Brussels, 06/11/2013 (Agence Europe) - The draft review of rules on port services seeks to boost competition between European ports and ensure financial transparency. On Tuesday 5 November, it was debated for the first time at the Parliamentary committee on transport and tourism. This debate, however, did nothing to dissipate fears that the proposal will be rejected. Representatives from various major European ports presented MEPs with their points of view, which, it must be said, were rarely encouraging.
The group representing the main European ports (UKMPG), a mainly private body, thinks that the Commission proposal does not introduce anything positive or crucial and it is calling for rejection, lock stock and barrel. The concerns of its members focus on EU interference, together with more red tape and uncertainties regarding the level of costs and consequent investor discouragement. First and foremost, the impact on public contracts and concessions must be assessed. The representative of the biggest port in Europe, Rotterdam, said that any kind of state support system that has a negative impact on competition between ports must be removed. He also attacked a European system that is over-prescriptive and over-regulated and therefore believes that a monitoring organisation is not necessary. The ports criticise the “straitjacket” that this regulation could impose.
The representative from the Italian port of Venice was much less categorical and said that common rules should be elaborated at a European level, covering all port services and introducing a ceiling on their prices. He believed that a European monitoring organisation should be put in place, but that it should adapt its decisions to specific local contexts.
The Finnish representative said that regulation could suit his country's ports if it remained flexible but that, for this, it should not be too detailed so that it does not create problems for small ports, “the less we introduce, the better it will be!”
Taking stock of the different ideas expressed, the rapporteur, Knut Fleckenstein (S&D, Germany), will present his draft report on 26 November. Fleckenstein has not ruled out the idea of reducing the scope of the proposal by excluding dredging, pilot, passenger and freight services. Consequently, as the chairman of the TRAN committee, Brian Simpson (S&D, United Kingdom), cleverly summed up, was it possible to amend this proposal? He asked whether it was possible to improve it or should it be rejected. Parliament has already twice in the past taken such action on port packages. (MD/transl.fl)