Activites

• 2008/04/09 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Regulation 2008/300
  • OJ L 097 09.04.2008, p. 0072
• 2008/03/11 Final act signed
• 2008/03/11 Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading
  • T6-0080/2008 summary

    The European Parliament adopted, by 583 votes to 21 with 35 abstentions, a legislative resolution approving, under the 3rd reading of the codecision procedure, the joint text resulting from the agreement reached in the Conciliation Committee between the European Parliament delegation and the Council. (For details of the agreement, please see the summary of 11/01/2008).

• 2008/03/10 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• #2857
• 2008/03/04 Council Meeting
• 2008/02/29 Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading
  • A6-0049/2008
• 2008/02/22 Joint text approved by Conciliation Committee co-chairs
  • 03601/2008
• 2008/01/11 Final decision by Conciliation Committee
• 2007/11/20 Formal meeting of Conciliation Committee
• #2821
• 2007/10/02 Council Meeting
• 2007/04/25 Results of vote in Parliament
  • Results of vote in Parliament
  • T6-0142/2007 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution drafted by Paolo COSTA (ALDE, IT) modifying the Council's common position. It followed the opinion of its Transport Committee and reinstated many of the amendments adopted by Parliament at 1st reading (see summary dated 02/05/2006), which had not been taken up by the Council. These covered such issues as the objectives of the regulation, definitions, the costs and funding of the proposed security measures, reporting requirements and the role of the European Aviation Safety Agency. The key amendments were as follows:- the amendments on costs state that Member States and users shall share the costs of the application of the common basic standards for tackling acts of unlawful interference. In order to avoid any distortion of competition between Member States and between airports, air carriers and other entities concerned within the Community as well as between Member States and third countries, the Commission must submit a proposal to introduce uniform arrangements for financing these security measures;- the detailed measures for the implementation of the common basic standards shall expire six months after their entry into force. The detailed measures may be maintained in accordance with the comitology procedure applicable, but only after a thorough re-evaluation of the security risks and a thorough evaluation of the costs and operational impact associated with those measures. Each of the detailed measures and procedures for the implementation of the common basic standards shall be laid down on the basis of a risk and impact assessment. The assessment shall include the estimated costs;- Member States shall inform the Commission of those measures, the financial and other costs of which, upon implementation of the measure, are disproportionate to the added security, if any, which the measure establishes. In such instances the Commission shall allow Member States to derogate from the common basic standards in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny;- Member States may apply more stringent standards than the common basic standards. The Commission may examine them and, after consulting the Committee, may decide whether the Member State is allowed to continue to apply the measures, and will communicate its decision to the Council and the Member States. Within one month of the decision being communicated by the Commission, a Member State may refer the decision to the Council. The Council, acting by qualified majority, may, within a period of three months, take a different decision. Member States shall meet the costs of applying more stringent measures;- where airport or on-board security costs are included in the price of an air ticket, those costs shall be shown separately on the ticket or otherwise indicated to the passenger;- security taxes and charges, whether levied by Member States or by air carriers or entities shall be transparent, shall be used exclusively to meet airport or on-board aircraft security costs and shall not exceed the costs of applying the common basic standards;- the Commission shall cooperate with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in fields falling within the scope of this Regulation. To facilitate such cooperation, the Commission is authorised to conclude agreements with the ICAO for the purpose of exchanging information and mutual support in connection with audits and inspections. The Commission shall negotiate those agreements with the assistance of the Committee;- every year the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament, the Council, the Member States and the national parliaments, informing them of the application of the Regulation and its impact on improving air security, as well as of any weaknesses or shortcomings brought to light by the Commission's checks and inspections;- the Commission shall establish a Stakeholders' Advisory Group on Aviation Security, composed of European representative organisations engaged in, or directly affected by, aviation security. The role of this group shall be solely to advise the Commission;- every year the Commission shall draw conclusions from the inspection reports and publish, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to documents, a report on the implementation of the Regulation and on the situation in the Community as far as aviation security is concerned;- lastly, agreements recognising that the security standards applied in a third country are equivalent to Community standards should be included in global aviation agreements between the Community and a third country in accordance with Article 300 of the Treaty in order to advance the goal of "one-stop security" for all flights between the European Union and third countries.

• 2007/04/24 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2007/04/12 Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading
  • A6-0134/2007
• 2007/04/11 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
• 2007/01/18 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #2772
• 2006/12/11 Council Meeting
  • 14039/1/2006 summary

    The Council's common position, adopted by unanimity, does not undermine the essential objectives and the underlying approach of the Commission's proposal. Two specific issues have arisen in the Council which are worth mentioning: 1. The application of new comitology rules: coherence had to be made with the newly adopted rules laid down in Council Decision 2006/512/EC of 17 July 2006 amending Decision 1999/468/EC that gives the European Parliament greater powers of scrutiny over autonomous acts adopted by comitology. In the view of the Council, the regulatory procedure with scrutiny laid down in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC should apply to both Article 4(3) setting the criteria to allow Member States to derogate from the common basic standards for small airports / small aircraft and Article 9(2) establishing the specifications for the national quality control programme of Member States. The Commission shares the view of the Council on this.2. The deletion of the provision on the examination by the Commission of more stringent measures applied by Member States: in Article 5(2) of the Commission proposal, the Commission proposed that it should be in the position to examine whether more stringent measures applied by a Member State are indeed based on a risk assessment and are relevant, objective, non-discriminatory and proportional to the risk that is being addressed. Where this would not be the case, the Commission after consulting the Committee –and ultimately the Council– should be in the position to decide that the Member State concerned is not allowed to continue to apply these more stringent measures. This provision was deleted by the Council which the Commission resisted through a statement.Intensive contacts have taken place between the three institutions in order to facilitate an early agreement in second reading on this file. However, this could not be achieved primarily because of the issue of financing of security for which the European Parliament had introduced in first reading several amendments seeking to commit Member States to pay at least some of the costs of aviation security.Lastly, the Council believes that its common position is appropriate and balanced. It reflects the aims behind the majority of the Parliament’s amendments. It would like to underline the great effort which has gone into securing early agreement on this Regulation and trusts that the common position will allow for early adoption of the legislation in due course.

• #2754
• 2006/10/12 Council Meeting
• 2006/06/15 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T6-0267/2006 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution drafted by Paolo COSTA (ALDE, IT), and made several amendments to the Commission’s proposal. (For a summary of the principal amendments, please refer to the preceding document.)

• 2006/06/14 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2006/05/22 Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
  • A6-0194/2006
• 2006/05/02 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• #2721
• 2006/03/27 Council Meeting
  • 2721 summary

    The Council unanimously agreed a general approach, pending the European Parliament's opinion at first reading, on a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules in the field of aviation security.The proposal seeks to replace Regulation 2320/2002/EC on common rules in civil aviation Security adopted in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 and in force since January 2003. The Commission submitted a proposal for its revision in September 2005.The new regulation is aimed at clarifying, simplifying and harmonising further the legal requirements with the objective of enhancing overall security in civil aviation. It lays down common rules for safeguarding civil aviation against acts of unlawful interference. It also provides the basis for a common interpretation of Annex 17 to the 1944 Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation.The new regulation will in particular extend Community competence to cover in-flight security measures. In addition, it addresses situations whereby a third country wants to apply different security measures to flights from Community airports than those laid down by Community legislation.

• #2695
• 2005/12/01 Council Meeting
  • 2695
• 2005/10/27 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• #2680
• 2005/10/06 Council Meeting
  • 2680
• 2005/09/22 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(2005)0429 summary

    PURPOSE: to replace Regulation 2320/2002/EC in order to clarify, simplify and harmonise the rules on civil aviation security.PROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council.CONTENT: Regulation 2320/2002/EC has been in force since January 2003. Experience over time has shown that the regulation is too detailed and is in need of simplification. Having such a high degree of detail in framework legislation adopted by codecision makes legal revision to take into account technical or operational developments impractical. This is an over-prescriptive approach in a framework legislation, which should be replaced by general principles with details added, when necessary, in the implementing legislation.It is, therefore, appropriate to replace this Regulation. The new framework regulation will solely lay down the basic principles of what has to be done in order to safeguard civil aviation against acts of unlawful interference, whereas implementing acts will lay down the technical and procedural decisions on how this is to be achieved.Increased harmonisation is also an integral element of 'one-stop security' - the concept whereby transfer- and transit passengers, bags and cargo need not be re-screened since there is confidence that baseline levels of security were met at the original departing airport. Again, this is an element that is of benefit to operators acting in a highly competitive market.A further issue of concern is that the current regulation is in the public domain. Consequently, any amendments made to it will also be in the public domain. In the view of the Commission it is not desirable to have detailed security measures and procedures placed in the public domain, as potential terrorists could use the information to seek out weaknesses in aviation security in order to perpetrate unlawful acts. Similarly, it is also not in the public interest to publicise new developments in security. By placing operational details in implementing legislation this issue can be addressed.The only additional competence sought relates to rules for in-flight security measures. It covers such diverse topics as access to the cockpit, unruly passengers and in-flight security officers ('sky marshals'). There currently does not exist Community legislation covering inflight security measures. In the view of the Commission harmonised rules would be best addressed as an element of aviation security legislation, by means of implementing legislation. However, the Commission stresses that such implementing legislation will be developed only as and when such rules are deemed necessary at the Community level. Also, it should be noted that the Commission has no intention of compelling any Member State to accept in-flight security officers on board aircraft and the proposal in no way seeks to change existing sovereignty on this matter.The following points should be noted:-The proposal permits Member States to apply more stringent security measures. The principle is unchanged from Regulation 2320/2002/EC. However, the new proposal requires that Member States shall both undertake a risk assessment and that they shall be able to justify such action, in general terms, if requested to do so by the Commission. Actions by Member States in response to specific threat information should not be prejudiced by this legislation and so heightened security requirements for individual flights would fall outside the requirements of this article.-A new Article addresses the situation whereby a third country requires different security measures on flights from Community airports than those laid down by Community legislation.Lastly, the proposal does not address the issue of financing security. A later Communication will deal with this matter.

  • DG Energy and Transport, BARROT Jacques

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(2005)0429
• Debate in Council: 2680
• Debate in Council: 2695
• Debate in Council: 2721
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A6-0194/2006
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T6-0267/2006
• Council position published: 14039/1/2006
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A6-0134/2007
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T6-0142/2007
• Joint text approved by Conciliation Committee co-chairs: 03601/2008
• Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading: A6-0049/2008
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading: T6-0080/2008
• : Regulation 2008/300
• : OJ L 097 09.04.2008, p. 0072

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)