natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
· The Council has deleted the provision that the Commission should carry out inspections to monitor implementation of the directive by Member States.
· The Council has deleted the provision that the Commission should carry out inspections to monitor implementation of the directive by Member States.
Your rapporteur welcomes the proposal for a directive as a useful measure to enhance port security.
Your rapporteur welcomes the proposal for a directive as a useful measure to enhance port security.
Opting for a harmonised European approach will also avoid distortions of competition between European ports.
Opting for a harmonised European approach will also avoid distortions of competition between European ports.
The Commission is also to be congratulated on keeping as closely as possible in the text of the directive to the terminology and definitions used in the IMO documents referred to above (SOLAS, ISPS-code, Code of Practice on Port Security) and those used in Regulation 75/2004.
The Commission is also to be congratulated on keeping as closely as possible in the text of the directive to the terminology and definitions used in the IMO documents referred to above (SOLAS, ISPS-code, Code of Practice on Port Security) and those used in Regulation 75/2004.
This enhances transparency and legal certainty and reduces the administrative burden on the organisations and authorities involved.
This enhances transparency and legal certainty and reduces the administrative burden on the organisations and authorities involved.
However, it is regrettable that the Commission has opted for a directive instead of extending the scope of the existing terminal regulation to all port areas.
However, it is regrettable that the Commission has opted for a directive instead of extending the scope of the existing terminal regulation to all port areas.
This results in divergent and at times overlapping legislative measures existing alongside each other, which is not conducive to transparency.
This results in divergent and at times overlapping legislative measures existing alongside each other, which is not conducive to transparency.
And when it comes to rolling back regulation, this approach is of no help at all.
And when it comes to rolling back regulation, this approach is of no help at all.
The following amendments seek to improve specific aspects of the proposal for a directive.
The following amendments seek to improve specific aspects of the proposal for a directive.
Scope of application of the directive
Scope of application of the directive
Like the Council, your rapporteur cannot accept that the scope of the directive should also apply to adjacent port areas.
Like the Council, your rapporteur cannot accept that the scope of the directive should also apply to adjacent port areas.
There is no clear definition of what constitute relevant 'adjacent port areas'.
There is no clear definition of what constitute relevant 'adjacent port areas'.
Furthermore, such areas frequently do not come under the jurisdiction of the port authority.
Furthermore, such areas frequently do not come under the jurisdiction of the port authority.
The definition of what constitutes a port area and the decision whether or not to extend the directive to adjacent areas should therefore be left to the discretion of Member States.
The definition of what constitutes a port area and the decision whether or not to extend the directive to adjacent areas should therefore be left to the discretion of Member States.
Study on the funding of port security
Study on the funding of port security
The earlier Regulation 725/2004 requires the Commission to carry out a study into cost-sharing between the authorities and operators.
The earlier Regulation 725/2004 requires the Commission to carry out a study into cost-sharing between the authorities and operators.
A similar study is also required for the present proposal.
A similar study is also required for the present proposal.
At this stage it is not clear what costs the proposed measures would entail and who should cover them.
At this stage it is not clear what costs the proposed measures would entail and who should cover them.
This is not in the interests of a level playing field.
This is not in the interests of a level playing field.
Port security committee
Port security committee
It should be left up to the ports and Member States to decide how they choose to obtain advice on the various aspects of port security.
It should be left up to the ports and Member States to decide how they choose to obtain advice on the various aspects of port security.
The provision requiring the setting up of a port security advisory committee can therefore be deleted.
The provision requiring the setting up of a port security advisory committee can therefore be deleted.
Commission inspections
Commission inspections
The success of this directive stands or falls by its effective implementation and enforcement.
The success of this directive stands or falls by its effective implementation and enforcement.
In this context, and in the interests of a level playing field, the Commission must be able to carry out inspections.
In this context, and in the interests of a level playing field, the Commission must be able to carry out inspections.
Regulation 75/2004 on enhancing ship and port facility security also contains provisions to this effect.
Regulation 75/2004 on enhancing ship and port facility security also contains provisions to this effect.
However, the Commission must ensure that its inspections do not create unnecessary additional bureaucracy or cause disruption to ports as a result of an excessive number of uncoordinated inspections.
However, the Commission must ensure that its inspections do not create unnecessary additional bureaucracy or cause disruption to ports as a result of an excessive number of uncoordinated inspections.
Information for Parliament and Council
Information for Parliament and Council
As stated earlier, proper implementation and enforcement of this directive are crucial to ensure both port security and a level playing field.
As stated earlier, proper implementation and enforcement of this directive are crucial to ensure both port security and a level playing field.
The Commission is therefore asked to report to Parliament and the Council at regular intervals and to assess whether adjustments to the directive are required because of changes in the terrorist threat or for other reasons.
The Commission is therefore asked to report to Parliament and the Council at regular intervals and to assess whether adjustments to the directive are required because of changes in the terrorist threat or for other reasons.
In the financial impact statement for the proposal for a directive the Commission mentions a follow-up evaluation.
In the financial impact statement for the proposal for a directive the Commission mentions a follow-up evaluation.
This evaluation, together with the information gained from inspections, will provide a basis for a report to Parliament and the Council.
This evaluation, together with the information gained from inspections, will provide a basis for a report to Parliament and the Council.
TÖÖSTUSE, TEADUSUURINGUTE JA ENERGEETIKAKOMISJONI ARVAMUS
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY
Koostaja: Giles Bryan Chichester
Draftsman: Giles Bryan Chichester
The European Commission adopted its amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing port security on 28 May 2004.
The European Commission adopted its amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing port security on 28 May 2004.
This proposal has to be treated under the codecision procedure and the ITRE Committee has been called to deliver an opinion for the Committee on Transport and Tourism.
This proposal has to be treated under the codecision procedure and the ITRE Committee has been called to deliver an opinion for the Committee on Transport and Tourism.
This proposal for a Directive intends to enhance security in those areas of ports not covered by Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on enhancing ship and port facility security.
This proposal for a Directive intends to enhance security in those areas of ports not covered by Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on enhancing ship and port facility security.
Your Draftsman believes that such a proposal is adequate in order to fulfil its objectives, but nevertheless points out that there are some issues that are not addressed satisfactorily, namely:
Your Draftsman believes that such a proposal is adequate in order to fulfil its objectives, but nevertheless points out that there are some issues that are not addressed satisfactorily, namely:
· the European Commission has not provided a proper cost-benefit analysis nor an adequate impact assessment of the costs resulting from the application of this Directive;
· the European Commission has not provided a proper cost-benefit analysis nor an adequate impact assessment of the costs resulting from the application of this Directive;
· the proposal makes no reference to the funding or financing of the measures proposed in the Directive.
· the proposal makes no reference to the funding or financing of the measures proposed in the Directive.
On the other hand, a positive aspect of the proposal is that it provides a certain degree of flexibility for Member States when implementing the Directive that should be maintained -and even reinforced- during the legislative process.
On the other hand, a positive aspect of the proposal is that it provides a certain degree of flexibility for Member States when implementing the Directive that should be maintained -and even reinforced- during the legislative process.
This flexibility mainly refers to:
This flexibility mainly refers to:
· the scope and definition of a port (Article 2): the identification of the boundaries of each port should always be entirely based on the information from the port security assessment;
· the scope and definition of a port (Article 2): the identification of the boundaries of each port should always be entirely based on the information from the port security assessment;
· the security levels (Article 8): the security plan with 3 levels seems adequate; security measures should be proportionate and allow different security regimes for different areas of the port;
· the security levels (Article 8): the security plan with 3 levels seems adequate; security measures should be proportionate and allow different security regimes for different areas of the port;
· cooperation between relevant security authorities, (i.e. port security officer, port security committee..) should be enhanced and the flexibility given in the proposal for these issues seems appropriate and should be maintained.
· cooperation between relevant security authorities, (i.e. port security officer, port security committee..) should be enhanced and the flexibility given in the proposal for these issues seems appropriate and should be maintained.
Tööstuse, teadusuuringute ja energeetikakomisjon palub vastutaval transpordi- ja turismikomisjonil lisada oma raportisse järgmised muudatusettepanekud:
The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:
12 a) Käesoleva direktiiviga seonduvate meetmete kohaldamine tõstatab tähtsaid rahastamisega seotud küsimusi.
(12a) The application of the measures included in this Directive raises important questions in relation to its financing.
Nimetatud meetmete rahastamine ei tohiks viia konkurentsi moonutamiseni.
The financing of such measures should not lead to distortion of competition.
31. märtsi 2004. a laevade ja sadamarajatiste turvalisuse tugevdamise määruse (EÜ) nr 725/2004¹ põhjenduses 15 viidatud finantsanalüüsis tuleks samuti arvestada käesolevas direktiivis sisalduvate meetmete kulude ja rahastamisega, ning koostada juhtnöörid nimetatud kulude rahastamiseks riigivõimude ja ettevõtjate vahel.
The financial study referred to in Recital 15 of Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 of 31 March 2004 on enhancing ship and port facility security 1 should also take into account the costs and funding of the measures included in this Directive and draw up guidelines for the financing of these costs between public authorities and operators.
Euroopa Komisjon peaks esitama hiljemalt 31. detsembriks 2005. a nimetatud analüüsi tulemused ja vajadusel ettepanekud Euroopa Parlamendile ja nõukogule.
The Commission should, by 31 December 2005 at the latest, present the results of this study, and, if appropriate, any proposals to the European Parliament and the Council.
This recital rectifies the clear omission of a reference to the costs arising from the requirements of this Directive.
This recital rectifies the clear omission of a reference to the costs arising from the requirements of this Directive.
Muudetud ettepanek sadamakaitse tugevdamist käsitleva Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu direktiivi kohta
Amended proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing port security
Ettepanekute vastuvõtmise kuupäev
Date amendments adopted
Richard James Ashworth, Ivo Belet, Šarūnas Birutis, Jan B?ezina, Philippe Busquin, Joan Calabuig Rull, Giles Chichester, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Lena Ek, Adam Gierek, Umberto Guidoni, András Gyürk, Fiona Hall, Rebecca Harms, Ján Hudacký, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Anne Laperrouze, Pia Elda Locatelli, Nils Lundgren, Angelika Niebler, Reino Paasilinna, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Vincent Peillon, Umberto Pirilli, Vladimír Remek, Herbert Reul, Teresa Riera Madurell, Paul Rübig, Andres Tarand, Britta Thomsen, Patrizia Toia, Catherine Trautmann, Claude Turmes, Nikolaos Vakalis, Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca, Dominique Vlasto
Richard James Ashworth, Ivo Belet, Šarūnas Birutis, Jan Březina, Philippe Busquin, Joan Calabuig Rull, Giles Chichester, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Lena Ek, Adam Gierek, Umberto Guidoni, András Gyürk, Fiona Hall, Rebecca Harms, Ján Hudacký, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Anne Laperrouze, Pia Elda Locatelli, Nils Lundgren, Angelika Niebler, Reino Paasilinna, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Vincent Peillon, Umberto Pirilli, Vladimír Remek, Herbert Reul, Teresa Riera Madurell, Paul Rübig, Andres Tarand, Britta Thomsen, Patrizia Toia, Catherine Trautmann, Claude Turmes, Nikolaos Vakalis, Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca, Dominique Vlasto
Kodanikuvabaduste, justiits- ja siseasjade komisjonilt arvamus
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS
Muudetud ettepanek sadamakaitse tugevdamist käsitleva Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu direktiivi kohta
on the amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive on enhancing port security
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs has been asked for its opinion on the proposal for a directive on enhancing port security.
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs has been asked for its opinion on the proposal for a directive on enhancing port security.
The committee is particularly interested in this issue because, in its amended proposal ( COM(2004)0393 ), the Commission extended the scope of the security measures to include roll-on roll-off ferries carrying passengers and/or cargo.
The committee is particularly interested in this issue because, in its amended proposal ( COM(2004)0393 ), the Commission extended the scope of the security measures to include roll-on roll-off ferries carrying passengers and/or cargo.
As already happens in the air transport sector, when the directive enters into force ferry passengers will be subjected to checks before they are allowed to embark.
As already happens in the air transport sector, when the directive enters into force ferry passengers will be subjected to checks before they are allowed to embark.
It will be left to the Member States to decide which types of ferry and which ports these provisions will apply to, on the basis of an assessment of security levels in ports and the subsequent drafting of a port security plan.
It will be left to the Member States to decide which types of ferry and which ports these provisions will apply to, on the basis of an assessment of security levels in ports and the subsequent drafting of a port security plan.
The proposal for a directive is a valuable prevention tool in Europe's fight against terrorism and forms part of a package of measures which is soon to include a proposal for a directive covering the entire intermodal chain and seeking to ensure security at every stage in a product's journey from manufacturer to final destination.
The proposal for a directive is a valuable prevention tool in Europe's fight against terrorism and forms part of a package of measures which is soon to include a proposal for a directive covering the entire intermodal chain and seeking to ensure security at every stage in a product's journey from manufacturer to final destination.
The draftsman fully endorses both the substance of and thinking behind the directive.
The draftsman fully endorses both the substance of and thinking behind the directive.
Port security plans will not only ensure greater protection against possible terrorist attacks, but will also reinforce measures to combat illegal immigration, drug trafficking and the counterfeiting of goods.
Port security plans will not only ensure greater protection against possible terrorist attacks, but will also reinforce measures to combat illegal immigration, drug trafficking and the counterfeiting of goods.
The draftsman endorses the Commission's approach, both as regards the directive's aim, which is to make ports more secure against the threat of intentional unlawful acts and as regards the possibility of carrying out Community inspections with a view to monitoring implementation of the directive by the Member States.
The draftsman endorses the Commission's approach, both as regards the directive's aim, which is to make ports more secure against the threat of intentional unlawful acts and as regards the possibility of carrying out Community inspections with a view to monitoring implementation of the directive by the Member States.
The draftsman agrees with the views expressed by the rapporteur of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and by the Council to the effect that "adjacent port areas" should be excluded from the directive's scope, with the Member States themselves defining what constitutes a port area.
The draftsman agrees with the views expressed by the rapporteur of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and by the Council to the effect that "adjacent port areas" should be excluded from the directive's scope, with the Member States themselves defining what constitutes a port area.
The draftsman would like the Commission at the earliest opportunity to make a detailed analysis of the cost of implementing the directive and how that cost should be shared among public authorities and private operators.
The draftsman would like the Commission at the earliest opportunity to make a detailed analysis of the cost of implementing the directive and how that cost should be shared among public authorities and private operators.
Kodanikuvabaduste, justiits- ja siseasjade komisjon palub vastutaval transpordi- ja turismikomisjonil lisada oma raportisse järgmised muudatusettepanekud:
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:
1) Ebaseaduslikud rünnakud , täpsemalt terrorism ja organiseeritud kuritegevus on üheks suuremaks ohuks demokraatia ja vabaduse ideaalidele ning rahu väärtustamisele, mis on Euroopa Liidu olemuse põhituumaks.
(1) Unlawful acts and , more particularly, terrorism and organised crime are among the greatest threats to the ideals of democracy and freedom and to the values of peace, which are the very essence of the European Union.
Improvement of port security should not be confined to fighting terrorism but should also include organised crime, since ports are often used as locations for trafficking, especially human trafficking.
Improvement of port security should not be confined to fighting terrorism but should also include organised crime, since ports are often used as locations for trafficking, especially human trafficking.
Muudatusettepanek 2
Amendment 2
2) Inimeste, infrastruktuuri ja varustuse, kaasa arvatud transpordivahendid, turvalisust sadamates peab kaitsma ebaseaduslike rünnakute ja nende poolt põhjustatud laastavate tagajärgede eest.
(2) The security of people, infrastructure and equipment, including means of transport, in ports should be protected against unlawful acts and their devastating effects.
It should be up to the Member States to define adjacent areas.
It should be up to the Member States to define adjacent areas.
Käesolev direktiiv hõlmab turvameetmeid, mis kehtivad inimeste, infrastruktuuri ja varustuse, kaasa arvatud transpordivahendid, kohta sadamates.
This directive addresses security measures which need to be observed by or affect people, infrastructure and equipment, including means of transport, in ports.
It should be up to the Member States to define adjacent areas .
It should be up to the Member States to define adjacent areas .
Muudatusettepanek 4
Amendment 4
Artikli 2 lõige 3
Article 2, paragraph 3
Liikmesriigid määravad käesoleva direktiivi jaoks kindlaks iga sadama piirid, võttes nõuetekohaselt arvesse sadama turvalisuse hindamise tulemusi.
Member States shall identify for each port the boundaries for the purposes of this directive, appropriately taking into account the information from the port security assessment.
Liikmesriigid piiritlevad käesoleva direktiivi jaoks iga sadama ja võimaluse korral määravad kindlaks sellega piirnevate alade – kus liiguvad transpordivahendid, millel on otsene või kaudne mõju sadama turvalisusele – piirid, võttes nõuetekohaselt arvesse sadama turvalisuse hindamise tulemusi.
Member States shall delineate for each port and, where possible, identify for adjacent areas in which means of transport with a direct or indirect impact on port security circulate, the boundaries for the purposes of this directive, appropriately taking into account the information from the port security assessment.
To clarify the fact that the Member States are competent to define the concept of ‘adjacent areas’.
To clarify the fact that the Member States are competent to define the concept of ‘adjacent areas’.
On the basis of the subsidiarity principle, there is no need for an advisory committee.
On the basis of the subsidiarity principle, there is no need for an advisory committee.
Euroopa Komisjon ja liikmesriikide asjassepuutuvad organid teevad kõik vajaliku selleks, et nende kontrollide teostamine häiriks võimalikult vähe sadamate tegevust.
The Commission and the bodies responsible within the Member States shall take the necessary steps to ensure that the inspections cause the least possible disruption to ports.
Mitte hiljem kui kolm aastat pärast direktiivi jõustumist ja järgnevalt iga viie aasta järel esitab komisjon Euroopa Parlamendile ja nõukogule hindamisaruande, mis tugineb muuhulgas vastavalt artiklile 14 saadud teabele.
No later than three years after the entry into force of the directive, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall submit an evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council based, among other things, on the information obtained pursuant to Article 14.
Ettepanek sadamakaitse tugevdamist käsitleva Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu direktiivi kohta
Proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive on enhancing port security
LIBE 15.09.2004
LIBE 15.9.2004
Romano Maria La Russa 13.09.2004
Romano Maria La Russa 13.9.2004
Artikli 251 lõige 2 ja artikli 80 lõige 2 EÜ
Articles 251(2) and 80(2) EC
ITRE 15.09.2004
ITRE 15.9.2004
Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert 01.09.2004
Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert 1.9.2004