3 Global navigation satellite system
| (30514) 6257/09 COM(09) 139
| Draft Regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No. 1321/2004 on the establishment of structures for the management of the European satellite radio-navigation programmes
|
| Legal base | Article 156 EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Document originated | 24 March 2009
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 27 March 2009
|
| Department | Transport |
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 3 September 2009
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 19-xviii (2008-09), chapter 6 (3 June 2009)
|
| To be discussed in Council | 9 October 2009
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
3.1 The Community has a two-phase policy for developing a global
navigation satellite system (GNSS). The first phase, GNSS 1, is
the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay System (EGNOS) programme.
The second phase, GNSS 2, is the programme, named Galileo, to
establish a new satellite navigation constellation with appropriate
ground infrastructure. Galileo is based on the presumption that
Europe ought not to rely indefinitely on the GPS (the US Global
Positioning System) and GLONASS (the Russian Global Navigation
Satellite System) systems, augmented by EGNOS. Galileo is being
carried out in conjunction with the European Space Agency[6]
and there are a number of agreements in place or being negotiated
with third countries about cooperation in the project. From early
in 1999 we and previous Committees have reported to the House
on many aspects of the Galileo project, most recently in June
2008.[7] The matter has
been debated four times in European Standing Committee, most recently
on 26 November 2007,[8]
and once on the Floor of the House.[9]
3.2 Council Regulation (EC) No. 1321/2004 created
the European GNSS Supervisory Authority (GSA) as an arms-length
body, to manage the public interests relating to the Community's
satellite navigation programmes — currently EGNOS and Galileo
(which are generally referred to together as Galileo). The GSA
was intended to be the formal owner of these two systems and act
as the regulatory authority to oversee the private sector concessionaire
that was expected to deploy and operate them, under the terms
of a public private partnership. The Regulation also provided
for an Administrative Board to oversee the GSA's operation, which
comprised the GSA's Executive Director, the Commission and Member
States together with non-voting observers from the European Space
Agency, Norway and Switzerland. Regulation 1321/2004 was amended
by Council Regulation (EC) No. 1942/2006 to provide for the GSA
to also take over the responsibilities of the former Galileo Joint
Undertaking (GJU).
3.3 The GJU had been created in 2002 to manage the
development of the Galileo programme on behalf of the Community
and the European Space Agency. It had been intended that the GJU
would be able to see the programme through to the conclusion of
Galileo's development phase and therefore it had been created
for four years. Delays to the programme meant that the development
phase could not be competed in this time frame (it is now expected
to last up to the end of 2010). When the GJU was wound up in 2006,
it was necessary to ensure continuity of the programme and the
smooth transfer of its activities to the GSA. Accordingly Regulation
1942/2006 provided for the GSA to be tasked with taking over the
GJU's responsibilities for supervising implementation of the Galileo
development phase, finalising technological developments relating
to the system, concluding negotiations of the public private partnership
concession contract and preparing for the deployment and operation
phases.
3.4 Following collapse of the public private partnership
negotiations the Transport Council agreed in November 2007 a revised
timetable for Galileo, to be completed by 2013, and for the funding
to come wholly from the Community budget. The Council agreed a
€3.40 billion cap on costs in the Financial Framework to
2013 and confirmed general principles for public sector governance
and the procurement strategy for the programme.
3.5 The subsequent Council Regulation (EC) No. 683/2008:
- foresees the development and
validation phase of Galileo now ending in 2010;
- sets out the strategy for achieving Full Operational
Capability — satellite launch and completion of the entire
Galileo infrastructure — by 2013, with the commercial operating
phase beginning at the end of this period;
- confirms the new funding arrangements;
- addresses issues of programme governance (with
the Commission identified as programme manager) and the procurement
strategy;
- with the Commission being placed in overall control
of the programme, confirms the GSA as a body to provide support
to the Commission;
- provides that, under the direction of the Commission,
the GSA's role is now to assist the Commission on any issue related
to the execution of the Galileo programme, as required; and
- provides for the GSA to retain specific responsibility
for the technical certification, security accreditation, operation
of the Galileo security centre and the market preparation and
commercialisation of the Galileo system.
3.6 This draft Regulation would amend Regulation
1321/2004 in order to ensure that the GSA's management structures
are appropriately revised to reflect the ending of the public
private partnership concept and to ensure that the GSA can perform
its tasks, whilst respecting the Commission's role as overall
manager of Galileo — in effect, it aims to align Regulation
1321/2004 with Regulation 683/2008. The principal amendments proposed
are:
- to change the name of the GSA
to "the GNSS Agency";
- to provide for the authority to be set up as
an agency that would be more analogous to an Executive Agency
of the EU rather than as a Community Agency;[10]
- to confirm the specific tasks of the Agency,
as previously set out in Regulation 683/2008;
- to ensure that it should perform these and any
other tasks entrusted to it under the overall management of the
Commission;
- to revise the voting structure in the GSA Administrative
Board, by providing that in future the Commission's votes would
be weighted in such a way that it would equal that of all the
Member States put together;
- to provide for a representative of the European
Parliament to have observer status on the Administrative Board;
and
- to set out the terms of reference for a proposed
Security Accreditation Committee, which would be chaired by a
non-voting member of the Commission and where there would be qualified
majority voting.
3.7 When we considered this proposal, in June 2009,
we commented that, although it was clearly right that Council
Regulation (EC) No. 1321/2004 be brought into line with Council
Regulation (EC) No. 683/2008, the Government had shown us that
there was considerable room for improving the draft Regulation.
We said that before considering the matter further we wished to
hear about progress in securing such improvement, particularly
in relation to the real, as opposed to the formal, status of the
proposed successor to the GSA (the GNSS Agency), its independence,
the voting structure, the seat of the Agency, a European Parliament
observer and security accreditation. Meanwhile the document remained
under scrutiny.[11]
The Minister's letter
3.8 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Transport (Paul Clark) writes now to tell us of progress in negotiating
this proposal, saying that:
- since April 2009 a number of
Council Working Group meetings have taken place at which the Government
has sought improvements to the text to ensure that the draft Regulation
is one with which it can be satisfied;
- considerable progress in securing a number of
improvements has been made;
- further negotiations will take place at Working
Group meetings during September 2009;
- the Government is hopeful that the outstanding
issues can be resolved in these further meetings, but it is also
possible that some of these will have to be addressed in discussions
at the Transport Council on 9 October 2009;
- at that Council it is highly likely that the
Swedish Presidency will seek to agree a general approach on the
draft Regulation, with a view to seeking a political agreement
at the December 2009 Transport Council;
- the Presidency will actively pursue a first reading
agreement with the European Parliament; and
- the Presidency is keen to secure progress on
the Galileo programme and there is a desire amongst Member States
to assist it and reach agreement as swiftly as possible.
3.9 The Minister reminds us that:
- with the Commission now in
overall control of the Galileo programme the Government had agreed
that it was appropriate to review the functions for the GSA and
that Council Regulation (EC) No. 683/2008 should confirm that
it would henceforward be a body which would provide support to
the Commission;
- the Government fully accepts and supports the
Commission's present aim of bringing the text of Council Regulation
(EC) 1321/2004 into line with the provisions of Regulation (EC)
No. 683/2008, given the substantial changes the latter made to
the finance, governance and procurement procedures for the programme;
- under the direction of the Commission the GSA's
role is now to assist it on any issue related to the execution
of the Galileo programme, as required;
- however the GSA presently retains specific responsibility
for the technical certification, security accreditation, operation
of the Galileo security centre and the market preparation and
commercialisation of the Galileo system; and
- the draft Regulation, which provides for the
proposed successor to the GSA, the GNSS Agency, would further
erode the independence of this body by having the weight of the
Commission's votes on the Administrative Board be equal to that
of all the Member States combined.
3.10 The Minister then says that during negotiations:
- all Member States have supported
the need to safeguard the Commission's position as programme manager
and to ensure it has full control of the Galileo programme;
- views, however, have been divided over the extent
to which this control should be exercised;
- a number of Member States support the Commission's,
whilst others, along with the Government, are keen not to put
in place a structure that would be at such variance with that
which applies on other Community agencies and thereby set an unhelpful
precedent;
- a clear resolution on this issue might not be
possible until the October 2009 Transport Council; and
- a compromise will have to found, but the Government
will aim to ensure that the position adopted will not extend beyond
the voting structures that exist in other agencies or create an
unacceptable precedent.
3.11 On other aspects of the proposed GNSS Agency
the Minister tells us that:
- the Commission and other Member
States have accepted the Government's contention that the ability
of the successor body to provide specialist and un-distracted,
that is arms-length, focus on the system and its commercialisation
needs to be safeguarded — this includes preparing the industry
and marketing the system in preparation for and during the exploitation
phase of Galileo (expected to commence from 2013);
- in the course of the negotiations
the Commission has undertaken to address the role the GNSS Agency
will play in the exploitation phase of the programme when it presents
its mid-term review of the Galileo programme and the governance
structure that will apply after 2013, which is expected to issue
in 2010;
- this assurance has delivered a key aim for the
Government, by ensuring that it remains possible for the agency
to continue to play a clear and useful role in the programme as
it moves forward;
- no discussion on the future location of the GNSS
Agency is expected to take place during the Swedish Presidency
as it does not see it as a priority;
- the Government agrees that this is not a matter
that needs to be resolved at this time as the priority is to progress
the procurement of the system and ensure the majority of the industrial
contracts are signed by the end of 2009, in line with the tight
timetable if Galileo is to be operational by 2013, as currently
envisaged;
- the Government and all other Member States are
unconvinced of the necessity of the proposal for a representative
of the European Parliament to sit on the GNSS Agency Administrative
Board as an observer;
- whilst the Government accepts that the European
Parliament needs to receive full, accurate and timely information
on Galileo to fulfil its obligations as an arm of the Community's
budgetary authority, it already gets this through the Galileo
Inter-Institutional Monitoring Panel;[12]
- the Government is keen, moreover, not to do anything
that would have the effect of confusing the lines of governance
on the programme, as the lack of effective project management
has been a recurring problem with the Galileo programme in the
past; and
- this is a further issue that the Government expects
to remain unresolved until the October 2009 Transport Council
and it may remain an issue during the subsequent discussions with
the European Parliament.
3.12 Recalling that the Government's main concern
with the draft Regulation relates to its security accreditation
provisions, which would establish a new Security Accreditation
Committee, which would be responsible for security accreditation
assurance on the Galileo system and would decide whether the risks
associated with the system are low enough to be acceptable, the
Minister says that:
- the Government has been keen
to ensure that this body would be independent of the other authorities
involved in the governance of Galileo, that is the Commission,
the GNSS Agency, etc, and would be controlled by Member States;
- there are very complex legal issues on this matter,
around the issue of competence;
- the Government has been supported by a number
of Member States and it has been working closely with the Commission
— sometimes on a bilateral basis — to get the text
to a state that will meet its concerns and ensure there is a structure
that will contribute towards system security assurance, whilst
retaining its independence, and remain under Member States' control;
and
- the Commission has been very receptive to the
Government's proposals, as have a number of Member States, and
the Government is confident that its concerns will be sufficiently
addressed for it to be able to agree the relevant security accreditation
provisions in the draft Regulation.
3.13 Finally the Minister says that:
- although issues still remain
to be addressed, the Government believes it has already achieved
success in having a number of its objectives — particularly
on security accreditation — accepted by the Commission and
other Member States and represented in amendments to the text
of the draft Regulation;
- it continues to discuss the outstanding issues,
but given the desire of all parties to reach an early resolution,
the Government believes an agreement will be reached with which
the UK can be satisfied;
- it is therefore likely that the Government will
wish to indicate that it is in favour of the emerging text at
the October 2009 Transport Council, in order to safeguard the
negotiated improvements to the text and to avoid delaying the
programme unnecessarily;
- it will not be possible to give us a definitive
report on the outcome of completed negotiations in time for us
to consider it ahead of that Council meeting;
- given the timetable, the Government wished us,
however, to have the present information so as to allow us to
comment before that Council meeting; and
- the Government can assure us that the its priority
objectives will be met by the terms of this draft Regulation —
it would not otherwise be willing to support it.
Conclusion
3.14 We are grateful to the Minister for his account
of where matters stand on this draft Regulation and we note the
possibility that the Government will wish to support a general
approach on its text at the October 2009 Transport Council. However,
we wish to have a definite report of the negotiations of this
measure before we consider the proposal again and meanwhile the
document remains under scrutiny.
3.15 Nevertheless we recognise that it may be
in the UK interest to support a general agreement at the October
2009 Transport Council on the lines that appears to be within
reach. So, given the Minister's assurance that the Government
will not support a text that does not meet its priority objectives
— the voting structure of the Administrative Board, the
question of an observer role for the European Parliament and the
issue of the Security Accreditation Committee, the Government
may, if appropriate and in accordance with paragraph (3)(b) of
the Scrutiny Reserve Resolution of 17 November 1998, support a
general approach at the forthcoming Transport Council.
6 See http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/About_ESA/SEMW16ARR1F_0.html
and http://www.esa.int/esaNA/index.html. Back
7
(28941) 13113/07: see HC 16-xxiv (2007-08), chapter 10 (18 June
2008). Back
8
See Stg Co Deb, European Standing Committee, cols. 3-40. Back
9
See HC Deb, 2 July 2007, cols. 763-87. Back
10
The EU's agencies are grouped into four different categories -
Community Agencies, Common Foreign and Security Policy Agencies,
Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters Agencies and
Executive Agencies. The Commission describes a Community Agency
as a body governed by European public law, which is distinct from
the Community Institutions (Council, Parliament, Commission, etc.)
and which has its own legal personality. It is set up by an act
of secondary legislation in order to accomplish a very specific
technical, scientific or managerial task, in the framework of
the EU's "first pillar". It says Executive Agencies
are organisations established in accordance with Council Regulation
(EC) No 58/2003 (OJ L 11, 16.1.2003) with a view to being entrusted
with certain tasks relating to the management of one or more Community
programmes. These agencies are set up for a fixed period. Their
location has to be at the seat of the European Commission (Brussels
or Luxembourg). Back
11
See headnote. Back
12
The Galileo Inter-institutional Monitoring Panel (GIP) was set
up by Council Regulation 683/2008 to monitor the Galileo programme
and its financing. The Panel comprises representatives of Parliament,
the Commission and Council, with the aim of being a forum for
sharing information. The Government understands that it has met
once since its formation. Back
|
