The European Parliament rejected the second Proposal of the European Commission to regulate market access to port services, with a majority of 532 out of 677 votes. There were 120 votes against rejection and 25 abstentions.
Following the result of the vote, Commissioner Barrot regretted that the European Parliament did not express its opinion on the substance of the amendments and expressed the wish that the Parliament would not lose sight of the motivations behind the Directive Proposal. The Commissioner said that he would present the opinion of Parliament to the College of Commissioners and then decide on further steps. These may include the withdrawal of the Proposal.
In an initial reaction, European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) chairman Giuliano Gallanti said: “We do not consider this as a day of victory as we were never against the idea of an instrument on port services as such. However, it became very clear to us after the vote in the Transport Committee in November that there was no steady political basis for the Directive and the risk was very high that something incoherent and counterproductive would have come out in the end. The fact that the controversial Directive is now off the table gives us the possibility to have a fresh start and look at the development of a more coherent European policy framework for our ports.”
ESPO had already asked the Commission in 2004 to work out a more comprehensive view on European seaport policy and at the time put forward a paper outlining the major themes that should be addressed by it.
“Absolute priority remains the facilitation of port development”, said Gallanti, “if we want our ports to be ready to accommodate the ever-increasing growth in cargo traffic, we must have clear rules on financing of new infrastructure and more legal certainty with regard to the application of environmental rules. It now takes more than ten years before getting clearance on vital infrastructure projects which is simply unacceptable.”
According to Gallanti, a strict regulatory approach should perhaps be dismissed, and alternative solutions considered, such as a code of good practice or interpretative guidelines on the application of the rules of the Treaty. What is important, says Gallanti, is a framework that supports port development, ensures a level playing field and emphasises the role of the port authority.
ESPO strongly recommend that the Commission now starts drafting a White Paper or similar communication on seaports, and ESPO is prepared to offer a platform for discussion with all stakeholders.
The Port of Rotterdam Authority has declared its support for the line sketched by ESPO, and the IFT and TGWU have welcomed the policy rejection.
"Chalk one up to common sense, to committed opposition by trade unions, and to virtually the whole industry uniting in rejection of the package," said Frank Leys, secretary of the ITF Dockers Section. "But even as we congratulate ourselves and thank our colleagues worldwide for their support, we must remain vigilant. You never know when the next attempt to turn the industry on its head may come."
Transport & General Workers Union's national organiser for transport, Graham Stevenson, said: "Today's vote is very welcome, but the MEPs must be asking the Commission why this piece of unwarranted, unwanted and unnecessary horse medicine was put before them again. The T&G and the UK port employers were at one on rejecting the directive in the first place. That alliance was sustained when the Commission tried to push it through a second time. Maybe the EU Commissioners will now get the message."
