In the middle of the night between Tuesday 15 and Wednesday 16 December, the European Parliament and the German Presidency of the EU Council reached agreement on the Regulation establishing the EU space programme, which clarifies the participation of non-Member States in the programme, but also relaxes the limitation of the programme’s duration and preserves an important role for the European Commission.
The agreement will promote a “strong role” for the EU in space, which will support the competitiveness of European companies and guarantee European strategic autonomy, said Italian rapporteur Massimiliano Salini (EPP) on Twitter. “Thanks to the successful conclusion of the trilogue, we ensure the continuity of the EU space programme, stable governance and an ambitious budget” (although far from the ambitions of the European Parliament - see EUROPE 12533/6) to “invest in technological innovation”, he added on Twitter.
Thus, with regard to Article 25, which deals with the conditions of eligibility for participation, it is the mandate of the EU Council that has been retained. It will therefore be up to the European Commission to define the eligibility conditions for companies from non-Member States, but always in conjunction with the competent national agencies. The European Commission will therefore have control over the decisions taken, but will still be accountable to the agencies (see EUROPE 12592/21).
As for Article 7, which deals with the participation of non-Member States, it is the rewording proposed by Parliament that has been retained (see EUROPE 12623/10), and the EU Council’s wording for Article 8. In substance, the co-legislators are tightening the participation of non-Member States in the programme, in particular for the GovSatCom (Government Satellite Communications Project), PRS (Public Regulated Service) and SSA space surveillance and monitoring of objects in orbit. As a reminder, the German Presidency wanted for a while to allow the United Kingdom to continue to participate in certain programmes after Brexit (see EUROPE 12420/5).
For the French MEP and shadow rapporteur for Renew Europe Christophe Grudler, one of the Parliament’s great victories is the fact that the programme is not limited in time to strict dates. “It is a long-term investment, so it cannot be said that everything stops on 31 December 2027 if there is no agreement on the next Multiannual Financial Framework, for example. It would be unacceptable to call into question the EUSPA [the future EU Space Programme Agency, editor’s note], the Galileo PRS”, he explained.
Thus, as the European Parliament had wanted in the first Article of the Regulation (see EUROPE 12623/10), the duration of the programme remains linked to the Multiannual Financial Framework, but the fixed dates, as proposed by the German Presidency, are no longer included in the text. In addition, a sentence in the recitals has been added to clarify that the future EU Space Programme Agency (EUSPA) is not subject to this time limitation.
Parliamentary defeat on the delegated acts front
On the other hand, the European Parliament did not win its case on delegated acts, in particular on the thorny issue of the Financial Framework Partnership Agreement (FFPA) (Article 31a(2)) between the European Commission and the European Space Agency (ESA), a dossier which is still pending (see EUROPE 12606/6). Here, the European Commission was absolutely against this possibility, several sources tell us.
One source explains that the European Parliament’s objective was to obtain more transparency and not to allow the European Parliament to use the right of veto provided for in the delegated act - a power which, moreover, the Parliament almost never uses, except on environmental matters, we are assured. The co-legislators therefore agreed to include in the body of the article itself that the European Parliament and the EU Council must be kept “fully” informed “well in advance” of the conclusion of the FFPA and its implementation.
The European Parliament also failed to obtain the delegated act in the event of a financial transfer between programmes (Copernicus, Galileo, GovSatCom, etc.) exceeding 7.5%. From a legal point of view, we are told that the sums involved would not have been large enough for the European Parliament to be able to invoke a delegated act.
Similarly, the Parliament’s request for a delegated act on work programmes was rejected. Here too, the Commission was particularly opposed, while the German Presidency seemed more flexible, to the surprise of some, given the latter’s attitude during the working group negotiations (see EUROPE 12566/8, 12578/7).
A “bizarre” European Commission
On this dossier, the European Commission is said to have adopted a particularly inflexible, “bizarre” position on this issue, confides one source, even making some people doubt its status as an “honest broker”.
The European Commission had already seriously disrupted negotiations during the previous mandate by refusing to support an Interinstitutional Agreement because of sub-delegated acts. So much so, that the then European Parliament President Antonio Tajani had taken a stand against the European Commission (see EUROPE 12205/3).
The next steps are unclear. The German Presidency is expected to rapidly present the Interinstitutional Agreement to the Member States in the Committee of Permanent Representatives I (Coreper I). On the European Parliament side, views differ: some mention a fast-track vote in the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) as early as this week, others say that this vote will only take place at the next committee meeting in mid-January. Final adoption could take place in February. See the agreement: https://bit.ly/2WjpOKX (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)