Document
European Parliament Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism
Consideration of draft report of Mr Georg Jarzembowski 20 June 2001
on the Commission Draft Proposal on Market access to port services
  I. Result of the discussion
Timescale
The ambitious time-scale as suggested by the Rapporteur, who had envisaged to have the report adopted by the Committee by 10 July, had raised the concern of Committee members, even of those in support of the Rapporteur's proposal, who thought this issue deserved wider consideration and research on the impact of the Directive. It was agreed that the new deadline for amendments would be 28 August and that the voting in Plenary would take place in September.
ESC had urged MEPs to give support to a wider debate on this issue (see ESC press release 19 June) in order to keep the discussion alive. Industry's views (shipowners, operators, ESPO, shippers) have only been firmly adopted in the last 2 weeks. Also, ESC asked the European Parliament to organise a public hearing to ensure that the views of all maritime industry players are properly heard and understood, but this request has not been taken into account.
General assessment of discussion in the Parliament
The Commission draft proposal for a Directive has a fair chance to fall completely as a result of heavy lobbying of national ports associations/European ports and for example the European pilotage organisations. Mr Jarzembowsky's report has the full support of the majority of the MEPs. Unless members will strongly lobby their national MEPs it is likely that the Jarzembowski report will have a majority in September.
The rapporteur has raised his profile in the Committee as being the expert on ports. It is therefore it is important to inform other MEPs and to give them good arguments on the functioning of ports and needs of shippers.
ESC had a meeting earlier this week with Karla Peijs (PPE- Netherlands) and Sir Robert Atkins (PPE-UK). Karla Peijs has given her full support to the ESC position and is prepared to propose in line with these views amendments to be prepared by ESC. ESC will meet next week the shadow-rapporteur Mr Dirk Sterckx (PPE-Belgium) and some UK MEPs.
ESC is liasing with ECSA on this issue and has recognised the joint interest of shippers and shipowners with regard to market access of port services to ports.
Reaction from MEPs
Piecyk, Willem Ernst (PSE-Germany)
Supportive to Jarzembowski report - Commission should focus on competition between ports, not within ports / need for transparency - cautious about threshold
Sir Robert Atkins (PPE- UK)
Fully in agreement with the Rapporteur - referred to special situation of UK Port
Ripoll (PPE-Spain) and some Italian MEPs
In favour of inclusion of cargo-handling in the directive - key element in improving efficiency in ports - referred to monopolies of cargo handling in Spain and Med countries - referred to outcome of MIF bottleneck study
Mark Watts ( PSE-UK)
Believed the Jarzembowski report an excellent report - wanted nothing changed - considered the Commission had ignored the Parliament report of 1999. Thought a cost/benefit impact study was lacking. Only some concern of pilotage because of safety implications - should be excluded.
Bouwman, Theo (Greens, Netherlands)
Referred to different situations in European ports - recognised that Spain and Italy needed more competition within ports. Danger of attracting traffic - environmental implications - safety of pilotage - more time for dialogue with unions.
Per Stenmarck (PPE - Sweden)
EU legislation necessary - in support of Commission proposal - in support of inclusion of cargo/self handling - no threshold for ports
Van Dam, Rijk (EDD - Netherlands)
More time for public debate, did not believe Member States would respond to the transparency rules as required by Commission/EP - if cargo handling was not included why the technical nautical services?
Esclopé, Alain (EDD - France)
Referred to the special situation of pilotage and safety implications of having this service liberalised
Karla Peijs (PPE - Netherlands)
State aid and transparency should be dealt with in a separate directive. Cargo handling should be included otherwise this Directive would be empty. Competition necessary within ports. EU legislation necessary
Belgian Presidency
The Parliament regretted that the Ports issue was not figuring on the priority list of the Belgian presidency, neither on the agenda of the upcoming Council meetings. The Presidency was accused of 'cherry picking' and taking out only the issue it could 'score' with.
II. Summary of the Jarzembowski Report
In his draft report, Georg Jarzembowski proposes to amend the Commission's Directive proposal on market access to port services in two ways :
Scope
To limit the scope of the "market access" provisions of the Directive to technical-nautical services. At the same time, the Commission is requested to submit, within a year, a report for each Member State on the state of application of the basic Treaty rules to seaports in general. There is no need for special market access arrangements for cargo handling or passenger services; for one thing the Commission cannot produce any significant number of problems and, secondly, even if problems did exist, blanketing all European ports with a highly bureaucratic tendering system would breach the principle of proportionality. Thirdly, the Commission, with its existing terms of reference, is already empowered to resolve individual cases using general Community law.
Establishing conditions for fair competition
The most important task of the European sea port policy is still finally to establish fair competition between sea ports and the Union. Competition among ports will increase their efficiency and contribute to an effective European transport policy, but only if competition among ports is not distorted by unilateral financial and organisational measures by Member States, regions or local authorities.
The rapporteur is therefore proposing the insertion in the directive of new provisions for the establishment of conditions for fair competition.
In the new chapter 2, Article 4a calls for transparency of financial relations between ports and public bodies. In addition, ports within the trans-European sea port network will submit data to the Member States and the Commission pursuant to the transparency directive. Article 4b requires the Commission and Member States to draw the necessary conclusions from the data submitted in order to establish conditions for fair competition. Within three years of the entry into force of the Directive the Commission should then submit an initial transparency report to the Council and Parliament.
Basic criticism of the Rapporteur: The Commission Communication does not adopt essential parts of the European Parliament's approach to sea port policy as set out in its 1999 resolution, as on the one hand it has not carried out the transparency study called for, nor drawn up guidelines for monitoring aid, and on the other is proposing a directive on market access going beyond maritime ('technical-nautical') services to include all port services.
ESC reaction to the draft report of Georg Jarzembowski
Exclusion of cargo handling services
The ESC regrets the suggested exclusion of cargo handling services from the proposed Directive by the EP Rapporteur, Mr Georg Jarzembowski. This would limit the proposed Directive solely to technical-nautical services and take out the most substantial pillar of the proposal. The suggested exclusion of cargo handling from the proposed Directive and limiting it to technical-nautical services would make the proposed Directive an empty shell. The argument used that the Commission has not sufficiently demonstrated that there are obstacles in cargo handling is not correct.
Shippers and shipowners have repeatedly stressed the need to have more competition in the cargo handling sector. Moreover in the discussions on the 1997 Green Paper on ports and in the exchange of views on the present proposed Directive, port users have repeatedly stressed that there are quite a number of harmful practices in cargo handling all over Europe.
It is also important to note that in the position paper adopted by the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) following their General Assembly in Oslo on 8 June, ESPO representing all European ports : "supports the basic principles of the Commission's Directive proposal on market access to port services, notably : free and non-discriminatory access to the markets of all port services for which the customer has to pay separately"
The exclusion of cargo handling as suggested by Mr. Jarzembowski should therefore be rejected.
Transparency/Fair Competition
The obstacles and problems in port services as highlighted in the different exercises do not concern unfair competition but rather the lack of competition and/or lack of potential competition and free access to services. On the issue of subsidies and transparency, ESC fully supports the application of the Transparency Directive 2000/52 on ports.
The issue of state aid guidelines is a difficult one. Shippers do not consider the application of State Aid Guidelines on ports at this point in time necessary. Moreover, the issue of transparency and State Aid is a completely separate issue and should not be dealt with in the proposed Directive on access to port services.
For further information contact: Nicolette van der Jagt, Secretary General of the ESC - Brussels 00 322 230 2113
|
