REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the minimum level of training of seafarers (recast)
13.5.2008 - (COM(2007)0610 – C6‑0348/2007 – 2007/0219(COD)) - ***I
Committee on Transport and Tourism
Rapporteur: Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou
(Recasting – Rule 80a of the Rules of Procedure)
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the minimum level of training of seafarers (recast)
(COM(2007)0610 – C6‑0348/2007 – 2007/0219(COD))
(Codecision procedure - recast)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2007)0610),
– having regard to Articles 251(2) and 80(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6‑0348/2007),
– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts[1],
– having regard to the letter of 24 January 2008 by the Committee on Legal Affairs to the Committee on Transport and Tourism in accordance with Rule 80a(3) of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to Rules 80a and 51 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A6‑0178/2008),
1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended hereunder and as adapted to the recommendations of the Consultative Working Party of the Legal Services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;
2. 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;
3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.
Amendment 1 Proposal for a directive Recital 10 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
10a. Member States should take and enforce specific measures to prevent and penalise fraudulent practices associated with certificates of competency as well as pursue their efforts within the IMO to achieve strict and enforceable agreements on the worldwide combating of such practices. |
Justification | |
The amendment makes a number of technical adjustments to the codified text of the proposal for a directive, incorporating the first part of recital 10 of Directive 2005/45/ΕC. | |
Amendment 2 Proposal for a directive Recital 17 a (new) | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
|
17a. The European Maritime Safety Agency should assist the Commission in verifying that Member States comply with the requirements laid down in this Directive. |
Justification | |
The amendment makes a number of technical adjustments, incorporating recital 12 of Directive 2005/45/ΕC. The Commission has entrusted the technical aspect of seafarer training quality assessment to the EMSA, whose experts carry out annually, over a five-year period, 8 to 12 in-situ inspections of training provided by all third countries for their seafarers employed on EU-registered vessels (around 75% of ships’ complements), ensuring compliance with the STCW Convention and preventing fraud. | |
Amendment 3 Proposal for a directive Recital 23 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
(23) The Council should review Annex II in the light of the experience gained in applying this Directive, acting on a proposal to be submitted by the Commission by 25 May 2008 at the latest. |
deleted |
Justification | |
The amendment makes a number of technical adjustments to the codified text of the proposal for a directive. The text proposed by the Commission should be deleted since Annex 2 is II has already been amended under the Directive 2003/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 (Article 1 (4) amends Article 18b (6) of directive 2001/25/EC). | |
Amendment 4 Proposal for a directive Article 27 – paragraph 2 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
2. The Council shall decide on any amendment of Annex II, acting on a proposal to be submitted by the Commission by 25 May 2008 at the latest in the light of the experience gained in applying this Directive. |
deleted |
Justification | |
The amendment makes a number of technical adjustments to the codified text of the proposal for a directive. The text proposed by the Commission should be deleted since Annex 2 has already been amended under the Directive 2003/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 (Article 1 (4) amends Article 18b (6) of directive 2001/25/EC). | |
Amendment 5 Proposal for a directive Annex ΙΙΙ – Part Α – point 5 | |
|
Text proposed by the Commission |
Amendment |
|
Directive 2005/45/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 160) |
Directive 2005/45/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 160) |
|
|
Only Article 4 |
Justification | |
The amendment makes technical adaptations to the codified text of the proposal for a directive. The wording of these adaptations is consistent with the wording of the proposals of the Consultative Working Party consisting of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. | |
- [1] OJ C 77, 28.3.2002, p. 1.
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
INTRODUCTION
The need for a minimum level of training for seafarers did not arise recently but goes back to internationally agreed training standards, in particular, the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers dating from 1978, which was revised in 1995 and lays down binding rules on training and certification requirements.
The present proposal is a recasting of the directive on the minimum level of training of seafarers. It has been submitted by the Commission with a dual objective:
- the codification of the Community act, i.e. the incorporation of successive amendments to the original Directive 2001/25/EC in order to make the Community act clear and readily understandable,
- to adapt the act to the new comitology procedure, i.e. the regulatory committee with scrutiny.
REMARKS ON PROCEDURE
Combining the codification of a Community act with the introduction of new elements amending the substance of the act is a normal legislative method of amending Community acts.
This procedure, known as recasting, helps simplify Community legislation since previously amended acts, which are often difficult to read, are repealed and, where appropriate, provision is made for the substantive amendment of the original act.
The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agreed by way of an Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001[1] on the rules to be followed by the three institutions on the implementation in practice of the recasting technique.
In the case under review here, beyond codification of the four acts amending the original Directive 2001/25/EC, the Commission proposes a number of substantive amendments. However, the recasting proposal, as submitted by the Commission for legislative processing, is restricted de facto. This is because proposals for substantive amendments to the current Directive 2001/25/EC are restricted and for the most part consist of adaptations to the new procedure of regulatory committee with scrutiny.
Pursuant to paragraph 9 of the above Interinstitutional Agreement, the Consultative Working Party, consisting of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, delivered an opinion on the proposal for recasting confirming the substantive amendments, which have been identified as such, to the Commission's proposal for a directive (in grey shading). In addition, it formulated a number of additional technical adaptations not contained in the Commission’s original proposal.
In accordance with the provisions of Rule 80A of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Legal Affairs delivered an opinion in the form of a letter to the Committee on Transport and Tourism, proposing the incorporation of all the adaptations suggested in the Consultative Working Party’s opinion.[2]
The Committee on Transport and Tourism is therefore required to examine the adaptation to the new procedure of regulatory committee with scrutiny, the amendments proposed by the Consultative Working Party and, by way of exception, amendments necessary for pressing reasons relating to the internal logic of the text.
SUBSTANCE OF THE DIRECTIVE
The directive on the minimum level of training of seafarers contributes to improving their level of knowledge and skills and providing greater guarantees of safety and prevention of maritime pollution.
The mutual recognition of seafarers' diplomas at Community level facilitates freedom of movement by eliminating undue obstacles. The directive supplements the Union’s legislative acts to ensure a standardised level of training for seafarers, which is not covered by the current directive on the mutual recognition of professional qualifications (Directive 2005/36/EC).
The directive applies to seafarers serving on board seagoing ships flying the flag of a Member State, with the exception of: (a) warships, naval auxiliaries or other ships owned or operated by a Member State and engaged only on government non-commercial service, (b) fishing vessels, (c) pleasure yachts not engaged in trade, and (d) wooden ships of primitive build.
Τhe education and training objectives and related standards of competence to be achieved are clearly defined and identify the levels of knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the examinations and assessments required under the STCW Convention.
Member States are to ensure that all training, assessment of competence, certification, endorsement and revalidation activities carried out by non-governmental agencies or entities under their authority are continuously monitored through a quality standards system to ensure the achievement of defined objectives.
The fields of application of the quality standards cover the administration of the certification systems, all training courses and programmes, the examinations and assessments carried out by or under the authority of each Member State and the qualifications and experience required of instructors and assessors.
The provisions of the Convention are incorporated in the directive in an annex, covering the mandatory provisions of the STCW code (part A) and the recommended guidance (part B). The directive allows for more stringent measures or requirements on matters relating to social protection and security, at Union level, such as, for example, minimum rest periods for watchkeeping personnel.
To ensure that the rules and recommendations of the Convention are faithfully implemented, uniform criteria are laid down for the recognition of certificates from third countries. At the same time, where training activities take place in Member States, the directive provides for the inspection of maritime institutes, training programmes and courses.
Provision is made for measures to prevent fraud and other unlawful practices involving the certification process or certificates issued and endorsed by Member States’ competent authorities, and for penalties.
An important role in ensuring that the requirements of the Convention and the directive are correctly implemented is played by the port state authorities in carrying out inspections of vessels flying the flag of a third country which has not ratified the Convention.
SUBSTANCE OF THE AMENDING PROPOSAL
As stated above, the objective of the proposal for a directive is the adaptation of the provisions to the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny, including to the acts covered by the Commission’s codification programme[3].
Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission[4] was amended by Council Decision 2006/512/EC of 17 July 2006[5].
Article 5a of the amended decision introduces the regulatory procedure with scrutiny for measures of a general scope which seek to amend non-essential elements of a basic act adopted by codecision, inter alia by deleting some of those elements or by supplementing them by the addition of new non-essential elements.
The new procedure enables Parliament and the Council to scrutinise ‘quasi-legislative’ measures implementing an act adopted by codecision on an equal footing and to reject such measures. Hitherto, Parliament was unable to reject an implementing measure and was restricted merely to expressing its opposition (‘droit de regard'). Using its executive powers, the Commission had the discretion to take a decision despite Parliament’s opposition, whereas the Council could block it under certain circumstances by a qualified majority.
Under the new procedure, the European Parliament is able for the first time to reject measures proposed by the Commission if it considers that the Commission is exceeding the implementing powers provided for in the basic act, or that the measures are incompatible with the aim or content of that act or fail to respect the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality.
The Commission is bound to implement the new procedure in the acts in force adopted in accordance with the codecision procedure, as is the case with this directive. In this proposal for a directive, the Commission introduces the regulatory procedure with scrutiny in Article 27 of the codified form of the directive. This provision, however, does not concern all the field of application of the directive but only the amendments proposed to certain definitions in Article 1, in particular points 16, 17, 18, 23 and 24.
RAPPORTEUR’S PROPOSALS
1. It is imperative to adapt the directive to the new regulatory procedure
The conditions laid down in Article 5a of the amended decision 1999/468/ΕEC introducing the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny are:
(a) it is a codecision act,
(b) the implementing measures to be adopted are of a general scope and seek to amend non-essential elements of a basic act, inter alia by deleting some of those elements or by supplementing them by the addition of new non-essential elements.
2. A need to examine to what extent decisions on amendments to international legal act should be taken by way of the (simple) regulatory committee procedure and not with scrutiny (by way of the relevant Regulation 2099/2002 concerning the procedure for checking the conformity of international legal instruments with Community legislation)
- because adaptation to the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny does not extend to all the provisions for revision of the directive, which gives rise to an issue that merits investigation, at least as far as Article 27, paragraph 4 is concerned. As regards this point, it is proposed that decisions on amendments to international legal instruments are taken by the (simple) regulatory committee procedure. It should be noted, that the Commission has stated that this Regulation must be subject to adaptation to the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny in one of the forthcoming 'omnibus' proposals.
3. A number of ‘technical’ amendments are proposed to take into account the points contained in the note of the Consultative Working Party and in the letter/opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs.
ANNEX 1: LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS
COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS
CHAIRMAN
Ref.: D(2007)4169
Mr Paolo COSTA
Chairman of the Committee on Transport
and Tourism
ASP 09G305
Brussels
Subject: Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament ad of the Council on the minimum level of training of seafarers (COM(2007)610 final - C6-0348/07 - 200/0219(COD) (recast)
Dear Sir,
The Committee on Legal Affairs, which I am honoured to chair, has examined the proposal referred to above, pursuant to Rule 80a on Recasting, as introduced into the Parliament's Rules of Procedure by its Decision of 10 May 2007.
Paragraph 3 of that Rule reads as follows:
"If the committee responsible for legal affairs considers that the proposal does not entail any substantive changes other than those identified as such in the proposal, it shall inform the committee responsible.
In such a case, over and above the conditions laid down in Rules 150 and 151, amendments shall be admissible within the committee responsible only if they concern those parts of the proposal which contain changes.
However, amendments to the parts which have remained unchanged may be admitted by way of exception and on a case-by-case basis by the chairman of the above committee if he considers that this is necessary for pressing reasons relating to the internal logic of the text or because the amendments are inextricably linked to other admissible amendments. Such reasons must be stated in a written justification to the amendments".
Following the opinion of the Legal Service, whose representatives participated in the meetings of the Consultative Working Party examining the recast proposal, and in keeping with the recommendations of the draftsperson, the Committee on Legal Affairs considers that the proposal in question does not include any substantive changes other than those identified as such in the proposal and that, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts with those changes, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance.
However, pursuant to Rules 80a(2) and 80(3), the Committee on Legal Affairs considered that the technical adaptations suggested in the opinion of the abovementioned Working Party were necessary in order to ensure that the proposal complied with the codification rules and that they did not involve any substantive change to the proposal.
In conclusion, the Committee on Legal Affairs, by 18 votes in favour[1], recommends that your Committee, as the committee responsible, proceed to examine the above proposal in keeping with its suggestions and in accordance with Rule 80a.
Yours faithfully,
Giuseppe GARGANI
Encl.: Opinion of the Consultative Working Party.
- [1] The following Members were present: Giuseppe Gargani (Chairman), Bert Doorn, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Hartmut Nassauer, Rainer Wieland, Jaroslav Zvěřina, Tadeusz Zwiefka, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Katalin Lévai, Antonio Masip Hidalgo, Manuel Medina Ortega, Aloyzas Sakalas, Diana Wallis, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, Jacques Toubon, Costas Botopoulos.
ANNEX 2: OPINION OF THE CONSULTATIVE WORKING PARTY
|
|
|
|
Brussels, 21.11.2007
OPINION
FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
THE COUNCIL
THE COMMISSION
Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the minimum level of training of seafarers
COM(2007) 610 final of 16.10.2007 - 2007/0219 (COD)
Having regard to the Inter-institutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts, and in particular to point 9 thereof, the Consultative Working Party, consisting of the respective legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, met on 26 October 2007 for the purpose of examining the aforementioned proposal, submitted by the Commission.
At that meeting[1], an examination of the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council recasting Directive 2001/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the minimum level of training of seafarers resulted in the Consultative Working Party’s establishing, by common accord, as follows.
1) The text of the first sentence of Recital 10 of Directive 2005/45/EC should be introduced, in adapted form, into the preamble to the recast proposal. The new recital, to be numbered 10, should read as follows: "Member States should take and enforce specific measures to prevent and penalise fraudulent practices associated with certificates of competency as well as pursue their efforts within the IMO to achieve strict and enforceable agreements on the worldwide combating of such practices ". As a consequence of the inserting of this new recital, recitals having been numbered 10 to 15 in the recast proposal should be re-numbered 11 to 16.
2) The text of Recital 12 of Directive 2005/45/EC should also be introduced, in adapted form, into the preamble to the recast proposal. The new recital, to be numbered 17, should read "The European Maritime Safety Agency should assist the Commission in verifying that Member States comply with the requirements laid down in this Directive". Following recitals numbered 16 to 22 in the recast proposal should be re-numbered 18 to 24.
3) Recital 23 should be removed from the text of the preamble to the recast act. The two following recitals, numbered 24 and 25 in the recast proposal, should be respectively re-numbered 25 and 26.
4) In Article 5(6), the reference made to "paragraph 3" should read as a reference to "paragraph 32".
5) In the English language version of the proposal, in Article 16(1) the correction made to the existing wording of Article 15(1), in which the words "a specified seafarer to serve in a specified ship for" were added, should have been identified by using the grey-shaded type generally used for marking substantive changes. Moreover, the presence of that correction should also have been mentioned in the explanatory memorandum.
6) The wording of Article 27(2) should be removed from the text of the recast act. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 27 should be respectively re-numbered 2 and 3.
7) It was acknowledged that in Annex I, Chapter VII, Regulation VII/1, the wording of point 1(5) contains a correct reference to Article 11, whereas the original text of Directive 2001/25/EC contained a mistake in that reference was being made in that point to Article 11 instead of Article 10.
8) In Annex III, Part A, the indication "only Article 4" should be introduced in correspondence with the quotation of Directive 2005/45/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
In consequence, examination of the proposal has enabled the Consultative Working Party to conclude, without dissent, that the proposal does not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such. The Working Party also concluded, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier act with those substantive amendments, that the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing text, without any change in its substance.
C. PENNERA J.-C. PIRIS M. PETITE
Jurisconsult Jurisconsult Director General
- [1] The Consultative Working Party had at its disposal 22 official language versions of the proposal and worked on the basis of the English text, being the master-copy language version of the document under discussion.
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Minimum level of training of seafarers (recast version) |
|||||||
|
References |
COM(2007)0610 – C6-0348/2007 – 2007/0219(COD) |
|||||||
|
Date submitted to Parliament |
16.10.2007 |
|||||||
|
Committee responsible Date announced in plenary |
TRAN 25.10.2007 |
|||||||
|
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s) Date announced in plenary |
JURI 25.10.2007 |
|
|
|
||||
|
Not delivering opinions Date of decision |
JURI 23.10.2007 |
|
|
|
||||
|
Rapporteur(s) Date appointed |
Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou 5.12.2007 |
|
|
|||||
|
Discussed in committee |
25.3.2008 |
5.5.2008 |
|
|
||||
|
Date adopted |
6.5.2008 |
|
|
|
||||
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
31 5 0 |
||||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Etelka Barsi-Pataky, Arūnas Degutis, Petr Duchoň, Saïd El Khadraoui, Robert Evans, Emanuel Jardim Fernandes, Francesco Ferrari, Brigitte Fouré, Georg Jarzembowski, Stanisław Jałowiecki, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Jaromír Kohlíček, Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, Sepp Kusstatscher, Bogusław Liberadzki, Eva Lichtenberger, Erik Meijer, Robert Navarro, Josu Ortuondo Larrea, Willi Piecyk, Paweł Bartłomiej Piskorski, Luís Queiró, Reinhard Rack, Gilles Savary, Brian Simpson, Ulrich Stockmann, Silvia-Adriana Ţicău, Georgios Toussas, Yannick Vaugrenard, Lars Wohlin, Roberts Zīle |
|||||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Zsolt László Becsey, Johannes Blokland, Jelko Kacin, Ari Vatanen, Corien Wortmann-Kool |
|||||||