Activites

• 2009/05/28 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 2009/21
  • OJ L 131 28.05.2009, p. 0132
• 2009/04/23 Final act signed
• 2009/04/22 End of procedure in Parliament
• 2009/03/11 Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading
  • T6-0112/2009 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a legislative resolution approving unamended, under the second reading of the codecision procedure, the Council’s common position for adopting a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on compliance with flag State requirements.

• 2009/03/10 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2009/02/18 Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading
  • A6-0069/2009
• 2009/02/17 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
• 2008/12/18 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #2913
• 2008/12/09 Council Meeting
  • 14288/2/2008 summary

    Although the Council agrees with the Commission as regards the objective of the proposal, it has made some major amendments to the original proposal. A number of the proposed provisions were not acceptable for the Council as they duplicate existing Community legislation and provisions included in other proposals of the third maritime safety package.Therefore, the common position adopted by unanimity, modifies, to a large extent, the original Commission proposal by redrafting it and deleting several parts of the text. This implies that all amendments introduced in the European Parliament's first-reading opinion related to these deleted parts were not accepted by the Council.The main political issues are as follows:Flag State auditing process: the Council follows the proposal by the Commission to introduce an independent audit of Member States' maritime administration. It considers, however, that the creation in the Community framework of a parallel auditing system to the one established at international level through the Voluntary IMO Member State Audit Scheme should be avoided. With a view to harmonising the auditing procedures and ensuring a level playing field, the common position therefore provides for an obligation to request regularly an IMO auditing of the administration and to publish the outcome of the audit. The interval for the renewal of the auditing is set at seven years, taking into account the available resources at IMO level. Furthermore, the common position ensures that once the IMO Audit Scheme becomes mandatory, the relevant provision of the Directive expires, either automatically eight years after the entry into force of the Directive or earlier, if needed, upon decision of the Commission in accordance with comitology rules (regulatory procedure).Quality management system: the Council supports the Commission's proposal to ensure that maritime administrations of Member States meet quality criteria related to the management of their tasks. In its common position, the Council, however, takes into consideration the specific situation of the different services concerned and leaves it up to the Member States to determine the international standards that are applicable for the certification of the different parts of their administration. In addition, following the objective of enhancing the flag State performance of Member States, the Council provides for a mandatory reporting on the performance to the Commission by Member States that are on the black list or, for two consecutive years, on the grey list of flag States established by the Paris MOU. By means of such a report the main reasons for the lack of compliance by the Member State concerned with its flag State requirements shall be identified.Other flag State requirements: the Council further simplified the Commission's proposal regarding measures to be taken before granting the right to fly the flag of a Member State and in the case of the detention of a ship flying the flag of a Member State by a port State. In this respect, the Council deems it appropriate, in the framework of a Directive, that Member States decide which measures have to be undertaken to ensure that the ship concerned complies or is brought into compliance with the applicable international rules and regulations.In parallel to the Common Position, a declaration of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union confirms their commitment to do the utmost with a view to ensuring a rapid and effective application of the international conventions on maritime safety, the IMO rules related to flag State obligations and the IMO audit.

• #2895
• 2008/10/09 Council Meeting
• #2861
• 2008/04/07 Council Meeting
  • 2861 summary

    The Council held a public policy debate on a proposal for a Directive on compliance with flag State requirements.The Commission transmitted its proposal as part of its third maritime package of seven legislative proposals, which aim to reinforce the safety of maritime transport in Europe. The Council already adopted six political agreements on the basis of five of the proposals. The respective common positions will be transmitted shortly to the European Parliament with a view to reaching an agreement to ensure that their implementation will start as soon as possible.During the policy debate all Member States underlined the importance they attach to improving maritime safety and the prevention of pollution caused by ships. They considered that fulfilment of the related flag State requirements was an essential element to achieve this objective and that, in particular, the IMO Flag State Code and the IMO Member State Audit Scheme constitute the appropriate means to this effect.Member States reaffirmed their commitment to take the necessary measures to implement the International Conventions with a view to ensuring a level playing field among the maritime administrations of Member States and underlined the importance of sharing best practices to this effect.Ministers, furthermore, underlined the need for a level playing field worldwide as regards the way flag States comply with their international obligations, thus contributing to the improvement of maritime safety and the protection of the marine environment and to the elimination of sub-standard ships.A majority of ministers stated that in their opinion the legislative proposal in question is not the most effective way to achieve the abovementioned objectives. In consequence, the presidency concluded that at this stage the Commission's proposal is not supported by a qualified majority of Member States. The proposal remains on the table, but the Slovenian presidency did not see sufficient political support to be able to work on the original proposal in the near future.

• 2007/03/29 Results of vote in Parliament
  • Results of vote in Parliament
  • T6-0093/2007 summary

    The European Parliament adopted the resolution drafted by Marta VINCENZI (PES, IT) amending the proposed directive on compliance with flag State requirements. (Please refer to the summary of 27/02/2007.) The main amendments were as follows:- an expanded recital states that the establishment of a Flag State Memorandum of understanding, under the conditions referred to in IMO Resolutions A.973(24) and A.974(24), to establish flag State synergies should be promoted by the Commission, and should provide incentives to register vessels in the registers of Member States. If third countries were allowed, subject to guarantees regarding the necessary quality and survey systems, to conclude agreements with the European Community enabling them to benefit from the good reputation of Community standards and from simpler administrative formalities, this could help, at a time when national registers and maritime administrations are engaged in global competition, to raise the overall degree of compliance with the IMO Conventions and eliminate international dumping- it should be specified in the directive that Member States should discharge their obligations as flag States in accordance not just with the IMO Conventions but also with the relevant ILO instruments;- the 1991 Code of Safe Practice for Ships Carrying Timber Deck Cargoes and the 1965 Code of Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes (BC Code)should both be incorporated into the list of IMO Conventions mentioned in the directive;- each Member State shall ensure the training of flag State surveyors and the oversight of flag State surveyors and investigators and, in the event of accidents or deficiencies, the coastal State, as well as of the activities of recognised organisations, should it delegate authority to such organisations;- as a precondition for registration of a ship in its register for the first time the Member State concerned shall ascertain whether the ship in question complies with the applicable international rules and regulations and ensure that this is confirmed by documentary evidence in its possession . If necessary, but in every case if the ship is not newly built, it shall liaise with the previous flag State and request it to pass on the necessary documents and data;- if the request is made by a Member State to another Member State, the previous flag State shall be obliged to communicate the documents and the data in question, as provided for by Regulation  789/2004/EC on the transfer of cargo and passenger ships between registers within the Community;- as laid down in Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system, Member States shall develop and implement an appropriate control and monitoring programme for ships flying their flag in order to be able to provide, not least by using the Community SafeSeaNet data exchange system, for a timely and comprehensive response to requests for information and clarification submitted by port or coastal States in the event of accidents or deficiencies;- Parliament amended the provisions on the information to be included in the database of each Member State, dividing this into two categories: (a) individual information, for each ship registered (including such details as the date of registration and, if appropriate, of removal from the register, repairs performed or pending, etc.); and (b) general information concerning all ships in the register (including the number of annual inspections of all types carried out by or on behalf of the flag State, broken down by procedure). All this information should be immediately forwarded in full to the new flag State if a ship leaves the register and is transferred to another register;- Parliament specified that authorisation as a flag-state inspector may only be granted to officers withat least three years’ experience at sea, or one year at sea plus two years with the competent authority of a member state as a practising flag state surveyor;- lastly, some amendments eased certain obligations and administrative requirements in the Commission’s proposal, with particular reference to ship inspection obligations.

• 2007/03/28 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2007/03/06 Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
  • A6-0058/2007
• 2007/02/27 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• 2006/03/14 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 2005/11/23 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(2005)0586 summary

    PURPOSE: to improve safety at sea, to prevent pollution and to protect seafarers by ensuring that Member States comply with the IMO Conventions.PROPOSED ACT: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.CONTENT: according to the Commission, this Directive acts as the missing link in relation to the other legislative instruments dealing with maritime safety. It is being presented in order to make an IMO Code on mandatory instruments as well as a flag-State Audit scheme compulsory. The ultimate aim being to harmonise the methods for implementing the international maritime conventions in the Member States.In presenting this proposal, the Commission is fulfilling the wishes of the Member States, who in Copenhagen 2002, requested that a Community system be put in place to monitor Member State obligations arising from international instruments to which they are a party. Not only will a harmonised application of standards improve safety at sea and prevent a distortion of competition it will also be of huge benefit to the environment. Current, sub-standard shipping standards, which account for many of the environmental accidents at sea, can be attributed to the lack of IMO enforcement capabilities.Lastly the Commission’s ultimate objective is to make the flags of the Member States more attractive, thereby transforming the European fleet into a quality fleet, while at the same time maintaining a competitive environment vis-à-vis third countries. The proposal has no impact on the Community budget.

  • DG Energy and Transport, TAJANI Antonio

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(2005)0586
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A6-0058/2007
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T6-0093/2007
• Debate in Council: 2861
• Council position published: 14288/2/2008
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A6-0069/2009
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T6-0112/2009
• : Directive 2009/21
• : OJ L 131 28.05.2009, p. 0132

History

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