13. We consider that the following raises
questions of political importance, but make no recommendation for
its further consideration:--
Department of Transport
(17538)
10519/96
COM(96)470 |
Draft Directive amending Directive 94/58/EC on the minimum
level of training for seafarers. |
| Legal base: |
Article 84(2); co-operation; qualified majority
voting. |
Background
13.1 This is a proposal to amend Council Directive
94/58/EEC, which was adopted on 22 November 1994,[26] on the minimum level of
training of seafarers. The Directive was based on the
internationally agreed training rules contained in the
International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Convention on standards
of training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers (STCW)
of 1978. The Directive also introduced a number of requirements
relating to onboard communication between members of the ship's
company and between specified members of the company and
passengers, and for communication between the ship and
shore-based authorities. It also enabled Member States to check
on the training and competence of seafarers on board ships flying
the flag of a third country.
13.2 We reported on the Directive when it was in
draft[27] and it was
subsequently debated by European Standing Committee A on 7
December 1994 as one of a number of documents concerned with
safety at sea.
The present proposal
13.3 In 1995, the IMO completed a revision of the
1978 STCW Convention in which the UK played a major part. In an
Explanatory Memorandum dated 1 November 1996 the Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State at the Department of Transport (Viscount
Goschen) tells us that the main features of the revision were in
three areas:
"(a) giving shipping companies
specific responsibilities for ensuring that the seafarers they
employ meet minimum international standards of competence and
undergo familiarisation on their ships, and that their ships are
manned in accordance with flag state requirements;
"(b) the establishment of uniform
standards for the attainment of competence in particular maritime
skills; and
"(c) measures to ensure that
governments who are parties to the [1995] Convention implement
the Convention's requirements and issue certificates only to
seafarers' who meet the minimum competency requirements".
13.4 The Minister explains that the proposed
Directive would update Directive 94/58/EEC in the light of STCW
1995, define common criteria for the recognition in the EU of
seafarers' certificates issued by or in third countries, and
modify some of the STCW provisions covering, for example,
detention of unsafe ships and the registration of certificates
and endorsements. The proposed Directive also includes some
amendments to enforcement provisions.
The Government's view
13.5 In his Memorandum, the Minister says that the
UK has no difficulty supporting measures which are contained
within STCW 1995, but he expresses reservations about a number
of issues where the proposed Directive goes beyond the
Convention. They include the practical implications of
requirements for Member States to keep an electronic register of
certificates and endorsements, making the provision of
information to third countries subject to reciprocity, and taking
accounts of guidance given in STCW on medical and eyesight
standards, approval of seagoing service and training courses, and
electronic access to registers of certificates.
13.6 The Explanatory Memorandum lists a number of
other minor provisions where clarification will be needed from
the Commission.
Conclusion
13.7 For the most part, the proposed amendments
to the 1994 Directive flow from the 1995 IMO Convention on
standards of training, certification and watchkeeping for
seafarers (STCW 1995). We are told that the United Kingdom
played a major part in the discussions which led to the new
Convention and, although the issues raised in the proposal are
concerned with safety at sea, an issue which is of significant
political importance, we see no need to recommend a debate. The
Minister has drawn attention to a number of areas where the
proposed amending Directive goes beyond the 1995 STCW and where
clarification or further discussion will be necessary. They are
not the kind of issues, however, which would cause us to
recommend a debate, and we therefore clear the document.
26.OJ No. L 319, 12.12.94, p.28. Back
27.(14583) 6938/93; see HC 79-xxxiii (1992-93),
paragraph 3 (30 June 1993); and (15339) 6655/94; see HC 48-xxii
(1993-94), paragraph 5 (22 June 1994). Back
|
