«12333/05 PUBLIC 7 NOTE Subject: MONTHLY SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTS JULY 2005 This document contains: – in Annex I, a summary of definitive legislative ...»
COUNCIL OF Brussels, 16 September 2005 (22.09)
THE EUROPEAN UNION (OR. fr)
Subject: MONTHLY SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTS
This document contains:
– in Annex I, a summary of definitive legislative acts adopted by the Council in July 2005.
This is accompanied by statements in the minutes which may be released to the public
(Annex II). The summary also mentions any votes against and abstentions, explanations of vote, and the voting rules applicable;
in Annex III, a list of the other acts 1 adopted by the Council in July 2005, with a reference, – where appropriate, to voting results, explanations of vote and statements which the Council has decided to make public.
This document is also available via the Internet ("http://ue.eu.int"); see under Documents, then "Summary of Council Acts".
It should be noted that only the minutes concerning the definitive adoption of legislative acts are authentic. Extracts from the minutes in question may also be obtained from the Transparency Department ("email@example.com").
With the exception of certain acts of limited scope such as procedural decisions, appointments, decisions of bodies set up by international agreements, specific budgetary decisions, etc.
12333/05 ani/JF/dot 1 EN
DG F III
ANNEX IJULY 2005
DEFINITIVE LEGISLATIVE ACTS TEXTS ADOPTED STATEMENTS EXPLANATIONS AND
VOTING RULES2672nd Council meeting (Economic and Financial Affairs) on 12 July 2005 Council Decision on protecting the euro against 8380/05 Unanimity counterfeiting, by designating Europol as the Central Office for combating euro counterfeiting Council Framework Decision to strengthen the criminal-law 9810/05 77/05, 78/05, 79/05 Unanimity framework for the enforcement of the law against s
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council PE-CONS 3624/05 Qualified majority amending Regulation (EC) No 1177/2003 concerning Community statistics on income and living conditions (EUSILC) Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on PE-CONS 3646/05 81/05 Qualified majority controls of cash entering or leaving the Community Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council PE-CONS 3630/05 Qualified majority amending Council Decision 2001/51/EC establishing a Programme relating to the Community framework strategy on gender equality and Decision No 848/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Community action programme to promote organisations active at European level in the field of equality between men and women
Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council PE-CONS 3636/05 87/05 and 88/05 Qualified majority amending Council Directive 74/408/EEC relating to motor vehicles with regard to the seats, their anchorages and head restraints Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on PE-CONS 3614/05 89/05 Qualified majority conditions for access to the natural gas transmission networks 2673rd meeting of the Council (Economic and Financial Affairs : Budget) on 15 July 2005
2676th meeting of the Council (Agriculture and Fisheries) on 18 July 2005 Council Decision on the accession of the European 7590/05 Unanimity Community to United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Regulation No 94 on provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to the protection of the occupants in the event of a frontal collision and Regulation No 95 on provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to the protection of the occupants in the event of a lateral collision
Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council PE-CONS 3635/05 97/05 Qualified majority amending Council Decision 2000/819/EC on a multiannual programme for enterprise and entrepreneurship, and in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) (2001-2005)
Statement by the Council on the possibility of reviewing the MARPOL 73/78 Convention "The Council invites the Commission to explore the possibility of launching an initiative in the framework of the International Maritime Organisation with a view to having the MARPOL 73/78 Convention reviewed, more particularly its Annexes on Regulations for the prevention of pollution by oil and by noxious liquid substances, and narrowing the scope of exceptions to prohibitions to discharge these products into the sea on the basis of the recent legislation of the EC and the EU on ship-source pollution, and to report to the Council in the course of 2006."
Statement by the Council and the Commission on the alignment of Article 2 of the Framework Decision with the final version of the provisions of Articles 4 and 5 of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements "The Council and the European Commission, recognising the complementary character of the Framework Decision and the need for alignment of its provisions with the provisions of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements, agree to align Article 2 with the final version of the provisions of Articles 4 and 5 of that Directive."
Statement by the Commission on Article 11(3) "When preparing its report to the Council, as contemplated in Article 11(3), the Commission intends to assess the economic impact of any measures it may propose, as well as their impact on the fight against pollution of the sea."
Statement by the Commission "Given the importance of combating ship-source pollution, the Commission is in favour of the discharge of polluting substances by ships being made a criminal offence and of penalties being adopted at national level in the event of the infringement of Community regulations concerning ship-source pollution.
The Commission is, however, of the opinion that the Framework Decision is not the appropriate legal instrument with which to impose on Member States an obligation to criminalise the illicit discharge of polluting substances at sea and to establish corresponding criminal penalties at national level.
The Commission – as it is arguing in the Court of Justice in its appeal C-176/03 against the Framework Decision on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law – considers that, within the competences which it possesses for the purpose of achieving the objectives set out in Article 2 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, the Community is empowered to require Member States to provide for penalties – including, if appropriate, criminal penalties – at national level, where this proves necessary in order to achieve a Community objective.
This is the case with regard to questions of ship-source pollution, for which Article 80(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community constitutes the legal basis.
Pending the ruling on C-176/03, if the Council adopts the Framework Decision in spite of this Community competence, the Commission reserves all the rights conferred upon it by the Treaty."
Statement by the Italian delegation "For some time Italy has had a system of controls of cross-border movements of cash and therefore endorses the spirit and objectives of the proposal for a Regulation.
With regard to the threshold triggering application of the Regulation, Italy would like to make the
– In those Member States which already have national rules on control of movements of cash the thresholds differ. However, in the interests of harmonisation there must be a uniform Community threshold.
– We feel it would be preferable for the threshold for application of the Regulation to be consistent with that laid down in existing Community legislation. The money-laundering Directives, which are closely related to the proposal under discussion, lay down a threshold of EUR 15 000 for application of preventive measures. In order to maintain the uniformity and overall consistency of the Community rules we consider that the same threshold should be used in a future revision of this Regulation.
– Furthermore, the application of differing thresholds might create confusion among citizens, particularly in the case of supplementary rules, or rules seen as such by the citizen."
Statement by the Council on recital 8 and Articles 4 and 5 "The Council agrees that fines should not be insurable and that the issue should be raised in the relevant international forum."
Unilateral statement by Malta on ship-source pollution "Malta agrees with the underlying objective of the Directive to combat ship-source pollution as one of the elements that can damage the marine environment. As an Island State, Malta’s economic and social livelihood is in fact completely dependent upon a healthy and sustainable marine environment.
However, Malta believes that the present Directive is not in consonance with international maritime law. International maritime law would be the most pertinent context within which to stipulate rules regulating an industry, such as the maritime industry, which is global by its very nature. Malta wishes to express solidarity with the maritime industry, which has expressed concerns about the appropriateness of this Directive and the negative effects it will have on European seafaring. At a time when Europe – and the rest of the world – is facing a crisis of seafarer shortage, this Directive and its parallel Framework Decision can only serve to de-motivate further any potential seafarers from taking a maritime career, defeating Community efforts to address this problem in a positive manner.
Malta reiterates its hope that such unilateral action as that constituted by this Directive will not create a precedent that would further undermine the authority of the International Maritime Organisation. It would be a matter of grave concern if international applicability of maritime standards is compromised by third States that choose to ignore international legislation, not out of the readiness to be bound by more stringent rules, but for abusive and manipulative motives. It is important that Europe acts in consonance with its long-standing tradition of respect for the rule of law and defends the principle of applicability of international law on a universal basis particularly with regard to the maritime industry.
Statement by Greece "Greece endorses the aim of the Directive, namely to protect the marine environment, and is particularly interested in seeing it promoted in view of Greece's special geographical situation (extensive coastline and numerous islands) and the particular importance of tourism for its national economy.
Nevertheless, Greece is unable to accept the text of the Directive since its provisions go beyond those in force at international level, which is likely to have an adverse effect on shipping in general.
In particular, Greece considers that the provisions of the Directive making maritime activity and the maritime profession liable to criminal sanctions go further than the provisions of the international MARPOL Convention and are contrary to the international nature of merchant shipping where uniform international rules must apply.
Greece also believes that the legal uncertainty which would arise from implementation of the Directive would lower the level of legal protection afforded to Community seafarers and people engaged in maritime transport generally, and would ultimately create disincentives for young people to take up maritime professions and for young entrepreneurs in the maritime sector of the European Union.
Within that framework and as regards the question of insurance against fines imposed for sea pollution incidents, Greece takes the view, having regard to international insurance practice, that only fines imposed by way of criminal sanctions are not insurable."
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany on recital 10a "The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany considers that the establishment of a European coastguard responsible for both preventing and controlling the consequences of accidents would not be useful, and would prefer enhanced cooperation between EU Member States in these areas to a new European organisation."
Statement by Cyprus "Cyprus supports the general principle and the objectives being pursued by this Directive, namely the imposition of sanctions on all those responsible for ship-source pollution, in an attempt to combat the latter phenomenon and protect the marine environment.
The international nature of the shipping industry means that any legislative provisions must be in line with international rules and in any event controlling pollution by adopting sanctions against those responsible cannot constitute an exception.
Cyprus believes that the amendments made during the examination both of the proposal for a Directive and of the proposal for a Framework Decision diverge from the relevant provisions of the international MARPOL Convention on the prevention and control of pollution.
Because of that divergence, Cyprus would be unable to support the adoption of those provisions and is therefore abstaining from the vote on this Directive.
Furthermore, recognising the importance of insurance cover for the relevant fines and taking into account international marine insurance practice, Cyprus is of the opinion that administrative fines are insurable because they are imposed using criteria different from those on the basis of which the courts impose fines in cases of infringements which are the result of fraud or serious negligence."
Statement by the Italian delegation "Italy welcomes the proposed Directives and wishes their quick adoption.