4 ESA and the EU
The EU's role in space
30. The Treaty of Lisbon established a legal
basis for the EU to pursue a European space policy.[90]
The EU may therefore "promote joint initiatives, support
research and technological development and coordinate the efforts
needed for the exploration and exploitation of space", and
to do so it should "establish any appropriate relations with
the European Space Agency".[91]
Augusto Gonzalez, Head of Space Policy Unit, European Commission,
told us that "the priority of the European Union is to make
sure that whatever we do in space delivers benefits for citizens".[92]
The EU's presence in the space sector has grown significantly
in recent years, and an estimated €12 billion is expected
to be spent on its space policies from 2014 to 2020.[93]
The EU has three major space programmes:
Galileo, its satellite
navigation programme, Copernicus, an Earth observation programme,
and EGNOS, the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service.[94]
Whilst these are EU programmes, ESA has been tasked with delivering
much of the technical output for these programmes.[95]
A "rapprochement" of
ESA and the EU
31. In its Communication Establishing appropriate
relations between the EU and the European Space Agency[96]
the European Commission outlined five factors it considered to
be "structural obstacles" in its relationship with ESA.[97]
These were:
· "Mismatch
of financial rules": the EU's Financial Regulation requires
procurement for EU programmes to be carried out according to "the
strict principle of best value".[98]
In contrast, ESA operates a policy of geographic return, whereby
the contracts secured by industries in each Member State should
be proportionate to that Member States' contributions to the organisation.[99]
The Commission argues that "this has given rise to difficulties,
particularly whenever programmes are funded through mixed ESA
and EU appropriations".[100]
· "Membership
asymmetry": ESA's membership includes 18 EU Member States
alongside Switzerland and Norway.[101]
Its membership therefore significantly overlaps with, but does
not exactly match, that of the EU. The Commission argues that
as ESA undertakes increasing amounts of work in the delivery of
the EU's space programmes, this asymmetry gives non-EU members
of ESA "disproportionate leverage",[102]
as "member states who are not members of the European Union
can cast a vote and influence a decision-making process on fundamental
matters in EU programmes".[103]
· "Asymmetry
in security and defence matters": the Commission argues that
"in order to contribute towards objectives of the Commons
Security and Defence Policy, the EU has to establish ever closer
and stronger links and synergies between the civil and defence
dimensions of space".[104]
Once more, it argues that the membership "asymmetry"
of ESA and the EU are therefore problematic in a space policy
context.[105] In particular,
Mr Gonzalez highlighted Copernicus and Galileo as programmes which
have "a security dimension".[106]
· "Absence
of mechanisms for policy coordination": cooperation between
ESA and the EU is currently organised through the 2004 EU/ESA
Framework Agreement, rather than through more formal structures.[107]
The Commission argues that because "there is no formal mechanism
at policy level to ensure that initiatives taken within ESA are
consistent with EU policies", "specific mechanisms for
coordination and cooperation need to be agreed in time-consuming
negotiations at programme level".[108]
It believes such negotiations could be avoided with formal agreements
to structure coordination.[109]
· "Missing
political accountability for ESA": the Commission argues
that "the fact that ESA as a European agency has no formal
link with the European Parliament deprives ESA of the direct link
with citizens that any EU policy enjoys".[110]
It therefore supposes that bringing ESA closer to the EU would
make the Agency "directly" accountable to European citizens.[111]
32. As a result of these issues, the Commission
has concluded that:
The need for greater operational efficiency, symmetry
in defence and security matters, political coordination and accountability
can only be resolved, in the long term, through the rapprochement
of ESA towards the European Union.[112]
Three possible forms for such a "rapprochement"
have been put forward. These are: "improved cooperation under
the status quo, bringing ESA as an intergovernmental organisation
under the authority of the European Union [...] or transforming
ESA into an EU agency".[113]
33. We put these "obstacles" to Jean-Jacques
Dordain, Director General, European Space Agency. Whilst acknowledging
that "in the current relationship, there is room for improvement",
he described himself as "not keen for an institutional change".[114]
Indeed, he did "not consider" the five issues raised
by the Commission as obstacles, and explained that ESA's financial
system had already been changed to be consistent with EU regulations.[115]
He dismissed the Commission's difficulties with membership asymmetry,
saying he would "not kick out Switzerland and Norway, because,
frankly speaking, we need Switzerland and Norway".[116]
He also dismissed the Commission's concerns about cooperation
on defence and security matters.[117]
ESA stated that the "optimum" resolution to the Commission's
concerns "would be one which most effectively maintains the
strengths of the ESA system while significantly improving the
efficiency of its relationship with the EU".[118]
34. We heard widespread scepticism regarding
the Commission's proposals, which echoed the concerns of ESA's
Director General. For example, UKspace stated that the EU should
"avoid imposing modifications on the successful ESA model"
as "ESA and the EU can work well together with distinct and
complementary roles";[119]
the National Oceanography Centre stated that the rapprochement
"does not seem desirable, since it will undoubtedly disrupt
ESA's ability to deliver";[120]
Mullard Space Science Laboratory stated that it seemed "unlikely
that oversight by the EU would in any way increase operational
efficiency";[121]
Professor David Southwood stated that the Commission's proposals
"seem rather one size fits all";[122]
and the UK Space Agency stated that "the strategic obstacles
set out by the Commission are over-stated, though there are some
issues that need to be addressed".[123]
David Parker told us that:
We have not seen the rationale for why there
would be any benefits in transferring the European Space Agency
lock, stock and barrel to the European Union. ESA has a very effective
relationship with the science community; it works, so there is
nothing particularly to be improved there. It has an effective
working relationship with industry in developing commercial technology,
so we don't see there is anything to be gained. Where the European
Union can really make a contribution is at the high political
and policy level of supporting relationships in space activities
between Europe and, for example, free trade discussions, perhaps
with the United States, and also investing in space infrastructure
where they support European Union policies. Those are the directions
in which we would like to see the European Union's involvement
in space head off.[124]
35. The Minister told us that he thought the
Commission's concerns were "misplaced" and "they
were trying to invent problems that were not there".[125]
When questioned on the proposals, he stated:
The Commission seems to suggest that transforming
ESA into an EU agency might be necessary to make it easier to
manage EU funds through delegations to ESA. We believe that instead
we should focus on what is best for growth and science, rather
than tidy-mindedness. ESA has served our space sector well as
an independent intergovernmental organisation. In preliminary
discussions in both the EU and ESA, several member states, notably
the UK and Germany, have arrived at the view that there is no
obvious case for ESA to become an agency of the EU. There are
legitimate questions about how it can work better with the EU.
It gets about a quarter of its funding from the EU and sometimes
it acts as an agent for the EU, as it is commissioned to carry
out work and deliver programmes such as Galileo. There are issues
about different auditing and funding rules, which can be tidied
up, but it is not obvious that the solution to such problems is
to go as far as ESA becoming an EU agency.[126]
36. We instead heard an alternative view for
how the relationship between ESA and the EU should develop. Jean-Jacques
Dordain set out explicitly what he hoped for from the EU as follows:
I consider that the EU is the world of the European
citizen, while ESA is the space world. I am not expecting, let
me put it this way, the Commission to explain to me how we make
a satellite. We know how to make a satellite. What I am expecting
from the European Commission is for it to tell me which of the
European policies can benefit from space infrastructure. There
are a lot, starting with-I am French-the agricultural policy,
but also the environment, security and development policies can
all benefit from space infrastructure. I need the European Commission.
I need a guide. I am not a specialist in agriculture or security.
This is what I am expecting from the EU. Again, I am not expecting
from it satellites-we know how to make satellites-but I am expecting
from it to describe the demand of European policies that can benefit
from space infrastructure.[127]
The Minister appeared to agree with this assessment,
stating that "the EU can use ESA to deliver EU programmes
and be a downstream customer, building up the use of ESA technology".[128]
37. The Commission's proposals are scheduled
for discussion at the next ESA ministerial council meeting, where
the Minister will be involved in putting together ESA's strategy
for how it should interact with the EU.[129]
The EU will be an important player in the space sector over
the coming years. However, its role is distinct from that of the
European Space Agency (ESA). ESA has specific strengths made possible
through its current structure and organisation. Rather than seeking
to oversee ESA's work, the EU should focus on developing its role
as a policymaker and customer for space services, leaving ESA
to act as a technical or design authority. We recommend that
the Government resists attempts by the European Commission to
bring the European Space Agency under its control. We also recommend
that Sir Mark Walport, Government Chief Scientific Adviser, raises
the scientific rationale behind this recommendation with Professor
Anne Glover, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the President of
the European Commission.
90 http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/lisbon_treaty/ai0027_en.htm
and Q 69 Q 73 This competence is shared with Member States (Q
131) Back
91
http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-the-functioning-of-the-european-union-and-comments/part-3-union-policies-and-internal-actions/title-xix-research-and-technological-development-and-space/477-article-189.html Back
92
Q 69 [Augusto Gonzalez] Back
93
Q 73 [Augusto Gonzalez] Back
94
Q 69 [Augusto Gonzalez] Back
95
Q 73, Q 74 [Augusto Gonzalez] Back
96
Establishing appropriate relations between the EU and the European
Space Agency, COM (2012) 671, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0671:FIN:EN:PDF
Back
97
COM (2012) 671 p3 Back
98
COM (2012) 671 p3 Back
99
Ev 70, para 5.3 Back
100
COM (2012) 671 p3 Back
101
Ev 67, para 1.1 Back
102
COM (2012) 671 p3 Back
103
Q 78 [Augusto Gonzalez] Back
104
COM (2012) 671 p3 Back
105
COM (2012) 671 p3 Back
106
Q 78 [Augusto Gonzalez] Back
107
Ev 69, para 2.3 Back
108
COM (2012) 671 p4 Back
109
COM (2012) 671 p4 Back
110
COM (2012) 671 p4 Back
111
Q 78 [Augusto Gonzalez] Back
112
COM (2012) 671 p4 Back
113
COM (2012) 671 p4 Back
114
Q 102 [Jean-Jacques Dordain] Back
115
Q 104 [Jean-Jacques Dordain] Back
116
Q 105 [Jean-Jacques Dordain] Back
117
Q 104 [Jean-Jacques Dordain] Back
118
Ev 70, para 2.8 Back
119
Ev 57, para 0.5, para 2.2 Back
120
Ev w6, para 2.2 Back
121
Ev 52, para 2.1 Back
122
Ev 48, para 7 Back
123
Ev 81,para 34 Back
124
Q 134 [David Parker] Back
125
Q 173 [Rt Hon David Willetts MP] Back
126
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmgeneral/euro/130211/130211s01.htm Back
127
Q 102 [Jean-Jacques Dordain] Back
128
Q 173 [Rt Hon David Willetts MP] Back
129
Q 19 [Professor Holdaway] Back
| 
