Sittings · Compare

What changed

From · opinion parliamentary committee · 2023-11-29 PECH-AD-752995 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements

→

To · Adopted text · 2024-04-10 TA-9-2024-0203 Amending Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements

+23 added · −210 removed · 0 modified paragraphs hide unchanged text

~~SHORT JUSTIFICATION~~

TEXTS ADOPTED

The current proposal forms part of a wider package of measures aimed at improving maritime safety. Whilst other elements of the package involve specific changes for the fisheries sector, it is equally apparent that the flag State Directive is of vital importance to fishing communities; flags of convenience, for example, cause major problems with regard to safety, working conditions, traceability of fisheries products and a level playing field.

P9_TA(2024)0203

The 2009 maritime safety package was in large part a response to a series of marine disasters, not least of which was the Prestige disaster off the coast of Galicia in 2002. This disaster was unprecedented in nature and had a devastating effect on sea life, birds and the wider environment. This, in turn, severely impacted all those involved in fisheries, particularly those engaged in inshore and artisanal fishing and the shellfish sector.

Amending Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements

The disaster also highlighted major shortcomings in the Spanish government’s response – highlighted in Parliament’s resolution in the wake of the disaster – as well as disparities in maritime safety across the EU. Parliament raised serious concerns at that time regarding flags of convenience and the 2009 flag State requirements Directive went some way to remedying this.

Committee on Transport and Tourism

The Commission considers that the 2009 Directive has in general been well transposed by Member States and has created a more level playing field in the shipping sector. It has not however remained fully up-to-date with developments at IMO level and there are still inconsistencies in relation to inspections and monitoring.

PE753.548

The Commission proposal therefore aims to update the Directive to conform more fully with IMO standards, to harmonise inspections and monitoring, to promote digital solutions and to improve cooperation between Member State authorities. The proposal also aims to improve flag State training.

European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 April 2024 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements (COM(2023)0272 – C9-0188/2023 – 2023/0172(COD))

Your rapporteur fully supports the Commission’s aim to update the current legislative regime and to ensure that it remains fully aligned with international standards. She also welcomes the moves to more fully embrace digital technologies.

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

Equally, however, she highlights recent resolutions where the European Parliament has continued to express concerns as regards the issue of reflagging and flags of convenience. This remains a major issue for the environment and, from a fisheries perspective, for those whose livelihoods are dependent on that environment. These views are reflected in wider civic society, for example in Galicia, where the Nunca Máis platform continues to campaign in the wake of the Prestige disaster for all shipping in EU waters to comply with IMO standards.

The European Parliament,

Europe contains some of the world’s busiest international shipping channels and the issue of ships using flags of convenience passing through sensitive marine areas such as the Fisterra corridor remains live.

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2023)0272),

Needs vary between waters as diverse as the Baltic, the Mediterranean and the Atlantic coast. All these areas however support communities dependent on a clean maritime environment – and all are dependent upon a properly functioning maritime safety regime. The current proposal should form a part of ongoing efforts to improve the EU’s work to protect our vital marine environment – as well as the economy, food security and communities dependent upon fisheries, aquaculture and shellfish.

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 100(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C90188/2023),

On a final note, your rapporteur regrets the truncated procedure which has been faced by the Fisheries Committee. The Committee should have been given full oversight within a reasonable timescale for a package of such importance to the fishing industry.

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

~~AMENDMENTS~~

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 20 September 2023,

~~The Committee on Fisheries calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to take the following into account:~~

– after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

~~Amendment 1~~

– having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 74(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 15 March 2024 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

~~Proposal for a directive~~

– having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

~~Recital 1~~

– having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Fisheries,

~~Amendment 2~~

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A9-0418/2023),

~~Proposal for a directive~~

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

~~Recital 1 a (new)~~

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

~~Justification~~

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

This Directive rightly emphasizes the safety of Union shipping and environmental protection. However, it could benefit from a more explicit acknowledgment of the importance of fair labour conditions and the welfare of seafarers, which are critical aspects of maritime operations.

P9_TC1-COD(2023)0172

~~Amendment 3~~

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 10 April 2024 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2024/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements

~~Proposal for a directive~~

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive (EU) 2024/3100.)

~~Recital 2~~

~~Amendment 4~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 2 a (new)~~

~~Amendment 5~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 5~~

~~Justification~~

The Directive maintains the independence of maritime accident investigations, which is essential. Still, it should also underscore the significance of thorough reporting, transparency, and accountability in these investigations to ensure that lessons are learned and applied to prevent future accidents.

~~Amendment 6~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 7~~

~~Amendment 7~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 8~~

~~Justification~~

Whereas theoretical experience may not be the most useful for inspections, observational experience can significantly benefit Member States in implementing a best-case scenario based on the modus operandi in other countries by providing practical insights, learning opportunities, and a foundation for informed decision-making.

~~Amendment 8~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 9~~

~~Justification~~

The capacity-building program for flag State surveyors and inspectors is a positive step. To enhance this, ongoing professional development and training opportunities could be emphasized to ensure that these professionals remain well-equipped to adapt to evolving safety and environmental standards.

~~Amendment 9~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 11~~

~~Amendment 10~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 12 a (new)~~

~~Justification~~

Ensuring access to information for relevant authorities is crucial for monitoring purposes. In addition to this, provisions could be made to protect whistle-blowers who report safety or environmental violations, contributing to a culture of transparency and accountability.

~~Amendment 11~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 12 b (new)~~

~~Justification~~

~~The Directive should also provide clear mechanisms for workers to report safety and environmental concerns, fostering a proactive approach to safety.~~

~~Amendment 12~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 17~~

~~Justification~~

Establishing a high-level group for flag State matters is a positive development. Still, it could be strengthened by including representation from workers and their representatives to ensure a holistic approach to maritime governance.

~~Amendment 13~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Recital 18~~

~~Amendment 14~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4 – paragraph 1~~

~~Amendment 15~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4a~~

~~Amendment 16~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4a~~

~~Amendment 17~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4a~~

~~Amendment 18~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4a~~

~~Amendment 19~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4a~~

~~Amendment 20~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4a~~

~~Amendment 21~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3~~

~~Directive 2009/21/EC~~

~~Article 4a~~

~~Amendment 22~~

~~Proposal for a directive~~