9. We consider that the following raises
questions of legal and political importance, but make no
recommendation for its further consideration at this stage:--
Department of Transport
(17534)
10284/96
COM(96)455 |
Draft Directive amending Directive 93/75/EEC on minimum
requirements for vessels bound for and leaving Community ports
and carrying dangerous or polluting goods. |
| Legal base: |
Article 84(2); co-operation; qualified majority
voting. |
Background
9.1 Directive 93/65/EEC[18] introduced a requirement for ships
entering or leaving a port in a Member State to report
information on any dangerous or polluting cargoes on board to the
appropriate shore-based authorities. The present proposal is to
amend the Directive and to extend its scope.
The proposal
9.2 The purpose of the proposed amendment is
threefold:
--to extend the scope of the Directive to cover
the carriage of irradiated nuclear fuel, plutonium and high-level
radioactive waste in flasks on board ships;
--to supplement the information given in the
Annexes to the Directive in the light of developments in
international legislation; and
--to facilitate future amendments to the Annexes
by using a Committee procedure.
9.3 The extension of the Directive to cover
certain radioactive materials follows the adoption by the
International Maritime Organisation (IMO) of a Resolution[19] on a code for the safe
carriage of such materials, known as the INF code. The
Government thinks the extension of the Directive is unnecessary
because the INF code defines these substances by reference to
another code (the IMDG code) which is already included in the
list of relevant conventions, codes and Resolutions in Article
2 of the Directive. In an Explanatory Memorandum dated 1
November 1996, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State,
Department of Transport (Viscount Goschen) says that the
Government is nevertheless
"prepared to accept its inclusion if the
majority of Member States accept the Commission's argument that
its specific inclusion would remove any uncertainties about the
materials covered by the Directive."
9.4 The Government's acceptance is, however,
conditional upon changes to that part of the proposal which is
concerned with the circumstances in which the existing Committee
procedure could be used to amend the Directive. The Minister
says:
"The proposed wording is insufficiently
specific, and could be interpreted as permitting the Committee
procedure to make amendments to the Directive which could go
beyond its purpose, which is to ensure that Member States have
ready access to information about dangerous or polluting goods
aboard ships bound for or leaving their ports, thus facilitating
a more effective response in cases of emergency. We should
prefer the text of the proposal to state that the Committee could
amend the Directive only in specified circumstances (namely to
assimilate amendments to specified international codes) and
without broadening its scope. Such amendments would be solely
technical.
"Moreover, we would not wish the INF Code
to be one of those specified international instruments, changes
to which the Committee could transpose into the Directive. The
INF Code is concerned mainly with other aspects of the safe
carriage of irradiated nuclear fuel, such as ship construction
standards, rather than reporting requirements, which are the
subject of the Directive. Issues surrounding the carriage of
irradiated nuclear fuel and such like are, in the Government's
view, properly matters which should be referred to the Council,
and should not be dealt with through a routine Committee
procedure."
9.5 The Minister adds that the Government supports
the purely technical amendments proposed for the Annexes to the
Directive.
Conclusion
9.6 If the present wording of this proposal on
the powers of the Committee has the effect which the Minister
believes it to have, then the proposal raises matters of both
legal and political importance. The Commission's own explanatory
memorandum suggests that it is only concerned to provide a simple
method of amending the Directive to reflect amendments or
developments in international law on safety at sea and on the
protection of the marine environment. We agree that any
ambiguity in the text should be resolved before the proposal is
adopted. We are not clearing this proposal at present and we ask
the Minister to tell us, in due course, how his concerns are to
be met.
18.OJ No. L 247, 5.10.93, p.19. Back
19.Resolution A.748 (18). Back
|
