9 Intra-EU shipping ~
| (35178)
12193/13
COM(13) 510
| Commission Communication: Blue Belt. A single transport area for shipping
|
| Legal base | ¯
|
| Document originated | 8 July 2013
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 12 July 2013
|
| Department | Transport
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 13 August 2013
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| Discussion in Council | Not known
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
9.1 The idea of broad yet cohesive and sustainable maritime policy
outcomes was discussed in the Commission's June 2006 Mid-Term
Review White Paper on Transport Policy Keep Europe moving:
a transport policy for sustainable mobility[23]
and in its October 2007 proposal for a wide-ranging integrated
maritime policy for the EU.[24]
9.2 In its January 2009 Communication Strategic
goals and recommendations for the EU's maritime transport policy
until 2018 the Commission noted the importance of shipping
to the EU's economy and set out its ideas for a maritime transport
strategy for the next nine years. The strategy aimed to promote
EU shipping and related industries which are safe, secure and
environmentally friendly while remaining efficient, adaptable
and globally competitive. In a second Communication, Communication
and action plan with a view to establishing a European maritime
transport space without barriers, the Commission set out its
concept of a EU maritime space without barriers, designed to extend
the single market by simplifying administrative procedures for
intra-EU maritime transport, particularly short sea shipping,
in order to improve the efficiency and competitiveness of this
sector as well as to deliver environmental benefits, and an action
plan to establish such a space.[25]
9.3 Key action 2 of the 2012 Commission Communication
Single Market Act II: Together for new growth called for
the establishment of a true single market for maritime transport
by no longer subjecting EU goods transported between EU seaports
to the administrative and customs formalities that currently apply
to goods arriving from third country ports. To achieve this,
the Commission said it would table a "Blue Belt" package
of legislative and non-legislative initiatives to reduce administrative
burdens for intra-EU shipping to a level comparable to that of
other transport modes (air, rail, and road).[26]
(The term Blue Belt derives from a Commission Communication Blue
Growth: opportunities for marine and sustainable growth, in
which the Commission said that the maritime transport space without
barriers "should be further developed into a 'Blue Belt'
of free maritime movement in and around Europe".)[27]
9.4 Following a Commission, Member State and trade
workshop held in The Hague in January concerning the Single Market
Act II and Blue Belt, the World Shipping Council[28]
developed ideas for a new work item for Blue Belt, known as an
eManifest. It outlined its reasons for requiring the eManifest
as follows:
- to harmonise the data elements
to be included in the manifest and to establish, in EU legislation,
a uniform electronic manifest provision applicable to maritime
transport in all Member States;
- to contribute to eliminating duplicative and
redundant requirements; and
- to use the manifest, rather than the New Computerised
Transit System, as a mechanism for providing proof of EU status
of goods carried by Blue Belt ships.
9.5 The Council's draft proposals are being developed
further in the Commission and are the subject of ongoing discussions
with Member States.
The document
9.6 This Communication sets out the Commission's
ideas for developing the Blue Belt, under which ships could operate
freely within the single market with a minimum of administrative
burden, reducing turn round times in port and thus cutting costs
to shipping businesses. Safety, security, environmental protection
and customs and tax revenues would continue to be ensured by making
optimal use of modern technology to monitor maritime transport
and the cargo concerned. The Commission suggests that the Blue
Belt package should contain two separate measures:
- enhancement of the existing
Regular Shipping Service Scheme (ships which call only at ports
within the EU); and
- use of an "eManifest" to facilitate
the control of cargo carried by vessels which also call at ports
outside the EU.
Enhancement of the Regular Shipping Service (RSS)
Scheme
9.7 RSSs are services which are authorised by the
customs authorities on condition that the service calls only at
ports in the customs territory of the EU. Goods carried on an
RSS are treated in the same way as for goods moved within the
EU by other transport modes. This means that the goods are deemed
to be in free circulation in the EU, unless established otherwise,
and it is not necessary to provide the customs authorities with
proof that these goods have EU status when entering one Member
State after leaving another.
9.8 The shipping industry has expressed concerns
that the current process for authorising an RSS, as laid down
in the Customs Code Implementing Provisions (Commission Regulation
2454/93), is unnecessarily cumbersome and inflexible. Before issuing
an authorisation for a particular RSS, there is a 45-day period
in which the authorising customs authority (in the Member State
where the shipping company is established) has to consult the
customs authorities of the other Member States used by that service.
This consultation is carried out through the use of a common electronic
information and communication system. If, after having been granted
authorisation, the shipping company subsequently wishes to extend
the service to additional Member States, it has to apply for a
new authorisation in order that the customs authorities of the
additional Member States can be consulted.
9.9 The Commission explains that it is currently
seeking, through existing comitology procedures, to facilitate
the authorisation process by:
- reducing the consultation period
from 45 days to 15 days; and
- allowing shipping companies applying for authorisation
to specify in advance any Member States that may be used by the
service in the future as well as those currently used ¯
a shipping company would not then need to
reapply for authorisation if it wanted to modify the service (to
any of the specified Member States) after the authorisation had
been issued.
Development of an electronic cargo manifest (eManifest)
9.10 The Commission reports a Blue Belt pilot project,
which took place in 2011 in cooperation with the European Maritime
Safety Agency (EMSA), involving over 250 vessels. The project
was designed to show how the EMSA's SafeSeaNet traffic monitoring
and information system could support the Blue Belt. The Commission
says that it successfully demonstrated how it could enhance data
provision to customs authorities, but the information provided
did not distinguish between EU and non-EU goods. It comments that
such a distinction is necessary for customs officials to be able
to ensure that non-EU goods are supervised appropriately, while
simultaneously facilitating passage of EU-goods.
9.11 The Commission outlines its intention to move
the Blue Belt initiative forward by allowing non-Regular Shipping
Services to use an electronic cargo manifest, that is an eManifest,
to prove the status of EU goods on board such vessels and, contrary
to current legislation, for these goods to retain their EU status
even when the vessel visits a non-EU port providing they remain
onboard. The Commission says it expects the eManifest to be operational
by June 2015 to align with the implementation date for the Reporting
Formalities Directive,[29]
with which it is linked.
The Government's view
9.12 The Minister of State, Department for Transport
(Mr Simon Burns) first says that the Government supports the moves
to enhance the RSS Scheme and that these changes will improve
the authorisation process by making it faster and more flexible.
He also tells us, on the comitology timetable, that the Commission
has already presented draft ideas for the enhancement of RSS to
the relevant expert committee in Brussels and it is expected that
revised proposals, reflecting the opinion of that committee, will
be presented for adoption in late September.
9.13 Turning to development of an eManifest the Minister
says that:
- discussion about an eManifest
is very much in its infancy and as yet there is no clear understanding
of the exact scope and processes that the Government may be asked
to support;
- the Commission has previously
stated that it would seek to develop a definition of the eManifest,
meeting the requirements of Blue Belt and Single Market Act II
by December, that by July 2014 it will undertake analysis of the
processes to support the use of the eManifest to accommodate customs
requirements and simplifications and that it proposed full implementation
by mid-2015;
- at a Commission eManifest workshop in June it
was agreed that a first phase would concentrate on harmonising
and standardising the requirements for an eManifest across the
EU, which the Government supports;
- no other decisions have been taken regarding
extending the functionality of the eManifest to discharge other
customs requirements such as Proof of Union status;
- indeed the Commission reported to an Electronic
Customs Group IT and legal meeting in early July that further
work was required to confirm the process definitions;
- some Member States, including the UK, expressed
concern that the timeframe proposed was extremely tight and that
no provision had yet been made by Member States to secure resource
and funding for the project;
- the Commission said that the next steps would
be to publish the consolidated conclusions of the June workshop,
to prepare a formal Commission working paper and to organise a
further informal meeting in the autumn;
- the Government still awaits completion of the
first of these steps;
- this Communication appears to pre-empt the discussions
and next steps and sets a timescale for the implementation of
something that is yet to be agreed;
- the Government is content with the idea of agreeing
a common harmonised dataset, but remains concerned that the lack
of clarity around the scope of this proposal risks adding unnecessary
burden to the trade if Member States implement solutions in a
way that does not deliver any anticipated benefits;
- it expects the Commission to undertake its previously
stated next steps of defining a problem statement with identified
scope, business processes and benefits in order to establish a
firm foundation for developing this idea further;
- as no formal requirement or scope is known and
no IT solutions have been considered, lead times for IT development,
including securing resources and funding in respect of a proposed
mid-2015 full implementation, are believed by many Member States,
including the UK to be too ambitious; and
- the Government does not support such a short
timetable.
9.14 The Minister comments that:
- the Government will seek to
get the timetable discussed at Council level, through the Transport
Committee, and to have its concerns reflected in Council conclusions;
- with the support of other Member States the Government
aims to persuade the Commission that no implementation date should
be agreed until the actual scope of the requirement has been finalised;
- it is the interest of all that any implementation
date is realistic and achievable by the carrier industry as well
as the Member States; and
- if the Government is unable to influence Commission
thinking at this stage, it will then work with other Member States
to resist this timetable during formal negotiations on the proposed
legalisation.
9.15 In relation to consultation the Minister comments
that none is considered necessary regarding the enhancement of
the RSS Scheme as the changes will make the authorisation process
quicker and more flexible for shipping services. He also says
that, once there is greater clarity regarding the processes to
be supported by the eManifest, then consultation with trade and
key stakeholders will be required as this has potentially significant
impacts upon systems and processes.
9.16 The Minister tells us that the enhancements
to the RSS Scheme have no financial implications for the EU budget
or for the UK. As for eManifest, he says that:
- the Commission has added it
to an existing project in its Multiannual Strategic Plan, a document
used by Member States for planning purposes that outlines future
changes to IT systems;
- some IT changes to departmental and trade systems
are likely to be required to implement an eManifest, whatever
the scope; but
- since the scope of changes, both legislative
and technological, is still under discussion, a detailed assessment
of the costs cannot be provided yet.
Conclusion
9.17 Whilst the Commission's Blue Belt proposals
themselves seem acceptable, we note the apparently justifiable
concern about the Commission's timetable for introduction of the
eManifest. So we should like to hear about the outcome of the
Government's efforts to have a more reasonable timetable adopted.
Meanwhile the document remains under scrutiny.
23 (27648) 10954/06 + ADD 1: see HC 34-xxxvi (2005-06),
chapter 1 (19 July 2006) and Stg Co Deb, European Standing
Committee, 30 October 2006, cols. 3-20. Back
24
(29068) 14631/07 + ADDs 1-5: see HC 16-viii (2007-08), chapter
2 (16 January 2008) and HC Deb, 3 June 2008, cols. 713-35. Back
25
(30392) 5775/09 (30393) 5779/09: see HC 19-xi (2008-09), chapters
3 and 4 (18 March 2009) and Gen Co Debs, European Committee
A, 11 May 2009, cols. 3-18 Back
26
(34297) 14536/12: see HC 86-xviii (2012-13), chapter 1 (31 October
2012) and Stg Co Debs, European Committee A, 5 December
2012, cols. 3-22. Back
27
(34262) 13908/12: see HC 86-xix (2012-13), chapter 12 (7 November
2012). Back
28
The trade body for liner shipping companies: see http://www.worldshipping.org/. Back
29
(30447) 5789/09 + ADDs 1-3: see HC 19-xi (2008-09), chapter 4
(18 March 2009). Back
|
