Brussels, 13/06/2007 (Agence Europe) - Answering questions put to him by Agence France Presse on Monday 11 June, François Auque, who is the CEO of EADS Astrium, the space subsidiary of the aeronautics defence group and one of the members of the private consortium that is to set Galileo in place, expressed his concern about the project's future. In his view, the stalled talks between the Transport Council and the private sector on 8 June, and the resumption of the construction phase by the public sector according to the Commission's wishes, could rekindle hostility on the industrial level between member states, giving rise to new conflicts.
Interviewed by AFP, Mr Auque noted that the Brussels decision puts an end to the “difficult compromise” reached in 2005. “The consortium of industrial concessionaries is dead, but for now the financing has not been found”, he said, going on to point out: “That means that this is a risky time, that the new system is not assured”.
Further to the decision by the Transport Council, the Commission has until September this year to submit detailed financing, acquisition, management and governance proposals to the Council for Galileo (see EUROPE 9442). However, in a joint statement adopted after the Council, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom recalled the Council's decision of March 2002 whereby all additional Galileo financing from the public sector should be ensured by redeployment within the limits of the ceilings agreed in this respect in the financial perspectives which will be in force at that time. The two countries nonetheless took a stance in favour of public-private partnership for “major infrastructure projects, including satellite applications and services, where the projects provide best value for money”. They spoke of their fear that “public acquisition of the Galileo system” could “increase rather than reduce” the cost and the risk for the Community budget. When it comes to the “new member states”, the Polish delegation affirmed in the 8 June declaration that “the most profitable option is to continue rapidly with the programme as any further delays would cause a significant rise in costs and a weakening of competitiveness compared to rival satellite navigation systems”. (aby)