referitor la proiectul comun, aprobat de Comitetul de conciliere, de regulament al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului privind norme comune în domeniul siguranței aviației civile și în vederea abrogării Regulamentului (CE) nr. 2320/2002
PROIECT DE REZOLUȚIE LEGISLATIVĂ A PARLAMENTULUI EUROPEAN
privind proiectul comun, aprobat de Comitetul de conciliere, de regulament al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului privind norme comune în domeniul siguranței aviației civile și în vederea abrogării Regulamentului (CE) nr. 2320/2002
– având în vedere proiectul comun aprobat de Comitetul de conciliere și declarațiile Comisiei referitoare la acesta (PE-CONS 3601/2008 – C6-0029/2008),
– având în vedere poziția sa în primă lectură(1) referitoare la propunerea Comisiei înaintată Parlamentului European și Consiliului (COM(2005)0429),
– având în vedere poziția sa în a doua lectură(2) referitoare la poziția comună a Consiliului(3),
– având în vedere avizul emis de Comisie privind amendamentele Parlamentului la poziția comună (COM(2007)0475),
– având în vedere articolul 251 alineatul (5) din Tratatul CE,
– având în vedere articolul 65 din Regulamentul său de procedură,
– având în vedere raportul delegației sale la Comitetul de conciliere (A6-0049/2008),
1. aprobă proiectul comun;
2. încredințează Președintelui sarcina de a semna actul, împreună cu Președintele Consiliului, în conformitate cu articolul 254 alineatul (1) din Tratatul CE;
3. încredințează Secretarului său General sarcina de a semna actul, după ce s-a verificat îndeplinirea corespunzătoare a tuturor procedurilor, și de a asigura, în acord cu Secretarul General al Consiliului, publicarea sa în Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene;
4. încredințează Președintelui sarcina de a transmite prezenta rezoluție legislativă Consiliului și Comisiei.
The proposal for a Regulation on common rules in the field of civil aviation security was adopted by the Commission on 22 September 2005 (COM(2005)0429). The fundamental aim of the proposal was to replace Regulation 2320/2002 establishing common rules in the field of civil aviation security, which had been adopted very quickly after 11 September 2001.
After two and a half years of experience with Regulation 2320/2002, it was apparent that a simpler and more flexible legislative framework was needed; one which would leave more decisions to implementing legislation than had the previous, very detailed legislation. At the same time, a greater degree of harmonisation was considered necessary to facilitate operations of the industry. Finally, it was hoped that greater clarity would make for more effective implementation of the security standards.
Like Regulation 2320/2002, the proposal covered issues such as the security standards to be followed at airports (e.g. the screening of passengers, prohibited articles or cargo), the means to monitor compliance with the common standards (e.g. Commission inspections), and international cooperation.
II. The legislative procedure before conciliation
The committee responsible, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, appointed Mr Costa as rapporteur. The Parliament held its first reading on 15 June 2006. Contacts between the Parliament and the Council took place during the Finnish Presidency in an attempt to reach an early second reading agreement. A compromise package (later referred to as the "Finnish compromise"(1)) was, however, rejected by the Parliament. Thereafter, the Council adopted its common position, on 11 December 2006: the Parliament's second reading took place on 25 April 2007.
At second reading, the Parliament adopted 97 amendments. In Parliament's view, the Council's common position had failed to address the question of cost sharing for aviation security measures. The Parliament restored its first reading position on the issue of financing.
The constituent meeting of Parliament's delegation to the Conciliation Committee was held on 10 July 2007. Its members mandated the chair, Mrs Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, the chair of the TRAN committee and rapporteur, Mr Costa, and the other members of the negotiation team, Mr Jarzembowski and Mr El Khadraoui, to begin informal negotiations with the Council.
Before the formal opening of the conciliation procedure on 20 November, four trialogues were held (on 4 September, 25 September, 10 October and 13 November) and the EP delegation met three times (on 5 September, 26 September and 23 October). When the conciliation procedure was formally opened, the two most controversial issues were still the financing of aviation security measures and, as had emerged during the procedure, the comitology provisions.
At the conciliation meeting of 20 November, the Council was represented by Mr Lino, Portuguese Minister of Transport, and the Commission by Vice-President Barrot. Even after two trialogues and delegation meetings, no agreement could be reached and the Conciliation Committee was adjourned.
A further trialogue at political level, with Mr Lino and Mr Barrot, took place on 10 December. All main outstanding issues (financing, comitology, the transition from the old to the new legal regime) were discussed, but no overall agreement could be reached. The Parliament delegation meeting on the following day therefore proposed to the Council a package comprising proposals on the three issues mentioned above. Since the Council could not accept all of these proposals a final agreement could be found only after a further EP delegation meeting on 18 December and an exchange of letters between the Presidency-in-Office of the Council and the chair of the EP delegation.
IV. Key points of the agreement reached
IV.1 Arrangements for financing security measures: Two Articles (Security Costs (Article 5) and Commission Report on Financing (Article 22)) were added to the text.
The Article on Security Costs sets out, as a first step, certain provisions in this matter. While non-binding language is used for the sharing of costs, the provisions on security charges (that they are directly related to the costs of providing security measures and designed to recover no more than the relevant costs involved) are of a binding nature, using the word "shall".
The report of the Commission, due no later than 31 December 2008, will deal with the principles of financing civil aviation security measures, the steps necessary to ensure that security charges are used exclusively to meet security costs, and ways to improve the transparency of such charges. It will also set out the principles necessary to safeguard undistorted competition between airports and between air carriers and the different methods to ensure consumers' protection as regards the distribution of the costs of security measures between taxpayers and users. This report "will be accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal". The Parliament accepted this standard wording together with a statement of Vice-President Barrot.
Vice-President Barrot states that he intends to present to the College of Commissioners a legislative proposal "on the distribution of the costs, between taxpayers and users, of the more stringent aviation security measures that Member States may adopt, further to the common basic standards provided in this new Regulation".
IV.2 Comitology: The Parliament succeeded in convincing the Council and the Commission to use the regulatory procedure with scrutiny for a whole series of measures when defining the common basic standards for aviation security (Article 4). The new comitology rules will apply, inter alia, to methods for screening of passengers (which will be relevant should the Commission wish to introduce, for example, body scanners as a new method of screening) and to the categories of articles that may be prohibited (such as, for example, liquids).
IV.3 Other issues:
·As regards the publication of implementing measures, a general rule was added that measures which have a direct impact on passengers shall be published (recital 16 and Article 16).
·An Article on the cooperation with the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) concerning audits was added (Article 8).
·The concept of "one-stop security" was strengthened (recital 20 and Article 20).
·The provisions on the use of sky-marshals were improved with a reference to training (recital 8) and the required security conditions (chapter 10.3 of the Annex).
·A provision was added to recital 3 that consideration should be given to the most effective means of offering assistance following terrorist acts that have a major impact in the transport field.
·The date of application of the new Regulation can be less than two years from the entry into force. The Parliament will be involved in the decision on the date of application via the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (Article 24).
V. Analysis of the agreement
The agreement reached in the course of the conciliation procedure on the civil aviation dossier represents a positive outcome for the Parliament. This can clearly be demonstrated by comparing the final outcome with the Finnish compromise on the table during the first reading.
Before the adoption of the common position by the Council, during the second reading and at the beginning of the conciliation procedure, the Council representatives underlined repeatedly that the Finnish compromise was as far as the Council would be able to go.(2)
The final agreement reached clearly goes much further than the Finnish compromise:
Concerning finance, the positions of the Commission(3) and the Council(4) (which did not want to include any provisions on financing in the text) and the Parliament (with several quite far-reaching amendments on this issue(5)) were poles apart. The final compromise is clearly closer to the Parliaments amendments than the Finnish compromise:
As regards the sharing of costs, both texts use non-binding language. In the final text, however, the provisions are included in Article 5 while in the Finnish compromise they were only in recital 18a. Moreover, the language used in Article 4a of the Finnish compromise underlines the autonomy of Member States, while the final text can be read as a first step towards Community rules. The final text is also more detailed.
As to the provisions on security charges (that they are directly related to the costs of providing security measures and designed to recover no more than the relevant costs involved) the expression "should" is used in recital 18a and Article 4a of the Finnish compromise. In Article 5 of the final text the word "shall" is used.
As for the next steps, in recital 18a of the Finnish compromise the Commission "is invited to consider an initiative on the financing of security measures at European airports, and the transparency of security costs, in order to address possible distortion of competition in this field". The final text includes a date ("no later than 31 December 2008") for the report foreseen as the next step and sets out in a much more detailed way what is expected. The provisions are not limited to the objective of addressing "possible distortion of competition", but include also the sharing of costs between taxpayers and users.
In the Finnish compromise, the Commission undertook "in the coming months" to present "a proposal on infrastructure charging at the European airports, including a proposal on transparency of the financing of the security measures". It continued: "On the basis of such legislation the Commission will also further develop a more general approach to the financing of security measures at the European airports." The proposal mentioned became the proposal on airport charges (COM(2006)820) which was made on 24 January 2007, despite the failure of the civil aviation security negotiations at that stage. The final outcome goes further, in the sense that Vice-President Barrot declared his intention to submit a legislative proposal to the College of Commissioners on the distribution of costs for more stringent measures.
At second reading, the Parliament's concerns about the delegated implementing power were expressed in mainly two amendments: one requiring detailed risk, cost and impact assessments for each implementing measure (AM 36) and one providing for a sunset-clause for all implementing measures (measures would expire after six months but could be upheld after a thorough re-evaluation of security risks, costs and operational impact) (AM 33).
The Finnish compromise provided for the regulatory procedure with scrutiny in two cases (the criteria allowing Member States to derogate from the common basic standards and the specifications for the national quality control programme).
Building on Parliament's amendments mentioned above, the final text in addition now provides for the scrutiny procedure for the list of measures contained in Article 4(2), i.e. for the common basic standards. The common basic standards can in a way be considered to be at the heart of the Regulation: the fact that, despite strong resistance, the Council and the Commission eventually accepted Parliament's arguments for the new comitology rules, should be regarded as a considerable success. This will allow for the Parliament's close involvement in such issues as liquids on board an aircraft(6) in the future. In acknowledgement of the need to make quick decisions in certain circumstances, Parliament's delegation accepted the possibility to use the urgency procedures for future measures under the scrutiny procedure.
V.3 Other issues
All the other issues summarised above under IV.3 were not part of the Finnish compromise and constitute clear improvements from the Parliament's view.
As the agreement reached goes much further than what was possible at earlier stages of the procedure, the delegation recommends that the Parliament approves the joint text at third reading.
Letter of Mr BÁRTOLO (Chairman of Coreper I) to Mrs KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU of 25 July 2007: "... que le Conseil, pour ce qui le concerne, est prêt à faire preuve d'une certaine flexibilité par rapport à sa position commune mais qu'il ne sera pas en mesure d'aller au-delà des principes consacrés dans sa proposition de compromis présentée au Parlement européen en novembre 2006."
The initial Commission proposal did not contain any provisions as to the question of who would pay for the security measures. Parliament had been very disappointed by this omission of the Commission since the Parliament, the Council and the Commission in an Interinstitutional Declaration added to Regulation 2320/2002 had recognised that the funding question had to be analysed urgently.
The common position does not contain any provisions on financing. In its statement Council outlined that it would be inappropriate in such a technical regulation to include requirements or obligations on financing and that "the principle of subsidiarity dictates that such questions be addressed at national level." (OJ C 70 E of 27.3.2007, p. 32)
See European Parliament resolution of 5 September 2007 on Commission Regulation (EC) No 1546/2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security (introduction of liquids onto aircraft).
Proiect comun, aprobat de Comitetul de conciliere, de regulament al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului privind norme comune în domeniul siguranței aviației civile și în vederea abrogării Regulamentului (CE) nr. 2320/2002
Data primirii celei de-a doua lecturi de către Consiliu
Data scrisorii Consiliului referitoare la neaprobarea amendamentelor PE
Reuniunile Comitetului de conciliere
Data votului delegației PE
Membri titulari prezenți
Inés Ayala Sender, Philip Bradbourn, Paolo Costa, Arūnas Degutis, Saïd El Khadraoui, Robert Evans, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Georg Jarzembowski, Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, Jörg Leichtfried, Eva Lichtenberger, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Hartmut Nassauer, Reinhard Rack, Gilles Savary, Brian Simpson, Dirk Sterckx, Ulrich Stockmann, Silvia-Adriana Țicău, Corien Wortmann-Kool
Membri supleanți prezenți
Mathieu Grosch, Elisabeth Jeggle, Anne E. Jensen, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch
Membri supleanți (articolul 178 alineatul (2)) prezenți
Data acordului în Comitetul de conciliere
Acordul prin schimb de scrisori
Data constatării de către copreședinți a aprobării proiectului comun și a transmiterii acestuia la PE și la Consiliu
Observații (date disponibile într-o singură limbă)