What changed

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

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

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.

(COM(2023)0272 – C90188/2023 – 2023/0172(COD))

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.

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

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.

The European Parliament,

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.

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

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.

– 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),

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.

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

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.

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of […],

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 opinion of the Committee of the Regions of […],

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 Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

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 the opinion of the Committee on Fisheries,

AMENDMENTS

– havingThe regardCommittee toon theFisheries reportcalls ofon the Committee on Transport and TourismTourism, (A90000/2023),as the committee responsible, to take the following into account:

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

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

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

Amendment 1

Proposal for a directive

Recital 81

Or. en

Proposal for a directive

Recital 92

Or. en

Proposal for a directive

Recital 117

Or. en

Amendment 4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Or. en

Amendment 7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Or. en

Amendment 8

Proposal for a directive

Recital 21

Or. en

Amendment 9

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive 2009/21/EC

Article 4a – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 10

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive 2009/21/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 11

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive 2009/21/EC

Article 6 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 12

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2009/21/EC

Article 6a – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 13

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

Directive 2009/21/EC

Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Or. en

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission proposal to revise the Directive 2009/21/EC on compliance with flag State requirements. It should improve the quality of inspections of EU-flagged ships, provide for a better oversight of recognised organisations carrying out work under the responsibility of a flag state and set up a more harmonised training system for the European inspectors. In turn, this should lead to a better enforcement of safety rules, less pollution from shipping and better compliance of the EU Member States with their obligations as flag States under the IMO regime.

The Rapporteur supports the obligation to have a quality management system as well as a broader use of modern digital technologies, in particular in the field of electronic certificates and interoperability of EMSA databases that could be consulted by European port state authorities in preparation for a port state inspection of a European flagged ship.

The Rapporteur believes that digitization and automation of the maritime sector have a significant potential to contribute to the reduction of its emissions and play a key role in its decarbonisation, in line with the ambitions of the Green Deal. She is also convinced that in order to preserve the competitiveness, the European maritime transport sector must participate in the Union's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 at the latest, in line with the Paris Agreement. To this end, she is of the opinion that Member States should use the Union Maritime Information and Exchange System (SafeSeaNet) and services established by Directive 2002/59/EC and proposes that electronic certificates become mandatory for all member states already after three years from the date of entry into force of this Directive.

In order to improve safety and ensure level playing field, the rapporteur is also convinced that training programs provided by EMSA to flag State authorities should favour more harmonised approach and should be continued, reinforced and extended to cover Maritime Labour Convention- related aspects in more detail. EMSA should facilitate coordination, as well as an exchange of information and of good practice between flag State authorities in this regard. The Rapporteur would like to see the inspections to reflect on the working conditions, safety and environmental performance of all ships flying the flag of Member States and therefore include accurate data on crews’ working and resting hours. Flag states should revise the guidelines provided to their inspectors and those authorised to act on their behalf to include systematic verification of these records' accuracy.

The rapporteur is of the opinion that to eliminate unwanted practices like the reflagging of vessels and the use of open registries, there should be a 'genuine link' between the actual owner of a vessel and the flag the vessel flies, in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS Article 5 of the 1958 Convention and Article 91(1) of the 1982 UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Accordingly, shipowners should be obliged to pay social security contributions under the flag they are sailing unless the employee pays them according to the law of the state in which they reside.

Finally, the Commission proposal sets up an expert group on flag state requirements to provide a platform for the exchange of best practice and in order to develop a joint approach to flag state inspections and a common reporting format. While the rapporteur agrees with this idea and believes that adequate capacity and competence building should be maintained and promoted, she considers that the solutions and recommendations developped by the expert group should should not penalise well-performing administrations.