.

(14) CoR opinion 258/2006 (13-14.2.2007).