Erika III pulls through stormy waters

Last year the Council of Ministers moved against the European Parliament on the strictness of some of the measures. On 4 September 2008, the European Parliament’s Transport Committee voted to adopt five out of the seven proposals on the table but left serious disagreement on the last two, namely, the areas of port inspections and financial liability.

The areas of contention between MEPs and governments included the vessel inspection rate that national authorities would have to meet, with some member states also wanting to exclude vessels calling at offshore anchorages from these requirements.

Their argument was that these measures would generate too many additional costs for them as a flag state, saying that the adherence to IMO rules should be dealt with at IMO level, which leaves them greater discretion. There was also a move to make the EU port ban on substandard vessels only temporary.

Ironically, it was the Maltese who seemed to be putting up the most opposition to the package, with all five of the Maltese MEPs voting against the measures even though the legislation springs from the ecological disaster caused by the ‘Erika’, a Maltese-flagged oil tanker that spilled its oil off the coast of France nine years ago.

At this point the intransigence of the opposing council members pushed the EP to say that it ‘deplores the fact that over a year after its first reading vote in April 2007 on proposals to protect Europe against maritime accidents and pollution, member state transport ministers are still blocking two areas – namely on flag state obligations and civil liability, and have not taken up most of Parliament’s recommendations on the other issues’.

However, on 9 October, the transport ministers finally gave their agreement on the last two proposals of the Erika III package: the proposed directive on flag state requirements and ship owners’ insurance.

Erika III also provides for the establishment of a list of harbours where vessels in distress will be able to seek shelter before running into deeper trouble at sea. The measure is aimed at avoiding another Prestige type disaster, which had unfolded after Spanish authorities had denied that ship in distress entry into a safe harbour. It is suggested that such ships be given a place of refuge after the situation is assessed by an independent authority, free of pressure from local officials excessively nervous about incidents near their coasts.