Document Sample
                         ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

             Speaking Points on Maritime Security
      Prepared for Mr F. Karamitsos, Director TREN G

              Background - Policy Considerations

• The Commission’s General Policy in transport security has been
  framed for the last two years by a succession of policy
  suggestions including the “White Paper” on Transport
  published early 2001.
• Successive Council Resolutions have highlighted this issue as a
  key political issue.
• Following the 9.11th events, a Regulation in the sector of
  Aviation has been adopted and a corps of Commission’s
  inspectors has been constituted, similar to the well
  established corps of Nuclear Inspectors.
• But, this is still not enough. The Commission has embarked
  upon ensuring security in the transport sector from the
  factory gate to the consumer door. This has of course to
  tackle all modes of transport.
• The most important of them is maritime transport. :
• The sector will be covered by a Regulation tackling
  maritime security for vessels, shipping companies and
  port facilities, which is currently under discussion in the
• And by a respective Port Security Directive which will be
  presented before summer.

                         ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

• Finally, a security directive covering the multimodal
  transport sector will be introduced and will ensure that cargo
  is responsibly transported at all times as well as detail what
  information (such us cargo ownership information, carriers
  responsibilities,   relevant   dates   and    cargo    origin   and

                       General Framework

• The Commission strongly supports as strategic policy
  approach the implementation of the maritime security
  measures recently agreed within the framework of the
  IMO Diplomatic Conference, in accordance with the respective
  timeframe. We expect that the recently agreed measures will
  be soon adopted as binding Community Legislation.

• The EU approach will help and develop, within the
  framework of international organisations, maritime
  security legislation and its respective implementation,
  which should be globally and uniformly applied. We do not
  agree with unilateral measures, which can lead to adverse
  economic effects and damage world sea borne trade.

  It is important that we frame the longer term interests of all
  trading partners to tackle security in a mutual supportive,
  cost effective and reciprocally recognised manner, in
  order to make security an asset of transparent, fast and
  efficient future trade exchanges within the maritime

                        ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

               Commission’s legislative action

• The European Commission has adopted a Communication
  and a proposal for a regulation to ensure the obligatory
  application throughout the European Union (EU) of the
  highest security standards on maritime transport, as
  agreed in the International Maritime Organisation
  applicable to international commercial shipping, and to port
  facilities serving them.

• The new requirements proposed by the European Commission
  for a strengthened security for international transport is
  proposed to apply to passenger ships carrying out
  domestic voyages, as for us there is no dilemma
  between cruise passengers and others.                 Similarly, the
  provisions with regard to security assessments, the drawing-up
  of security plans and the designation of company and ship
  security officers according to the Commission’s proposal would
  be extended to other ships used for domestic traffic. The
  Regulation also foresees a process of Commission
  inspections to check the harmonised implementation of
  these new security rules throughout the EU.

• However, further additional work is needed in other international
  arenas, including within the EU, to ensure the problems are
  comprehensively covered and to avoid recourse to

                         ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

  bilateral initiatives such as those developed by some
  third countries.

• Therefore,   as    mentioned      above      the   Commission’s
  Communication goes further than the framework on ship
  security and port installations treated by the IMO, and
  opens the debate on the entirety of maritime transport.

• The regulation goes beyond the measures adopted by IMO in
  that it:

- Makes obligatory some requirements that are only
  recommendations, in order to raise the level of security
  sought and to avoid divergences of interpretation between
  Member States;
- Requires a national authority to be nominated as a
  contact point at national level for the security of ships
  and port installations (of course it does not intend to adapt
  or assess the stucture of administrations;
- Foresees an inspection process supervised by the
  Commission to verify the framework for implementation of
  national plans adopted within the framework of this regulation;
- Gives the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) a role
  in assisting the Commission in the execution of its tasks;
- Adapts various terms adopted in the IMO framework to the
  benefit of the national maritime traffic within Member
- Extends all the requirements of Chapter XI-2 of the SOLAS
  Convention and Part A of the ISPS Code to passenger ships

                          ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

  on national routes where they sail further than 20 nautical
  miles beyond the coasts;
- Extends to other ships sailing nationally the requirements of the
  texts relating to undertaking safety evaluations, establishing
  safety plans, and designating safety agents for companies and
  for ships with the particular objective to raise “safety

In the months to come, the Commission:

• Will   present     a   proposed         directive   defining   the
  complementary measures to put in place in EU ports;

• In this Directive the Commission intends to expand to the
  entire port the security philosophy from the draft
  Regulation on ship and port facility security.                 The
  approach suggested in this Directive under preparation takes
  into account that port security measures should complement
  those of the ships and port facilities. It also takes into account
  the specificity of port areas, including attention to port industry
  and other activities relevant for the port security.

• Furthermore we intend to support, in conjunction with Member
  States,   the      work     of    the     International    Labour
  Organisation (ILO) concerning increasing security in
  identifying seafarers and port workers, and will take, as
  necessary, a legislative initiative in the matter, following the
  adoption of a text by the ILO, foreseen for June 2003.

                        ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

• The Commission is also in the course of looking into intermodal
  security. It is the intention of enhancing security throughout
  the entire logistic chain, irrespective of whether a maritime leg
  is included or not. Even although maritime security is the first
  focus at this point in time, it is the clear objective not to
  hamper short sea shipping in its development because of costly
  security measures. Therefore security will rapidly be extended
  to the land-leg of transport, both for maritime pre- or post-
  haulage as well as for completely land-based logistical chains.

                Container Security Initiative

• On 4 June 2002, the United States' House of Representatives
  adopted a Bill introducing the Maritime Transportation
  Anti-terrorism Act of 2002. Among other things, this
  legislation envisages a number of measures aiming at
  enhancing    cargo   and   container   security   conditions   for
  containers bound for US ports and the respective Container
  Security Initiative.

• Furthermore, the CSI involves placing US Customs
  inspectors at foreign seaports to target and pre-screen
  US-bound cargo containers before they are shipped to
  the US. Such containers are likely to benefit from a fast track
  importation procedure. The United States is initially focusing on

                       ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

  20 "mega ports" on the basis that roughly 68 per cent of the
  5.7 million sea containers entering the US annually arrive from
  these 20 foreign seaports. It is recalled that thus far, the US
  have concluded bilateral agreements with a number of EU
  Member States covering the following ports:

Member State         Ports involved in agreement

The Netherlands      Rotterdam

Belgium              Antwerpen

France               Le Havre

Germany              Hamburg and Bremerhafen

Italy                La Spezia and Genua

United Kingdom       Liverpool, Felixstowe, Southampton, Tilbury
                     and Thamesport

Spain                Algeciras

Sweden               Gothenburg

• On 19 December 2002, the European Commission launched
  infringement procedures against those Member States that
  have signed declaration of principle with the US Customs. Still
  today the Commission has concerns on the negative
  effects the measures taken by the Member States will
  have on trade flows and that the measures will lead to
  competition between EU ports and indeed could lead to
  potentially shifting terrorism onto ports not covered by
  CSI. Any difference in treatment would also run counter to EU

                         ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

   trade and transport policies, which are based on equal
   treatment across the Community and worldwide.

• On 18 March 2003 the Council has authorised the
   Commission to negotiate an extension of the scope of
   the 1997 EU - US customs co-operation agreement so as
   to ensure a more co-ordinated approach to security
   controls on the movement of goods. Areas where co-
   ordination could be established would include:

- the definition of key information for the identification of high-risk
  consignments and agreement on how to collect and exchange it
  between competent authorities so as to ensure the effective
  application of risk management techniques;
- the establishment of common definitions for controls and
  agreement on how these definitions could be used to identify
  high-risk movement of goods;
- the co-ordination of positions to be taken on these issues in
  multilateral discussions;
- the development of a common approach for the carrying out of
  practical actions in this domain in conformity with international

• The objective is to strengthen security while facilitating
   legitimate trade in conformity with international commitments
   and the principle of reciprocity.

                         ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

• As international security is only as effective as its weakest link,
  we support international co-operation within relevant
  fora to ensure a more co-ordinated approach for all
  ports handling international cargo and indeed suggest
  that all international agreements be modified to tackle
  all security issues in order to assist trading partners
  representing developing economies to enhance the
  security level of their sea borne trade.

               Expected Costs for Port Security

• A port is a unique geographical area composed of many
  diverse elements. It is both a centre of commerce and a
  centre of population. It is the beginning or terminus for many
  modes of transportation that have become closely integrated
  and interdependent.

• The economic benefits emanating from a port system extend
  far beyond its general geographic area.       The security of a
  seaport is clearly a complicated matter, perhaps the
  most difficult security challenge that exists within a
  nation’s infrastructure.

• The overall cost of security measures for ports includes
  the costs for port facilities and the port itself. The costs
  may be subdivided into elements that can be associated directly

                        ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

  with the port facilities, such as equipment that may be installed
  into screen vehicles or provide perimeter protection, as well as
  staffing, planning activities, and training. Additionally, ports and
  governments     will   incur   additional   costs   related   to   the
  administration of maritime security matters. We will further
  identify these costs in our proposal.

• MS have already integrated those costs within their policy
  priorities following the IMO Diplomatic Conference of December
  2002.   But it is not our intention –at this stage- to propose EC
  money for that. We think this is a matter of subsidiarity.


• The EU Regulation when adopted will provide the necessary
  legislative frame for the implementation of maritime security
  requirements. Each MS may have after that to adopt only
  secondary legislation in order to tackle respective administrative
  issues. Indeed, no time should be lost in view of the July 2004
  deadline. We believe that the draft Regulation currently
  under consultation in the Council will be proven in this
  respect a very efficient tool.

• Authority will also be needed for the ministries that are
  implementing and enforcing the requirements, maybe
  through additional legislative acts. In this respect for many
  of the proposed security measures to be meaningful, port

                        ANTWERPEN , 22-05-03

  facilities must have the right to search and detain vehicles,
  cargo, and persons; the right to seize suspect or illegal
  materials; the support of local police authorities; etc.

• There must also be an efficient means to properly return,
  reject, or dispose of suspect cargo and persons. Relevant
  information on the parties involved must be captured and
  shared. These changes must be made in conjunction with the
  implementation of new measures.

• Major review efforts to understand the current situation and
  identify gaps seem to be underway in all EU MS and all indicate
  that that their overall goal is to meet the July 2004 deadline,
  although they recognise that there is virtually no time to spare
  in the schedule.

• For the proper implementation of maritime security
  requirements a lot of additional work is expected by all of us.