REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002
16.5.2006 - (COM(2005)0210 – C6‑0153/2005 – 2005/0098(COD)) - ***I
Committee on Transport and Tourism
Rapporteur: Luis de Grandes Pascual
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/
(COM(2005)0210 – C6‑0153/2005 – 2005/0098(COD))
(Codecision procedure: first reading)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2005)0210)[1],
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 80(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6‑0153/2005),
– having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A6‑0184/2006),
1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;
2. Points out that the appropriations allocated to the Agency indicated in the Commission proposal must be compatible with the overall ceiling for decentralised agencies set out in the financial perspective 2007-2013;
3. Calls on the Commission to confirm, once the next financial perspective has been adopted, the amounts indicated in the proposal for a regulation or, should the need arise, to submit the adjusted amounts for approval by the European Parliament and the Council, so as to ensure that those amounts are compatible with the ceiling;
4. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;
5. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
|
Amendments by Parliament |
Amendment 1
RECITAL -1 (new)
|
|
(-1) Bilateral and regional agreements concluded between coastal States, such as the Helsinki and Barcelona Conventions of 1992 and 1976 respectively, provide for mutual assistance in the event of a maritime pollution incident. |
Justification
Compromise amendment aimed at a first reading agreement with Council and Commission.
Bilateral and Regional agreements offer an effective framework for operational response activities in the case of small to medium scale disasters. Coastal States which are contracting parties of the agreements include Member States and non EU Member States. The European Community is contracting party to all the European regional agreements.
Amendment 2 RECITAL 4 A (new) | |
|
|
(4a) The Agency is to play a key role in developing a centralised satellite imagery service for surveillance, the early detection of pollution and identification of the ships responsible. This new system will improve the availability of data and the effectiveness of the response to pollution caused by ships. |
Amendment 3
RECITAL 4 B (new)
|
|
(4b) The Agency is to play a key role in surveillance, the early detection of pollution and identification of the ships responsible, by setting up a satellite imagery service centre. This new centre will increase the availability of data and the effectiveness of the response to pollution caused by ships. |
Justification
Provision is made for setting up this centre as an accompanying measure in Directive 2005/35/EC on ship‑source pollution and on the introduction of sanctions for infringements, and it will support the Commission and the Member States in rapidly detecting and identifying those responsible.
Amendment 4
RECITAL 5 A (new)
|
|
(5a) The activities of the Agency in this field should not relieve coastal States of their responsibility to have appropriate pollution response mechanisms in place and should respect existing co-operation arrangements between Member States or groups of Member States in this field. In the event of a maritime pollution incident, the Agency should assist the Member State(s) affected, under the authority of which the clean-up operations will be conducted. |
Justification
Compromise amendment, aimed at a first reading agreement with Council and Commission.
The role of the Agency must be to provide additional means and is not intended to replace actions by the Member States, but to overcome the inadequacies of large-scale disasters response and complement the effort of the Member States concerned. ( Regulation (EC) No 724/2004 amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002).
Amendment 5
RECITAL 8
|
(8) The amounts to be committed for the funding of response to pollution should cover the period 2007 to 2013 in line with the new financial perspective. |
(8) The amounts to be committed for the funding of response to pollution should cover the period 2007 to 2013 in line with the new financial perspective. Particular attention should be paid to those areas identified as the most vulnerable. |
Amendment 6
RECITAL 9 A (new)
|
|
(9a) This amount must be regarded as the minimum necessary for the completion of the tasks entrusted to the Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships. |
Justification
Should the funding fall below the threshold proposed by the Commission, the successful excution of this Community measure will be seriously jeopardised .
Amendment 7
RECITAL 10
|
(10) In order to optimise allocation of commitments and take into account any changes with regard to oil pollution response activities, it is necessary to ensure continuous monitoring of the particular needs for action so as to allow for adaptation of the annual financial commitments. |
(10) In order to optimise allocation of commitments and take into account any changes with regard to ship pollution response activities , it is necessary to ensure continuous monitoring of the particular needs for action so as to allow for adaptation of the annual financial commitments. |
Justification
For the sake of consistency with the field of application, which should not be limited to combating oil pollution but should cover all types of pollution, the term that should be used is the one that appears in Regulation (EC) n° 1406/2002 establishing the European Maritime Safety Agency.
Amendment 8
ARTICLE 2, POINT (B)
|
(b) "Regional agreements" means the bilateral and regional agreements, such as the Helsinki and Barcelona Conventions of 1974 and 1976 respectively, concluded between coastal States to render mutual assistance in the event of a maritime pollution incident. |
(b) "Regional agreements" means the bilateral and regional agreements concluded between coastal States to render mutual assistance in the event of a maritime pollution incident. |
Justification
Compromise amendment, aimed at a first reading agreement with Council and Commission. See also the rapporteur´s amendment to new Recital 1 on Regional agreements.
Amendment 9 ARTICLE 2, POINT (B A) (new) | |
|
|
(ba) "Oil" means the substances governed by Annex I to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (Marpol 73/78). |
Amendment 10 ARTICLE 2, POINT (B B) (new) | |
|
|
(bb) "Noxious liquid substances" means the substances governed by Annex II to Marpol 73/78. |
Amendment 11 ARTICLE 3, POINT (A) | |
|
(a) information by assembling, analysing and disseminating best practices, techniques and innovation in the field of oil pollution response, |
(a) information by assembling, analysing and disseminating best practices, techniques and innovation, such as instruments for monitoring tank-emptying, in the field of response to pollution caused by ships. |
Amendment 12 ARTICLE 3, POINT (B) | |
|
(b) co-operation and co-ordination by providing the relevant services of the Commission with technical and scientific assistance in the framework of the activities of the relevant regional agreements, |
(b) cooperation and coordination by providing the Member States and the relevant services of the Commission with technical and scientific assistance in the framework of the activities of the relevant regional agreements, |
Justification | |
Assistance should be provided to the Member States as well as the Commission, since the functions and tasks of the Agency are intended to complement those of the Member States and are performed at the latter's request. | |
Amendment 13 ARTICLE 3, POINT (C) | |
|
(c) operational assistance by supporting on request with additional means, such as stand-by anti-pollution ships and equipment, Member States’ pollution response actions in the event of accidental or deliberate pollution caused by ships. Assistance shall be targeted primarily at the Baltic Sea, the Western approaches to the English Channel, the Atlantic coast and the Mediterranean Sea, particularly the area along the tanker trade route from the Black Sea, while any other area in need shall also be assisted. |
(c) operational assistance by providing on request additional means, consisting of a system of vessels with adequate technical and human resources and a centralised satellite imagery service for surveillance and the early detection of pollution. These measures will serve to support Member States’ prevention and response actions in the event of accidental or deliberate pollution from ships. Assistance by anti-pollution vessels shall be targeted primarily at the Baltic Sea, the Western approaches to the English Channel, the Atlantic coast, divided into two areas, north and south, and the Mediterranean Sea, particularly the area along the tanker trade route from the Black Sea, notwithstanding the possibility of providing assistance to any other area in need. |
Justification | |
The European Maritime Safety Agency did not come into being to take the place of Member States' actions to prevent and combat pollution from ships but to provide complementary measures to assist the Member States' response capacity which may be insufficient when they are faced with a major disaster. | |
Moreover, the creation of a satellite imagery service centre to combat pollution is one of the accompanying measures envisaged in Directive 2005/35/CE on ship‑source pollution and on the introduction of sanctions for infringements. This measure will support the Member States in rapidly detecting sources of pollution and identifying those responsible. | |
Amendment 14 ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 2 | |
|
Annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspectives. |
Annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspectives: in this connection the minimum funding of operational assistance to the Member States pursuant to Article 3(c). must be guaranteed. |
Justification | |
Should the funding fall below the threshold proposed by the Commission, the successful excution of this Community measure will be seriously jeopardised. | |
Amendment 15 ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 2 A (new) | |
|
|
|
|
|
The appropriations allocated to the Agency shall be compatible with the global ceiling for agencies set out in the financial perspectives 2007-2013. |
|
|
|
Justification | |
The appropriations allocated to the Agency should comply with the overall ceiling established for the decentralised agencies. This will ensure availability of resources for the financing of the actions of the programme. | |
Amendment 16 ARTICLE 4 A (new) | |
|
|
Article 4a |
|
|
Monitoring response capacity |
|
|
In order to meet the need for additional anti-pollution vessels, and to define the requirements for additional operational assistance in the various regions of the European Union, it is important to draw up on a regular basis a list of the commercial and State pollution response mechanisms available in and the response capacity of those regions. |
Justification | |
Following the successive disasters of the Erika and the Prestige, a number of Member States (notably Spain) have made a considerable effort to step up their pollution response capacity. In other Member States yet more progress is being made. In order to ensure that the additional operational assistance can be deployed wherever necessary and as efficiently as possible, it is important to monitor closely the – commercial and State – response capacity in the Member States. | |
Amendment 17
ARTICLE 5, PARAGRAPH 2 A (new)
|
|
2a. The Commission and the Agency shall ensure that best value for money is achieved in the financing of Community actions under the present Regulation. |
Justification
As well as being correct, Community expenditure should also be efficient.
Amendment 18
ARTICLE 6, POINT (A)
Article 10, paragraph 2, point l (Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002)
|
"(l) review the financial execution of the detailed plan, as referred to in (k) and the budgetary commitments provided for in Regulation (..) before the beginning of the financial year on the basis of the report provided for in article 15 (2) (g)." |
"(l) review the financial execution of the detailed plan, as referred to in (k) and the budgetary commitments provided for in Regulation (..) before the beginning of the financial year on the basis of the report provided for in article 15 (2) (g). This review shall be carried out when the statement of estimates of the Agency's revenue and expenditure for the following financial year are produced, as provided for in Article 18(5). " |
Justification
Compromise amendment, aimed at a first reading agreement with Council and Commission.
Amendment 19
ARTICLE 6, POINT (B)
Article 15, paragraph 2, point (g) (Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002)
|
"(g) he/she shall submit a report to the Commission and the Administrative Board, by 31 January each year, concerning the financial execution of the detailed plan for the Agency’s pollution preparedness and response activities and give an update of the status of all actions financed under this plan.” |
"(g) he/she shall submit a report to the Commission and the Administrative Board, by 31 January each year, concerning the financial execution of the detailed plan for the Agency’s pollution preparedness and response activities and give an update of the status of all actions financed under this plan." The Commission in turn shall submit this report to the European Parliament for information and monitoring purposes and, for information, to the Committee established by Article 4 of Decision No 2850/2000/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2000 setting up a Community framework for cooperation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution1 and the Committee referred to in Article 9 of Decision 2001/792/EC, Euratom of 23 October 2001 establishing a Community mechanism to facilitate reinforced cooperation in civil protection assistance interventions2. |
|
|
1 OJ L 332, 28.2.2000, p. 1. Decision amended by Decision No 787/2004/EC (OJ L 138, 30.4.2004, p. 12). 2 OJ L 297, 15.11.2001, p. 7. |
Justification
Compromise amendment, aimed at a first reading agreement with Council and Commission.
Transparency must be the hallmark of the Agency's action and Parliament is the most appropriate monitoring body and should not be neglected.
Amendment 20 ARTICLE 7, TITLE | |
|
Evaluation |
Mid-term evaluation |
Justification | |
Compromise amendment, agreed between the Council and the Commission at first reading. | |
Amendment 21 ARTICLE 7, PARAGRAPH 1 A (new) | |
|
|
On the basis of this report the Commission shall, if appropriate, submit a proposal for the amendment of the present Regulation to take account of scientific progress in the field of combating pollution from ships, particularly with regard to liquid noxious substances. |
Justification | |
This concerns not only periodic evaluation to monitor the efficiency of the Agency's work, but also incorporating any scientific advances which may at any time prove useful to combat pollution from ships. | |
- [1] Not yet published in OJ.
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
The successive major environmental disasters caused by the Erika and Prestige shipwrecks, and the serious economic consequences they had, exposed the inadequate response capacity possessed by most Member States at present in the face of large-scale disasters.
Consequently, the European Union realised that it needed to take measures additional to those taken by coastal states in order to provide an effective and timely response to cases of marine pollution.
The European Maritime Safety Agency was set up in response to these shortcomings. The aim was that the Agency should provide an appropriate framework for developing specific measures to improve maritime safety and prevent pollution by ships in the waters of the Member States.
Regulation 1406/2002 setting up the European Maritime Safety Agency initially assigned to the Agency tasks in the field of technical assistance, inspections, data gathering and exploitation of databases on maritime safety, and other activities.
It has now been decided to assign the Agency new tasks, which will undoubtedly provide added value. Accordingly, Regulation 724/2004 has been adopted, amending Article 2 of Regulation 1406/2002 and assigning to the Agency the following tasks, inter alia:
(a) to support with additional means in a cost-efficient way via the Community mechanism in the field of civil protection established by Decision 2001/792/EC, Euratom, pollution response actions in case of accidental or deliberate pollution caused by ships, when such a request has been presented by a Member State. In this respect, the Agency will assist the affected Member State under which the clearing operations are conducted;
(b) to provide the Commission and the Member States with objective, reliable and comparable information and data on maritime safety, on maritime security and on pollution by ships to enable them to take the necessary steps to improve their actions in these fields and to evaluate the effectiveness of existing measures. Such tasks will include the collection, recording and evaluation of technical data in the fields of maritime safety, maritime security and maritime traffic, as well as in the field of marine pollution, both accidental and deliberate, the systematic exploitation of existing databases, including their cross-fertilisation, and, where appropriate, the development of additional databases.
Summary of the proposal
The proposal for a Regulation stems from the Community's determination to make the European Maritime Safety Agency a useful tool with a permanent mission. Given the long-term nature of the Agency's responsibility for responding to and preventing pollution caused by ships, the proposal seeks to give the Agency the necessary financial security by means of a multiannual undertaking that should cover the period from 2007 to 2013 in accordance with the new financial perspective.
The proposal therefore establishes the procedures for and defines a financial contribution by the Community for the funding of the new tasks of the Agency, on the basis of a multiannual commitment to be spread over a period of seven years.
Firstly, with regard to operational assistance, the proposal for a regulation will give the Agency a higher profile as regards funding the provision of effective additional means for responding to accidental or deliberate pollution caused by ships, by opting for vessel contracts at competitive prices. The Agency has opted for long-term chartering by concluding stand-by contracts with commercial ship operators having vessels of sufficient capacity that can be adapted for pollution response purposes, which would cover the four designated priority regions (the Baltic Sea, the western approaches to the English Channel, the Atlantic coast and the Mediterranean), while they can also provide similar assistance to any other area in need during a minimum period of three years (stand-by ships). In response to a request for assistance from a Member State, such vessels would have to interrupt their customary commercial activities in order to deploy to the area in need. The three-year period is deemed necessary in order to cover the financial investments, particularly in appropriate on-board equipment, and this represents the most cost-efficient solution. Contracting of the first stand-by oil recovery vessels will be carried out in 2005 via a restricted tender procedure. In 2006, new vessels should be equipped and operational in the four zones, so that between 2007 and 2013, with the renewal of the first contracts, a sufficient number of vessels should be permanently available to respond to accidental or deliberate pollution caused by ships in Community waters.
With regard to liquid noxious substances (LNS), in the case of 'chemical' spills, the first contract for stand-by vessels is scheduled for 2006. In 2007 a further three vessels will be contracted, so that up to four LNS response vessels will be operational between 2007 and 2013. The contracts will have to be renewed in 2010 and in 2013.
The total amount of appropriations for these stand-by vessels for the period from 2007 to 2013 will be in the region of EUR 136 million of the EUR 154 million allocated to the Agency.
Secondly, a further highly important activity covered by multiannual funding will be the establishment of a satellite imagery service centre, which would complement the activities of the Member States and the Commission in responding to illegal discharges and accidental spills from ships. The Agency will have to set up an appropriate infrastructure for this purpose and will have to purchase analysed satellite imagery. An initial estimated of costs shows that 1000 pictures for all Community waters would cost EUR 1 million. If this service were to be used on a regular basis by Member States, that amount would not be sufficient. After the first three-year contract has expired (in 2009), the Agency might wish to negotiate larger numbers of images at an estimated cost of EUR 3.5 million, taking advantage of positive developments in the satellite industry.
Rapporteur's position
1. Nature of the European Maritime Safety Agency
The role of the European Maritime Safety Agency must be to improve maritime safety and to prevent and respond to pollution caused by ships in the waters of the Member States. It must be an instrument with a permanent mission, is here to stay, aspiring gradually to take on more tasks, although these should always be additional to the tasks carried out by Member States in the field of pollution prevention and response
The Agency must provide additional means and is not intended to replace actions by the Member States, but to overcome the inadequacies of disaster response and complement the efforts of the Member States concerned.
The role of the Agency must be to provide added value and it must make sure it does not become a purely bureaucratic instrument.
2. Management transparency
One of the distinguishing features of the Agency must be transparency in the management of the resources allocated to it. Often agencies set up within the European Union are accused of acting in a non-transparent manner without effective parliamentary control. Accordingly, your rapporteur would propose that, in addition to the evaluation carried out every four years provided for in Article 7, the European Parliament should be regularly informed of the financial implementation of measures designed to prevent and respond to pollution caused by ships. This would ensure the necessary transparency and efficiency for monitoring the proper application of the regulation. Parliament would be fully aware of the conditions under which the Agency was performing the tasks assigned to it and of the plans it was making for future years. This would also enable Parliament to meet its budgetary responsibilities effectively by each year allocating to the Agency the amounts needed to perform its duties, within the framework of the annual budgetary procedure (report to be submitted also to the European Parliament under Article 6(b).
3. Scope of the regulation - widening the scope of the proposal to include all kinds of pollution caused by ships
It is of the utmost importance that all the actions covered by the Agency's financial contribution should take into account both oil pollution and pollution caused by liquid noxious substances. Accordingly, the actions referred to in Article 3(a) of the proposal should also refer to pollution by LNS.
It is also important that the Agency should provide technical and scientific assistance to the Member States and the Commission, since the Agency's functions and tasks are intended to complement those of the Member States and be carried out at their request.
Funding
Following the Conference of Presidents' decision of 29 September 2005 concerning the financial perspective, Parliament should be able to approve the financial reference amount mentioned in Article 4 of the proposal. The total sum of 154 million euro should be seen as the minimum reasonable threshold.
OPINION of the Committee on Budgets (27.3.2006)
for the Committee on Transport and Tourism
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002
(COM(2005)0210 – C6‑0153/2005 – 2005/0098(COD))
Draftswoman: Jutta D. Haug
SHORT JUSTIFICATION
Commission proposal
General
Against the background of the recent maritime accidents causing extensive oil spills (ERIKA, Prestige), Regulation N° 724/2004 entrusted the Maritime Safety Agency with specific obligations in the field of the response to pollution caused by ships within the Community. Under the terms of that Regulation, the Agency is required to provide the Member States and the Commission with technical and scientific assistance in the field of accidental or deliberate pollution caused by ships and, in particular, to support, on request, in a cost-efficient way, the pollution response mechanisms of the Member States.
Member States affected by oil slicks with which they cannot deal themselves will be able to call on the Agency to increase their capability for dealing with pollution by using additional resources for the recovery of oil at sea. This system of “reserve vessels” which the Agency will place at the disposal of Member States affected will have equipment for recovering pollutants from the sea. The system requires substantial funding to be given to the Agency on a multiannual basis in order to guarantee its financial security and to make it effective.
The current legislative Commission proposal therefore establishes the procedures for and defines a financial contribution of the Community for the funding of the new tasks of the Agency, on the basis of a multiannual commitment to be spread over a period of seven years.
Financial implications
The Commission is proposing a financial package of EUR 154 million over a period of seven years for the European Maritime Safety Agency to allow it to combat pollution caused by ships. The EU funding for the Agency should cover the period corresponding to that of the new financial perspective (2007-2013). The funds are intended to strengthen the capability of the Member States to respond to pollution caused by oil and other substances using specialised anti-pollution vessels.
For the period of 2007 to 2013, the Commission proposed the following amounts on Budget line 06020203: European Maritime Safety Agency - Anti-pollution measures:
in EUR million
|
|
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 and 2013[1] |
Total Reference Amount |
|
Operational expenditure Commitments |
|
19,000 |
22,500 |
25,000 |
19,000 |
48,500 |
154,000 |
|
Operational expenditure Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These amounts should be allocated as follows:
►Operational objective 1 - operational assistance
- action 1: Baltic Sea : EUR 33 million
- action 2: Mediterranean Sea: EUR 38 million
- action 3: Atlantic Coast: EUR 51 million
- action 4: Black Sea: EUR 13,5 million
- action 5: Satellite Imagery: EUR 7 million
►Operational objective 2 - Information, cooperation and coordination
EUR 11 million
It should be noted that the figures used by the Commission for estimating the budget of the multiannual programme are based on the activities deployed in 2005 and 2006. Although the multiannual programme for oil pollution response is due only to begin as of 2007, the activities for 2005 and 2006 are directly relevant because contracts will still be valid and will need to be renewed during the period covered by the multiannual programme.
Remarks
For 2005, the budgetary authority had already allocated an amount of EUR 17.8 million for the implementation of the Agency’s anti-pollution activities, for 2006 the Commission's PDB had the same amount on the line. In second reading Parliament increased the anti-pollution line by EUR 6 million, bringing it up to a total of EUR 23.8 million (CA/PA) for the current year.
While your draftswoman fully agrees with the fact that the Maritime Safety Agency has been assigned an operational remit in the field of anti-pollution, it is clear that such an extension of tasks can only go hand in hand with making available the necessary funding on a long-term basis.
However, in the absence of an agreement on the next financial perspective, the amount of EUR 154 million for the seven year period of 2007 to 2013, as estimated by the Commission in its proposal, and as realistic as it might be, can only be considered purely indicative. The final amounts might have to be adopted by the budgetary authority in line with the new financial perspective (Amendments 1, 2, 3 and 5).
The necessity for a multi-annual commitment to provide financial security for the anti-pollution measures is not disputed by your draftswoman. On the contrary, if funding for the agency’s anti-pollution measures should go below a certain threshold, an appropriate response to oil spills will no longer be possible. Thus, in the eyes of your draftswoman, providing Community funding that is not adequate would be a waste of money (Amendments 4 and 6).
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on Budgets calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:
Draft legislative resolution
Amendment 1
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out that the appropriations indicated in the legislative proposal are purely for guidance until agreement is reached on the financial perspective for the period 2007 to 2013;
Amendment 2 Paragraph 1 b (new) | |||||||
1b. Points out that the appropriations allocated to the Agency indicated in the Commission proposal must be compatible with the overall ceiling for decentralised agencies set out in the financial perspective 2007-2013; | |||||||
Amendment 3 | |||||||
Paragraph 1 c (new) | |||||||
1c. Calls on the Commission to confirm, once the next financial perspective has been adopted, the amounts indicated in the proposal for a regulation or, should the need arise, to submit the adjusted amounts for approval by the European Parliament and the Council, so as to ensure that those amounts are compatible with the ceiling; | |||||||
Proposal for a regulation | |||||||
| |||||||
Amendment 4 RECITAL 9 | |||||||
|
(9) A financial reference amount covering the same period 2007 to 2013 is provided for in this Regulation for the implementation of the Action Plan. |
(9) An indicative financial reference amount covering the same period 2007 to 2013 is provided for in this Regulation for the implementation of the Action Plan. | ||||||
Justification | |||||||
As long as no decision on the new financial perspective 2007 – 2013 has been reached, all reference amounts for multi-annual funding can be purely indicative. | |||||||
Amendment 5
RECITAL 9 A (new)
|
|
(9a) Given the special nature of this Community activity, the financial reference amount can be considered as the lower limit for the implementation of the new tasks assigned. |
Justification
If funding for the anti-pollution measures, for whatever reason, should go below the financial reference amount, as indicated in the Commission proposal, practical implementation of this Community activity would become impossible.
Amendment 6 ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 1 | |
|
The financial reference amount for the implementation of the tasks referred to in Article 3 for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 shall be euros 154 million. |
The indicative financial reference amount for the implementation of the tasks referred to in Article 3 for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 is set at EUR 154 million. |
Justification | |
See Amendment 3. Once a decision has been reached, the Commission shall present, if necessary, a legislative proposal to set the reference amount with respect to the appropriate ceiling of the financial perspective (see amendment to the legislative resolution). | |
Amendment 7 ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 2 | |
|
Annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspectives. |
Annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspectives. However, a certain minimum amount of financing is necessary for the implementation of the operational assistance referred to in Article 3(c). |
Justification | |
See amendment 4. A certain annual minimum amount is necessary for financing this activity. Going below this minimum would render any appropriate response to pollution impossible. | |
Amendment 8 ARTICLE 4 | |
|
The financial reference amount for the implementation of the tasks referred to in Article 3 for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 shall be euros 154 million. |
1. The financial reference amount for the implementation of the tasks referred to in Article 3 for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 shall be EUR 154 million. |
|
|
2. The appropriations allocated to the Agency shall be compatible with the global ceiling for agencies set out in the financial perspectives 2007-2013. |
|
Annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspectives. |
3. Annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspectives. |
Justification | |
The appropriations allocated to the Agency should comply with the overall ceiling established for the decentralised agencies. This will ensure availability of resources for the financing of the actions of the programme. | |
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 | |||||
|
References |
COM(2005)0210 – C6-0153/2005 – 2005/0098(COD) | |||||
|
Committee responsible |
TRAN | |||||
|
Opinion by |
BUDG | |||||
|
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary |
0.0.0000 | |||||
|
Draftswoman |
Jutta D. Haug | |||||
|
Previous drafts(wo)man |
| |||||
|
Discussed in committee |
20.2.2006 |
23.3.2006 |
|
|
| |
|
Date adopted |
23.3.2006 | |||||
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
26
| ||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Richard James Ashworth, Reimer Böge, Simon Busuttil, Gérard Deprez, Valdis Dombrovskis, Hynek Fajmon, Neena Gill, Ingeborg Gräßle, Louis Grech, Catherine Guy-Quint, Jutta D. Haug, Ville Itälä, Anne E. Jensen, Wiesław Stefan Kuc, Janusz Lewandowski, Mario Mauro, Jan Mulder, Giovanni Pittella, Antonis Samaras, Nina Škottová, László Surján, Kyösti Virrankoski, Ralf Walter | |||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Kathalijne Maria Buitenweg, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Peter Šťastný | |||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
| |||||
|
Comments (available in one language only) |
... | |||||
OPINION of the Committee on Budgetary Control (13.12.2005)
for the Committee on Transport and Tourism
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002
(COM(2005)0210 – C6‑0153/2005 – 2005/0098(COD))
Draftsman: Umberto Guidoni
SHORT JUSTIFICATION
Summary
1. The European Maritime Safety Agency was assigned new tasks in the field of oil pollution response by means of Regulation (EC) N° 724/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending Regulation (EC) N° 1406/2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency. The new tasks of the Agency cover activities in the areas of information, co-operation and co-ordination and operational assistance. To carry out these activities at a competitive rate, some long-term investment is required e.g. the negotiation of stand-by contracts for the emergency use of commercial vessels for pollution response. The Commission considers that appropriate financial security on the basis of a multi-annual commitment is necessary to allow the Agency to properly carry out its new tasks, and do so in a cost-efficient way. This funding proposal establishes the procedures for and defines a financial contribution of the Community for the funding of the new tasks of the Agency. The Commission proposes a financial reference amount of EUR 154 million for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013.
Revenues
2. The new tasks of the Agency involve the provision of enhanced capacity to respond to oil spills, through the negotiation of stand-by contracts for the emergency use of commercial vessels by the Member States in the event of a disaster, the equipping of these vessels to carry out anti-pollution activities and the training of crews. In the event of a disaster, Member States could call on these vessels to supplement their own anti-pollution mechanisms.
3. Although any Member State that wished to use these services would have to pay the vessel owners for operational use of these vessels, no charge is foreseen for the services provided by the Agency, i.e. the negotiation of the stand-by contracts, the equipping of the vessels and the training of crews.
4. For reasons of sound financial management, and in order to ensure "the best possible combination of cost and efficiency" (recital 10 of regulation 724/2004 of 31 March 2004), the case for requiring Member States to pay fees to the Agency when they make use of the capacity provided by the Agency should be examined. Article 18(1)(c) of the basic act of the agency (regulation 1406/2002 of 27 June 2002) already allows the levying of charges for services provided.
5. Charging for the use of the services provided by the Agency would help ensure that Member States are not tempted to rely solely on the pollution response capacity provided by the Community, in line with recital 8 of regulation 724/2004 of 31 March 2004 which states that "The activities of the agency […] should not relieve coastal States of their responsibility to have appropriate pollution response mechanisms in place".
6. Moreover, any increase in revenue from the levying of charges would be matched by an equivalent reduction in the contribution from the Community budget, helping reduce the overall burden of the EC budget to European taxpayers. However, these charges would form part of the costs of clear up, so the Member State affected should be able to seek reimbursement of these costs from the insurers of those that caused the pollution.
7. Nevertheless, for reasons of solidarity, the Commission does not propose the levying of any charges for the services provided by the Agency to the Member States. Instead, these services will be paid for by all Member States through the Community budget.
8. While your draftsman agrees with the solidarity approach proposed by the Commission, he considers that the Commission should provide details of the possible case for charging for the services provided in order to allow an open and transparent debate on the two alternative funding models: subsidy from the Community budget versus charging. In particular the Commission should provide details of the costs and benefits of the new tasks assigned to the Agency, including the costs of providing the stand-by facility as compared to the cost of operational use of these vessels and to the existing operational costs of pollution clear-up.
Financial reference amount
9. Article 4 states that the financial reference amount for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 shall be euros 154 million. However the negotiations on the new Financial Perspectives covering the period 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 have not yet been completed. Article 4 as drafted by the Commission would pre-empt those negotiations. It (and recital 9) should thus be amended to make it clear that the size of the overall envelope will be subject to the outcome of the negotiations on the new Financial Perspectives.
Efficiency and effectiveness of expenditure
10. Article 5 of the proposed regulation covers protection of Community financial interests. The article requires preventive measures to be taken against fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities, recovery of amounts unduly paid and payment of penalties in the event of irregularities. However, as well as being correct, expenditure should also be efficient and effective. Regarding efficiency, a further paragraph should be added to Article 5 calling on the Commission and the Agency to ensure that best value for money is achieved.
11. Assessing the effectiveness of expenditure could be tackled in Article 7 on evaluation. The Commission should provide an assessment of the extent to which the objectives of the Agency have been achieved. In order to allow this assessment to be carried out properly, measurable objectives against which performance is to be assessed should be set out clearly at the start of the programme.
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on Budgetary Control calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:
Draft legislative resolution
Amendment 1 Paragraph 1 a (new) | |
1a. Points out that the financial framework as set out in the proposal is indicative and subject to agreement on the new financial perspective; | |
Justification | |
The Regulation should not preempt negotiation of the new financial perspective. |
Proposal for a regulation
| Text proposed by the Commission[1] | Amendments by Parliament |
Amendment 2 RECITAL 9 | |
|
(9) A financial reference amount covering the same period 2007 to 2013 is provided for in this Regulation for the implementation of the Action Plan. |
(9) A financial framework covering the same period 2007 to 2013 is provided for in this Regulation for the implementation of the Action Plan, subject to agreement on the new financial perspective. |
Justification | |
This Regulation should not preempt negotiation of the new financial perspective. | |
Amendment 3 ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 1 | |
|
The financial reference amount for the implementation of the tasks referred to in Article 3 for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 shall be euros 154 million. |
The indicative financial framework for the implementation of the tasks referred to in Article 3 for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 shall be EUR 154 million. |
Justification | |
This Regulation should not preempt negotiation of the new financial perspective. | |
Amendment 4 ARTICLE 5, PARAGRAPH 2 A (new) | |
|
|
2a. The Commission and the Agency shall ensure that best value for money is achieved in the financing of Community actions under the present Regulation. |
Justification | |
As well as being correct, Community expenditure should also be efficient. | |
Amendment 5 ARTICLE 7 | |
|
The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council, on the basis of information provided by the Agency, a report on the implementation of this Regulation no later than four years from its entry into force. The report shall set out the results of the utilisation of the Community contribution as referred to in Article 4 as regards commitments and expenditure covering the period between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2009.
|
The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council, on the basis of information provided by the Agency, a report on the implementation of this Regulation no later than four years from its entry into force. The report shall set out the results of the utilisation of the Community contribution as referred to in Article 4 as regards commitments and expenditure covering the period between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2009. The report shall also contain an analysis of the extent to which the measurable objectives set for the Agency have been achieved. |
Justification | |
As well as being correct. Community expenditure should also be effective. | |
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 | |||||
|
References |
COM(2005)0210 – C6‑0153/2005 – 2005/0098(COD) | |||||
|
Committee responsible |
TRAN | |||||
|
Committee asked for its opinion |
CONT | |||||
|
Enhanced cooperation |
No | |||||
|
Drafts(wo)man |
Umberto Guidoni | |||||
|
Discussed in committee |
21.11.2005 |
12.12.2005 |
|
|
| |
|
Date amendments adopted |
12.12.2005 | |||||
|
Result of final vote |
for: against: abstentions: |
11 0 0 | ||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Inés Ayala Sender, Paulo Casaca, Petr Duchoň, Szabolcs Fazakas, Ingeborg Gräßle, Umberto Guidoni, Ona Juknevičienė, Nils Lundgren, Jan Mulder, Bart Staes, Terence Wynn | |||||
|
Substitutes present for the final vote |
| |||||
- [1] Not yet published in OJ.
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual funding for the action of the European Maritime Safety Agency in the field of response to pollution caused by ships and amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 | |||||||||
|
References |
COM(2005)0210 – C6-0153/2005 – 2005/0098(COD) | |||||||||
|
Date submitted to Parliament |
25.5.2005 | |||||||||
|
Committee responsible |
TRAN | |||||||||
|
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s) |
BUDG |
CONT |
ENVI 7.6.2005 |
ITRE 7.6.2005 |
| |||||
|
Not delivering opinion(s) |
ENVI |
ITRE |
|
|
| |||||
|
Enhanced cooperation |
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
Rapporteur(s) |
Luis de Grandes Pascual |
| ||||||||
|
Previous rapporteur(s) |
|
| ||||||||
|
Simplified procedure – date of decision |
| |||||||||
|
Legal basis disputed |
|
|
| |||||||
|
Financial endowment amended |
|
|
| |||||||
|
European Economic and Social Committee consulted – date of decision in plenary |
| |||||||||
|
Committee of the Regions consulted – date of decision in plenary |
| |||||||||
|
Discussed in committee |
22.2.2006 |
2.5.2006 |
|
|
| |||||
|
Date adopted |
2.5.2006 | |||||||||
|
Result of final vote |
+ – 0 |
40 0 0 | ||||||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Inés Ayala Sender, Etelka Barsi-Pataky, Philip Bradbourn, Paolo Costa, Michael Cramer, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Arūnas Degutis, Saïd El Khadraoui, Robert Evans, Emanuel Jardim Fernandes, Roland Gewalt, Mathieu Grosch, Ewa Hedkvist Petersen, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, Stanisław Jałowiecki, Georg Jarzembowski, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Jaromír Kohlíček, Fernand Le Rachinel, Bogusław Liberadzki, Eva Lichtenberger, Robert Navarro, Josu Ortuondo Larrea, Willi Piecyk, Luís Queiró, Luca Romagnoli, Gilles Savary, Dirk Sterckx, Ulrich Stockmann, Gary Titley, Marta Vincenzi, Corien Wortmann-Kool | |||||||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Johannes Blokland, Anne E. Jensen, Sepp Kusstatscher, Helmuth Markov, Salvatore Tatarella | |||||||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) |
Esther Herranz García, Francisco José Millán Mon, Marie-Hélène Descamps | |||||||||
|
Date tabled |
16.5.2006 | |||||||||
|
Comments |
... | |||||||||