Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on A European ports policy
Date: 2008-04-09
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: State aid, common ports policy, competition, economic development, environmental protection, investment, pollution control measures, port administration, transport infrastructure

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 172/29

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘A European ports policy’

(2008/C 172/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

— highlights the key importance of ports for economic and social development, and for competitiveness

and prosperity in Europe, not only in the coastal regions;

— notes the tremendous diversity that is such a feature of European ports and is convinced that differing

structures foster competition to identify the most efficient transport routes;

— stresses that it makes sense to manage ports at regional and local level and is thus pleased that the
Commission has no intention of intervening to harmonise the different forms of port management in
place in the EU;

— would stress that it is not only individual ports that are competing with one another, but entire trans-

port chains;

— considers that the guidelines on State aid due to be introduced in 2008 are a suitable tool for clari-
fying the EC Treaty provisions as they relate to ports, with a view to ensuring that competition in the
ports sector continues to be fair and efficient;

— notes the continued absence of a real internal market for maritime transport in Europe and welcomes
any simplification in administrative procedures, the progress made in modernising customs formal-
ities, and the Commission's initiative, announced for 2008, to establish a European Maritime Trans-
port Space without Barriers;

— calls for the further development and promotion of the ‘Clean Ship’ and ‘Clean Port’ projects and feels
that efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships — for instance, through access to shore
power — should be concentrated at international level, so that European ports do not suffer any
disadvantage in global competition;

C 172/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

Rapporteur: Mr HARLINGHAUSEN, Member of Hamburg Parliament's Committee for European Affairs,

(DE-EPP)

Reference document

Communication from the Commission on a European Ports Policy

COM(2007) 616 final

I. Policy recommendations

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Basic points

thanks the Commission for

1.
the communication on a
future European ports policy, which is the fruit of an extensive
reflection and consultation process carried out between May
2006 and June 2007 in which various aspects of the European
ports policy were examined by all stakeholders in six dedicated
workshops;

2.
considers the Commission communication as a follow-on
from an earlier document — the Communication to the Euro-
pean Parliament and the Council Reinforcing quality service in sea
ports: a key for European transport and the Proposal for a Directive
of the European Parliament and of the Council on market access
to port
(COM(2001) 35 final) — on which the
Committee of the Regions issued an opinion on 20 September
2001 (CdR 161/2001 fin), and from the Proposal for a Directive
of the European Parliament and of the Council on market access
to port services (COM(2004) 654 final), on which the Committee
of
the Regions issued an opinion on 13 April 2005 (CdR
485/2004 fin);

services

3.
thinks that the communication is closely linked with other
pertinent issues, particularly European marine policy and Euro-
pean transport policy, and would refer to its own-initiative
opinion of 12 October 2005 on EU maritime policy — a question
of sustainable development for local and regional authorities (CdR
84/2005 fin), its opinion of 13 February 2007 Towards a future
maritime policy for the European Union (CdR 258/2006 fin), and
its opinion of 14 February 2007 on the Mid-term review of the
European Commission's 2001 Transport White Paper
(CdR
119/2006 fin);

4.
stresses that any future European ports policy must be
designed and implemented in line with the subsidiarity and
proportionality principles;

General comments on the communication

5.
highlights the key importance of ports for economic and
social development, and for competitiveness and prosperity in
Europe, not only in the coastal regions. Ports, maritime trans-
port and the attendant logistics are one of Europe's strongest
growth areas. Ports handle 90 % of the EU's international trade.
40 % of intra-Community trade is also shipped via ports. More-

over, more than 200 million passengers travel by ship in the EU
each year;

6.
is convinced that any European ports policy must take due
account both of these aspects and of increasing globalisation
and the new context of an enlarged European Union. Other
factors that are of key importance for sustainable and balanced
growth and for the success of European regions are climate and
environmental protection and public health;

7.
notes the tremendous diversity that is such a feature of
European ports and is convinced that differing structures foster
competition to identify the most efficient transport routes;

is pleased, therefore, that, following the failure in the Euro-
8.
pean Parliament of
the two draft directives — which the
Committee of the Regions had also criticised — on market
access for port services, the communication and the further
measures it announces mostly involve soft law, rather than new
legislative proposals, as that is a better way to take account of
the differing structures that are in place;

9.
welcomes the fact that the Commission has taken the
opportunity to broaden the communication's scope to go
beyond the approach of the two draft directives, which were
essentially limited to access to port services, and address a large
number of issues;

10.
welcomes the measures proposed to clarify Community
rules in this area. The purpose of the measures must be to
further improve effective competition and free market access.
The Committee of the Regions notes in this connection that, in
many parts of the Union, a high level of effective competition
already exists between and within European ports;

11.
would stress that it is not only individual ports that are
competing with one another, but entire transport chains. This
must be borne in mind in all provisions affecting the sub-area
of ports, as these also impact on the entire logistics chain in
hinterland traffic;

believes that EU measures liable to have an impact on
12.
transport flows, such as, for instance, trans-European transport
network policy, or the guidelines on the application of Com-
munity environmental legislation to port development, should
be underpinned by the need to maintain a stable environment
for investment and a favourable social environment in ports,
and to ensure sustainable port development, the uniform appli-
cation of the provisions of the Treaty, and consultation with the
national, regional and local authorities;

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 172/31

Port performance and hinterland connections

intention of intervening to harmonise the different forms of
port management in place in the EU;

broadly

agrees with the Commission analysis on
13.
improving port performance and welcomes the greater promi-
nence given to increasing efficiency rather than expanding infra-
structure; calls however, for strategies to promote intermodality
and multimodality that take account of the specific features of
the various regions, and stresses that the goal of a more rational
distribution of traffic in Europe must be realised by the market
within a global political framework;

14.
would also point out, however, that the concept of ‘port’,
that is connections between the open sea and the hinterland,
should also include the seaward approaches to a port (e.g. use
of ice-breaking and dredging to keep shipping lanes open);

Expanding capacity while respecting the environment

15.
feels that any port development must be respectful of
environmental concerns and the interests and needs of those
living in port cities;

16.
thus supports the Commission's intention to issue guide-
lines on the application and interpretation of environmental
provisions as they relate to port development. This requires a
new, broad-based consultation process involving not only the
port sector, but also the regional and local authorities that play
a crucial role in port development. Coordination and balance
are needed between port development measures and action to
protect the environment;

22.
considers that the guidelines on State aid due to be intro-
duced in 2008 are a suitable tool for clarifying the EC Treaty
provisions as they relate to ports, with a view to ensuring that
competition in the ports sector continues to be fair and effi-
cient;

23.
in this connection also welcomes the extension of the
transparency provisions of Directive 2006/111/EC to all ports
irrespective of their size and annual turnover;

notes the points made in the communication that the
24.
relevant European Court of Justice case-law applies to the award
of concessions and that a transparent selection procedure must
be carried out when granting concessions that do not come
under public procurement law. The Committee of the Regions
still sees a need for clarification of the role of port authorities in
this regard and their scope for giving adequate support
to
regional interests and port development;

25.
is concerned that lack of flexibility in the administration
of the proposed measures will result in legal uncertainty or a
reduction in investment incentives for existing providers, thus
potentially weakening Europe's competitive position;

welcomes the planned action on waste and sediment
17.
management and endorses
intention of
ensuring that the corresponding EU rules are applied in all
Member States;

the Commission's

26.
trusts that ports will also still have scope to undertake
necessary modernisation, expansion and conversion work as
part of effective port development without the need for a selec-
tion procedure;

18.
backs the Commission's plans to cut emissions in ports,
but also stresses the key role of the International Maritime Orga-
nisation (IMO) in this connection, and calls for international
agreements rather than any European attempt to go it alone
that would weaken the EU's global competitiveness;
feels,
however, that the EU must act alone if the IMO does not come
up with tangible solutions within a reasonable timeframe;

Modernisation

notes the continued absence of a real internal market for
19.
maritime transport in Europe and welcomes any simplification
in administrative procedures, the progress made in modernising
customs formalities, and the Commission's initiative, announced
for 2008, to establish a European Maritime Transport Space
without Barriers;

nonetheless has

20.
the practical
problems involved in establishing barrier-free maritime trans-
port, and recommends that a careful analysis be made of the
existing situation before any new action is taken;

its misgivings

about

27.
feels that further clarification is needed as to the rights of
workers when an undertaking is subject to a transfer of owner-
ship, particularly
in cases where Directive 2001/23/EC
mentioned in the communication does not apply;

notes that technical maritime services (such as pilotage,
28.
towage and mooring) are classed as
services of general
economic interest and are therefore subject to Articles 86, 87
and 88 of the Treaty establishing the European Community.
Under these articles and the principle of subsidiarity, it is the
Member States' responsibility to identify their SGEI in compli-
ance with the conditions set out
in the Decision of 28
November 2005. If a Member State decides that an undertaking
is responsible for an SGEI, the undertaking may receive public
service compensation if the income from providing the SGEI
does not cover the costs incurred. Compensation may not
exceed the costs actually incurred and a reasonable profit;
recalls, in the same context, that the cost of essential technical-
nautical services for safe navigation in port areas constitutes a
total transport costs and therefore
very small percentage of
rejects the idea of encouraging price cuts for these services in
order to make maritime transport more attractive;

A level playing field — clarity for investors, operators and users

21.
stresses that it makes sense to manage ports at regional
and local level and is thus pleased that the Commission has no

29.
believes that there is still a need for clarification with
regard to pilotage and associated safety issues, which are the
responsibility of local and regional authorities;

C 172/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

30.
agrees with the Commission assessment of worker ‘pools’
and highlights their importance in recruiting and training port
workers under current EU law, particularly in relation to
freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services;

and continual improvements in basic and further training for
port workers, including. for instance, through the use of simula-
tors as standard, are key factors in the further sound and
sustainable development of ports and the regions in which they
lie;

31.
welcomes the definition of the term ‘port dues’ and the
fact that these are discussed solely in relation to the overall
infrastructure, and asks for detailed clarification of the use of
such dues in the planned State aid guidelines so as to avoid any
anti-competitive cross subsidisation;

notes that port dues are already very transparent and

32.
thus sees no need for further rules in this area;

33.
welcomes the Commission's intention to devote more
attention to competition between European ports and third-
country ports, and to provide support for the ports concerned,
many of which are at a disadvantage not only because of their
peripheral geographical location but also because of increased
competition with third countries;

34.
is concerned that the 100 % scanning of all shipping
containers bound for the USA, required under the US Safe Port
Act (2006) and in House Resolution No 1 (2007),
is almost
impossible for European ports to implement and is also extre-
mely costly; it therefore calls on the Commission to negotiate
feasible solutions with the US authorities;

Establishing a structured dialogue between ports and cities

35.
supports the Commission's intention to improve the
image of ports and to integrate them more effectively into cities.
In many regions, ports play a key role that goes beyond purely
economic and employment aspects. They often shape the urban
landscape and make a significant contribution to urban or
regional development;

therefore calls for an innovative approach which exploits
36.
the cultural, tourist and recreational potential of port cities, and
proposes that research and regional cooperation projects be
launched to identify potential future developments more effec-
tively;

welcomes the Commission's planned measures to raise
37.
public visibility, but envisages difficulties in respect of
the
security measures currently in place both for general safety
reasons and to combat terrorism and crime;

38.
feels there is a need for further clarification as to the
development and relevance of the planned multi-purpose access
cards;

Work in ports

39.
believes that any European ports policy must also take
account of the employment dimension if it is to safeguard and
create skilled jobs;

40.
thus welcomes Commission plans to promote social
dialogue at European level. This must be done in close coopera-
tion with the social partners. Good and safe working conditions

41.
underscores the fact that Europe can only maintain its
competitive position on the world stage if it demonstrates an
exceptional capacity for innovation and offers a higher quality
than other regions, and stresses the key importance of academic
education and training and ongoing vocational
training to
achieve this objective;

42.
is concerned that the number of work-related accidents
in ports and on ships is still too high. The Committee of the
Regions points out that local and regional authorities play an
important role in monitoring and enforcing health and safety
rules in ports.

II. Conclusions and recommendations

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

43.
laments the delay in the building of infrastructure for the
trans-European network (TEN) and calls on the Commission to
better inform the Member States and the regions and cities
about available funding possibilities and in this way help them
to build up capacity and infrastructure for land access to ports
(hinterland connections) and for the seaward approaches to
ports (connections between ports and shipping lanes) and to
develop logistic distribution networks;

believes that

44.
future rules for the granting of aid to
motorways of the sea must formally involve the regions, and, in
this connection, calls for a generally simplified procedure that
better reflects the interests of the undertakings involved and
thus fosters the more widespread use and acceptance of environ-
mentally sound maritime transport;

proposes that, in future, greater use be made of land-use
45.
planning tools and integrated coastal zone management in land
and sea access planning;

calls for the speedy publication of the State aid guidelines
46.
following consultation with the Member States, regions and
stakeholders;

47.
calls for economic incentives to be introduced to ensure
appropriate port infrastructure and adequate sea transport to
island and remote coastal regions,
in order to promote the
sustainable development of these areas and to minimise factors
hampering business activity and equal access to major European
markets;

48.
stresses the need to combat air pollution and climate
change and for ports and maritime transport to play a role on
this front, for instance through the rapid switch to cleaner ship
fuel and the speedy implementation of the IMO rules for the
treatment of ships' ballast water;

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 172/33

49.
calls for the further development and promotion of the
‘Clean Ship’ and ‘Clean Port’ projects and feels that efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships — for instance,
through access to shore power — should be concentrated at
international
level, so that European ports do not suffer any
disadvantage in global competition; complementary action
should also be taken at European level to ensure an immediate
improvement in the quality of
life for people living in port
communities;

believes that the public should be better informed than
50.
hitherto about
the key importance of ports and seas for
economic growth and job creation in Europe. This task should
be left largely to the Member States, regions and ports;

51.
looks forward with keen interest to the introduction,
planned for 2008, of Commission measures to develop the EU's
integrated maritime policy and to seeing how ports will be
involved in this process;

52.
acknowledges that, with due consideration for the subsi-
diarity and proportionality principles, a large number of
measures are required at EU level to cover all aspects of ports
policy. However, the Committee of the Regions fears that not all
the measures can be achieved within the intended timeframe
and for this reason would like to see a clear statement of the
priority that is be given to each initiative;

communities in which they are located, and which have very
limited financial and human resources when it comes
to
applying EU guidelines and legislation; proposes that, in some
cases, new Community legislative instruments be checked for
their impact on the capacities and volume of activity of these
ports, so as not to undermine their viability;

54.
thus recommends that the list of actions be revised to
indicate the degree of priority to be attached to the individual
objectives that the actions are supposed to achieve, the tier of
government likely to be responsible under the subsidiarity prin-
ciple, and the appropriate timeframe;

offers its help and support in working out proposals for
55.
setting the order of priorities for the measures concerned and
for future ports policy, and would ask to be kept regularly
informed of developments in this policy area;

recommends establishing a system under which all
56.
interest groups are able to be consulted regularly,
thereby
making it possible to factor their input into the ongoing devel-
opment of the European ports policy, avoid potential conflicts
and exchange best practice; it draws attention in this regard to
the possibility of supporting and promoting local and regional
bodies in a bid to secure a high level of acceptance for the
policy;

proposes

that, when the Commission's proposed
53.
measures are adopted, consideration be given to the existence of
small
local and regional-scale ports, whose activities are not
predominantly commercial and which play a vital role for the

asks the Commission to submit an interim assessment of
57.
the European ports policy by 31 December 2009 including a
proposal for measures to eliminate bottlenecks between ports
and the hinterland.

Brussels, 9 April 2008.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Luc VAN DEN BRANDE