1. The impact of the EU on Japanese shipping
Presentation to INTERTANKO’s members in Japan
By Ketil Djonne, advisor to INTERTANKO in Brussels

2. How does Brussels have an impact on Japanese interests?
Firstly, there is a direct effect on Japanese vessels when calling at European ports since there is a growing tendency in Europe to make European rules applicable to all flags through Port State Control
Secondly, the EU has an indirect impact on Japanese shipping through its increasing influence on international rulemaking particularly in the IMO
Thirdly, the EU has an influence on the competitivness of Japan’s European based competitors through it control of tonnage tax schemes etc.
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

3. The “Erika” accident increased Brussels presence in shipping.
Focus on:
Year 2000
Lack of flag state implementation
Inadequate class response and control
Lack of transparency
Double standards with charterers
An international system with agreed rules but
serious lack of implementation and control
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

4. is a place for INTERTANKO to be..
I can see a growing
importance for
the EU!
No doubt - Brussels
is a place for INTERTANKO to be..

5. In the wake of the Erika (early 2000), INTERTANKO’s mission was: Avoid a European repetition of post-Exxon Valdez! Secure support for international rules!
Good INTERTANKO network in Brussels already before the accident happened (first chairman visit in 1993, Brussels tanker event in 1998)
Chairman W.Hoegh immediately met Commission Vice President de Palacio (Jan. 2000)
Close co-operation with Commission in initial phase in order to have a dialogue on the input behind the proposals to come
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

6. Brussels politics: The three main decisionmakers
Commission
(Propose and monitor
implementation)
ECJ
Commission
Court
European
Parliament
(Opinion & Veto)
Council
(Decides and
implements)
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

7. Interacting with the Commission
Loyola de Palacio
(Margaritis Schinas)
Commissioner for Transport and Energy Policy
Francois Lamoureux
Director General
Fotis Karamitsos
Director for maritime policy
Willem de Ruiter Jean. Trestour Wolfgang Elsner
Unit staff members
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

8. Erika I
Proposal for an EU Regulation on (regional) phasing out of single hull tankers
Proposal for radical amendments in the EU directive on Port State Control
Proposal for radical amendments to the EU directive on Licensing of Class
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

9. Erika II
Proposal for a new EU Directive on Monitoring & Reporting of maritime traffic
Proposal for EU Regulation establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency
Proposal for a European third layer of oil pollution compensation (“COPE”) and a “wish-list” for future changes to the IOPC/CLC system
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

10. INTERTANKO’s priorities
Encourage international rules (phase-out, COPE, VDR)
Ensure long-term EU support for the IMO
Oppose any erosion of the power of the ship master
Promote transparency on charterer in PSC-data
Promote places of refuge
Avoid inclusion of shipping in the directive on liability for restoration of environmental damage
Generally improve the standing of the tanker industry in Brussels
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

11. “Political Agreement”
EU “Co-decision”
Com
Com EP
Council
Preparation
Initiative EP
“Pre Decision”
Formal
Proposal
“Political Agreement”
&
“Common Position” EP
opinion
“First Reading”
EP approves
or rejects
“Second Reading”
Commission
withdraws
Council
adopts
“Conciliation”
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

12. The keys for INTERTANKO influence Brussels
A good understanding of the system
Recognised as a credible partner
Can provide valuable input from industry also in Asia
The ability to get in early
The ability to be reliable and long term
The ability to prioritise and to “steer rather than obstruct”
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

13. Numerous discussions and position papers...
Chairman Lars Carlsson meets De Palacio again in June 2001
Position papers and numerous written input
Co-operation with ECSA, ICS and others
Chairman, other INTERTANKO members and staff meet all EP spokesmen + other MEPs, Commission officials and not the least Member State’s officials frequently and regularly in order to put across the views of the international tanker industry
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

14. In dialogue... MEP Theo Bouwman EP Green coordinator MEP Dirk Sterckx,
”Monitoring
& Reporting
EP Committee. Chairman Konstantinos
Hatzidakis
MEP Mark Watts
”Port state control, VDR”
INTERTANKO
Chairman & staff
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

15. Erika I package adopted December 2001
Regulation No 417/2002 on the phasing out of single hull tankers. Implementation in conformity with MARPOL 13G
Directive 106/2001 on Port State Control. Implementation in Member States by 22 July 2003
Directive 2001/105 on licensing of “recognised organisations”. (Class Directive) Implementation in Member States by 22 July 2003.
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

16. 2/3 of Erika II package adopted in June 2002
Directive 2002/59 on Monitoring & Reporting of maritime traffic
Compulsory VDR by 2007/2008 at the latest
Compulsory AIS for tankers at first survey after
Coordinated, and adequately equipped, system of places of refuge in Europe by Feb. 2004
A electronically based reporting, monitoring and data surveillance system for ships entering or passing EU waters by end of 2008
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

17. Erika II package adopted in June 2002
Establishment of EMSA with a “mandate” to assist Member States and Commission in
Updating EU legislation on maritime safety and pollution
Implementing maritime safety and pollution legislation
Training of port state and flag state officials
Facilitating EU-wide co-operation in maritime accident investigation
Provision of objective, reliable and comparable information on maritime safety
Providing technical assistance to new Member States
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

18. So, what has been achieved?
“Phase-out” moved from EU to IMO
Retrofitting of VDR partly moved from EU to IMO
Third layer “COPE” moved from EU to IOPC
“Weather ban” from bad to acceptable
“Port of refuge” obligation imposed on governments
Naming of charterer in PSC detention data
Shipping exempted from environmental damage directive
The need to take a global approach to air pollution broadly accepted
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

19. What’s next? Implementation of Erika regulations
PSC, Licensing of class, phase-out, monitoring, PRF
A shift from maritime safety to (horizontal) environmental issues
Environmental liability issues
Air pollution from sea going vessels
Consolidation of EU role in global maritime politics
EU membership of the IMO and the establishment of the European Maritime safety Agency (EMSA)
Co-ordination of EU reactions to US security initiatives
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

20. Brussels The main ”players”
Commission
(The executive)
ECJ
Commission
Court
European
Parliament
(Direct election)
Council
(Member States)
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

21. Erika I: The remaining issue of liability
Proposal for a European third layer of oil pollution compensation (COPE) and a “wish-list” for future changes to IOPC/CLC system
Annex to IOPC close to adoption
Amended Commission proposal from June 2002
The other issues (distribution of financial contributions, the limitation rights, criminal fines)
Liability for restoration of environmental liability (relationship with IOPC, HNS, Bunkers)
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

22. INTERTANKO: Goal & Strategy
Safeguard the international system of IOPC and CLC
Retain current sharing of financial responsibility
Avoid introduction of liability for restauration of environmental damage in Europe
Work closely with P&I, ITOPF, ICS and others to demonstrate for European decision makers that the current international system should be preserved
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

23. Air pollution
Under the EU’s air emissions policy, land-based sources have substantially reduced their air emissions.
Now the focus turns to shipping.
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

24. EU Commission on air pollution
Communication on air pollution strategy to be presented end of 2002:
1.5% sulphur cap on fuel in EU territorial waters by
Amendment of EU directive 99/32 on sulphur in heavy fuel. Focus on use of 0.2% in ports
Special regime for ferries
EU Member States ratification of MARPOL Annex VI
The future: NOx, VOC, climat gases?
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

25. INTERTANKO: Goal & Strategy
To encourage ratification/implementation of Annex VI
To limit European rules on 1.5% in HFO to IMO SECA areas
To encourage abolition of 0.2% cap on MDO under Directive 99/32 – or to limit 0.2% to use in ports
To seek exemptions for fuel utilised for tankers’ main engines whilst in ports
To inform decision-makers on practical realities and to build alliances
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

26. EU membership of the IMO?
• Commission Recommendation to the Council
• Currently the Commission has observer status but can not speak or vote
• Strong legal arguments in favour but resistance amongst EU Member States
• Better coordination NOW is the key objective, especially on security issues
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

27. INTERTANKO: Goal & Strategy
Encourage active EU support for the IMO
Avoid a “regionalisation” of IMO
Work closely with EMSA in order to ensure continued support for a European global approach to regulatory affairs
Work closely with EMSA on implementation of the Erika-decisions in order to secure efficient, smooth and fair implementation for international tanker operators
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

28. Maritime security The US is acting on many levels:
ILO
• IMO
OECD
Multilateral
CSI
C-TPAT
Bilateral
ADVANCE
NOTICE
24 H. RULE
SHORE
LEAVE
Unilateral
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

29. EU Maritime Security Policy: From Reaction to Action
In December 2002 the Commission will present two Communications.
A Communication on maritime security which will include:
An EU regulation making the IMO agreement mandatory under EU legislation.
An EU Directive on Seafarers ID.
• The Communication will also address the issues of:
Possible government guarantees for terrorist insurance.
An EU programme for port & terminal security
A possible coordinating role for EMSA in the field of maritime security
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

30. EU Maritime Security Policy (Cont.)
A second Communication on EU external border control. This will examine the following issues:
Possible EU routines for controlling people and cargoes in ports.
The results of the EU-US customs negotiations on CSI and cargo-manifest rules as well as other transparency and information exchange rules.
A joint EU police commando, trained and ready to intervene on-board vessels and also in international waters.
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

31. Conclusions (I)
Throughout the Erika debate INTERTANKO has fought regional initiatives and turned most of these into sensible solutions to the benefit of the Japanese tanker industry
Europe, not the least the Commission and the Parliament, have come a long way in accepting the role of the IMO
The EU has gained “self-confidence”, however, and EMSA will develop this further. EMSA will therefore become a key partner for INTERTANKO
The shift of focus to broader environmental issues creates new challenges for the tanker industry.
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

32. Conclusion (2)
• The EU will continue to exert its influence on the world stage by increasing its activity in the IMO. This development should not be seen as a threat only, INTERTANKO can also make use of the EU’s bargaining power.
• The EU will also increase its contribution to global maritime regulations by making IMO maritime security rules mandatory EU legislation.
• With the advent of EMSA, and of better coordination within the IMO, the EU’s importance for Japanese shipping will increase.
Japan and INTERTANKO need to be active in EU
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo

33. The future ”Triangle of power” in shipping politics?
Japan
USA EU
18/09/2018
INTERTANKO in Tokyo