EC starts consultations on further maritime safety initiatives

The European Commission’s plans to put forward another package of maritime safety proposals bringing together all the loose ends from the political debates initiated by the Erika and Prestige accidents have hitherto been known as the ?Erika III package?. A preliminary outline of the EC?s ?Maritime safety package 2004? (as it is now called) proposals was presented to EU member states and industry at consultation meetings earlier this month.

The EC indicated that the preliminary ideas presented so far would be developed into a full set of finalised proposals before the end of the year. All relevant parties will be involved in written and oral consultations with the Commission and the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA). The Commission underlined that its views are far from finally developed and that all input from industry would be welcome in the coming weeks and months.

While underlining its openness to comments and alternative suggestions, however, the EU officials also emphasised that their intention is to put forward a set of new proposals which will all be somewhat interlinked. In its package the Commission has identified six areas in which it will be considering new initiatives. Referring back to various discussions and decisions both in the Council of Ministers and in the European Parliament, the Commission is first of all proposing an EU directive on minimum flag state criteria which would be mandatory for EU flag states to follow. Such criteria, which would be based on relevant IMO resolutions, would secure a minimum standard for all EU flag state administrations, and allow the Commission and EMSA to operate a mandatory EU flag state auditing scheme.

Secondly, and partly linked to the flag state initiative above, the Commission intends to put forward fairly radical ideas on how to improve and streamline the current European port state control regime. Here the Commission suggests better targeting, increased use of blacklists and port entry bans as well as a possible preferential status for EU Flag States when audited and controlled.

In its third suggestion, the Commission proposes to develop European legislation which would turn the provisions of the consolidated maritime ILO convention which might be adopted next year into mandatory EU legislation. By applying these rules to EU vessels through flag state implementation and to third flag via European port state control, the Commission hopes to achieve a ?level playing field? concerning seafarers’ working and living conditions. Furthermore, the Commission is signalling that it once again will raise the issues of liability and compensation. On this point the Commission’s ideas fall into two separate areas. Most important from a tanker perspective is that the Commission once again seems set to re-open the IMO IOPC/CLC system in order to introduce more ?accountability? for all the elements in the transport chain.

The Commission also puts forward a number of suggestions for improving the directive on monitoring and reporting on maritime traffic which was adopted after the Erika incident. Amongst these suggestions is one to develop a more detailed and stringent set of procedural rules for allocating places of refuge along European coasts.

Finally, the Commission suggests looking into marine casualty investigation, noting that even though there are clear IMO obligations on flag states to undertake and report accident investigations, only a limited number of flag states comply. Also, the Commission notes that when they do take place, such investigations tend to drag on for too long. The Commission therefore proposes the development of some sort of common European methodology for accident investigation partly modelled on experience from the aviation sector.

At the meeting, INTERTANKO gave its initial thoughts on the various Commission ideas. Although supportive on several aspects it was suggested that the EU now ought to await completion of various processes within the IMO (flag state code/auditing) and the ILO (consolidated maritime labour convention) before starting a process of turning such principles into EU law.

INTERTANKO gave its support to further improvements in port state control and underlined the need for bringing the various criteria and mechanisms in the Paris, Tokyo MOUs and USCG more in harmony.

On the issue of accident investigation, INTERTANKO suggested to the Commission that before dealing with this issue it would be necessary to decide what the purpose of accident investigation would be. Is the purpose to find out and learn in order to avoid future repetition of faults committed, or is the main purpose to penalise? The two goals are not really compatible, and increasingly the search for a party to penalise seems to undermine the possibility of finding out and learning, INTERTANKO argued.

Finally, on the suggestion to re-open the IOPC/CLC system, a very clear and forceful warning was issued to the Commission. The industry representatives told the Commission that the current compensation system serves the interests of oil spill victims very well and should not be amended. The Commission was furthermore informed that industry associations had undertaken to find a voluntary solution to the question of fair distribution of costs between oil receivers and oil transporters. Industry negotiations are well under way, and the Commission should not consider involving itself in this matter.