The independent Inquiry Board (IB) set up following a Galileo programme failure in July recommends that the Commission review the institutional functioning between the European Commission, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the GSA agency responsible for the EGNOS signal and the Galileo programme (in the future, the EU Space Agency), to give the latter more autonomy.
According to a document consulted by EUROPE, on Friday 15 November, the Inquiry Board, made up of independent experts (see EUROPE 12302/10), recommends implementing an action plan structured around 10 recommendations ranging from technical to governance aspects. Among these, experts strongly recommend putting an end to the organizational disorder highlighted by the July blackout (see EUROPE 12299/29).
Because one thing is certain, according to them: “there are too many cooks in the kitchen!” The triangular organisation (European Commission, ESA and GSA) does not work. The chain of command is unclear, there is a dilution of tasks and responsibilities.
“Roughly speaking, today, when there is a problem, the GSA calls the ESA, which in turn calls on the Commission to give the green light, without necessarily having the expertise. Then the ESA consults its engineers to give the GSA the green light so that it can act. And it takes a long time!”, explains one source.
For the Inquiry Board, the GSA, as the service provider, should have “full autonomy and authority” to decide on all actions related to the provision of services, which would be fully in line with the provisions of the Regulation establishing the EU Space Programme.
As a reminder, the legislative file had seriously stumbled at the end of the negotiations, after a sudden and abrupt opposition to the agreement between the co-legislators of the European Commission on the issue of governance (see EUROPE 12207/6).
There is a risk that the Commission may try to circumvent the provisions of the Regulation by renewing the Framework Partnership Agreement between the three institutions, explains one source, reminding us that some members of the European Commission do not necessarily view the loss of control over the programme in a positive light. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)