INTERTANKO in BRUSSELS

1
INTERTANKO in BRUSSELS

• Presentation to INTERTANKOs Iberian seminar
• By Ketil Djonne, ADS-Insight, Brussels

2
The 1993 EU-Council Resolution on Safe Seas1)
New guiding principles

• A shift from flag state to port state
• Continued support for a global approach and to
  work through the IMO, but subject to
• Increased co-ordination of EU policies before and
  at the IMO
• Mandatory EU implementation of adopted IMO rules
• In case the IMO fails, the EU may regulate on a
  regional basis
• 2) A work programme to be completed end of 1999

3
1993
I can see a growing importance for the EU!
No doubt - Brussels is a place for INTERTANKO to
be..
4
Seen from Brussels the Erika highlighted all
the weaknesses of the system

• Lack of flag state implementation
• Inadequate class response and control
• An irresponsible shipowner (did not show-up)
• Lack of transparency
• Double standards with charterers
• An international system with agreed rules but
• serious lack of implementation and control

5
In the wake of the Erika,INTERTANKOs mission
was Hinder a European repetition of post-Exxon
Valdez!

• Good INTERTANKO network in Brussels already
  before the accident happened (first chairman
  visit in 1993, Brussels tanker event in 1998)
• Chairman W.Hoegh immediately met with Commission
  Vice President de Palacio (Jan. 2000)
• Close co-operation with Commission in initial
  phase in order to dialogue on the input behind
  the proposals to come
• Very close and good co-operation with ECSA

6
BrusselsThe main players
Commission (The executive)
ECJ
Commission
Court
European Parliament (Direct election)
Council (Member States)
7
Interacting with the Commission
Loyola de Palacio (Margaritis Schinas) Commissione
r for Transport and Energy Policy
Francois Lamoureux
Director General
Director for maritime policy
Willem de Ruiter Jean. Trestour Wolfgang Elsner
Unit staff members
8
Erika I

• An invitation for the industry to sign-up for
  voluntary agreements
• Proposal for an EU Regulation on (regional)
  phasing out of single hull tankers
• Proposal for radical amendments in the EU
  directive on Port State Control
• Proposal for radical amendments to the EU
  directive on Licensing of Class

9
Erika II

• Proposal for a new EU Directive on Monitoring
  Reporting of maritime traffic
• Proposal for EU Regulation establishing a
  European Maritime Safety Agency
• Proposal for a European third layer of oil
  pollution compensation (COPE) and a wish-list
  for future changes to the IOPC/CLC system

10
INTERTANKOs priorities

• To have the concept of a voluntary agreement
  abandoned
• To oppose regional rules (phase-out, COPE, VDR)
• To ensure long-term EU support for the IMO
• To fight any erosion of the power of the ship
  master
• To promote transparency on charterer in PSC-data
• To support the establishment of EMSA
• To avoid inclusion of shipping in the directive
  on liability for restoration of environmental
  damage
• To generally improve the standing of the tanker
  industry in Brussels

11
The Triangle of power
Commission
n
EuroParl
Council
12
EU Co-decision
Com
Com
Council
EP
EP
Preparation Initiative
Pre Decision
Proposal
Formal
Political Agreement Common Position
EP opinion
First Reading
EP approves or rejects
Second Reading
Commission withdraws
Council adopts
Conciliation
13
Erika -status

• Erika I, finally adopted in December 2001
  Implementation in July 2003
• Erika II,
• - COPE-proposal resolved in the context of IOPC
• - Monitoring and reporting close to adoption
• - EMSA close to adoption and operational end of
  2002?

14
So, what has been achieved?

• Concept of voluntary agreement scrapped
• Phase-out moved from EU to IMO
• Retrofitting of VDR partly moved from EU to IMO
• COPE moved from EU to IOPC
• Weather ban from bad to acceptable
• Shipping exempted from environmental damage
  directive
• Port of refuge obligation imposed on
  governments
• Naming of charterer in PSC detention data

15
Whats next?

• Consolidation of the EUs role in global maritime
  politics - EU membership in IMO
• Implementation of Erika I II as well as
  PRF-directive
• Combat of low quality registers through
  co-ordinate EU initiatives in the IMO and the
  ILO. Focus on the human element?
• A co-ordinated European approach to
  post-September 11th maritime security
• Air pollution from sea going vessels
• The European Maritime Safety Agency up and
  running by 2003
• Deregulation of port services - focus on pilotage
  
• Promotion of Short Sea Shipping
• A revision of EU competition rules. Implication
  for tramp?

16
EU membership of IMO

• Commissions practical argument A need for
  better EU co-ordination
• Legal rational in EU law When there is Community
  law the EU speaks with one voice
• Needs a mandate in order to renegotiate the
  Geneva convention
• The industry must decide whether it believes EU
  membership of the IMO will enhance maritime
  safety or not

17
Environmental Liability

• Green paper in the early 1990s
• 2002 Commission proposal for a horizontal
  directive on liability for environmental damage
• Shipping generally exempted
• Important that HNS, bulk and IOPC conventions
  are ratified and implemented in Europe. Industry
  focus now on Member States and European Parliament

18
Air emissions from ships

• Communication on air emissions from seagoing
  vessels
• Revision of Directive 99/32 - 0.2 in MDO
• Additional measures for HFO?
• Industry focus on ratification of MARPOL Annex
  VI. 1.5 in MARPOL SECA areas? 0.2 in ports?
  If so how? Focus on input rather than output
  (fuels quality rather than on the ship emissions)

19
Short Sea Shipping Deregulation of port Services

• SSS as integrated part of EU transport policy
• Botle neck exercise
• Informal Transport Council, Gijon May 2002 Focus
  on
• Ports (transparency, port services,
  benchmarking, pilotage)
• VTS VTM
• Harmonisation of legal and administrative
  frameworks

20
Thank you