BTJ 3/2008 - Baltic Transport Journal

This would have left the ports governed
by the basic principles of the
Treaty and secondary legislation.
The essential question was
whether it was in the interest of the
ports to be subject to an incoherent
patchwork of jurisprudence and legislation
which often demonstrated contradictions, the
conflicting objectives of the EU transport and
environmental policy being a case in point.
Beyond the traditional context
Already in 2004, ESPO made a plea for a
thorough reflection of the priorities to a European
seaport policy, expressing the need for a
coherent framework within a broad perspective
focusing on the main challenges of the port sector.
The time for such a profound discussion only
became pertinent after the failure of the second
Directive proposal. Several factors helped to
bring the debate back on its feet. First there was
the determination of Transport Commissioner
Jacques Barrot to restore a climate of confidence
after the traumatic experience of the Directive.
Second the Commission had launched a process
to develop a comprehensive and integrated
maritime policy which would inevitably cover
ports. Finally there came a proposal from ESPO
to organize a wide-ranging stakeholders consultation
on the principal themes and challenges
to the European ports’ policy. The latter two
broadened the scope of the debate beyond the
traditional transport policy context.
Between June 2006 and June 2007, a stakeholder
consultation process was held which
consisted of two conferences and six thematic
workshops. This resulted in adopting the communication
policy on European ports by the
Commission on 18 October 2007. The communication
resorts to the Commission’s integrated
maritime policy and forms part of
its freight transport agenda, which were both
adopted around the same time.
Balanced picture reflected
The Commission’s new communication
is based on an overview of the general challenges
to the European ports’ system. These include
the demand for international transport,
technological change, emissions and climate
Maritime
A new policy for the European seaports
No traffic flow reorientation
Following the failure of the second port services’ Directive in
2006, it looked for a while as though the prospect of a European
ports’ policy was definitely off the table.
change, dialogue between the ports, cities and
stakeholders and, finally, reconciliation with
transparency, competition and, in general, the
Community’s set of rules.
The communication’s actual policy proposals
generally consist of a mixture in interpreting
the Treaty rules and an action plan
with further measures and instruments, which
are mostly of a “soft law” nature, i.e., which are
not legally binding but have certain indirect
legal effects and aiming to produce practical
effects. These relate to the following areas:
port performance and hinterland connections,
expanding capacity while respecting the environment,
modernisation, a level playing field
– clarity for investors, operators and users, establishing
a structured dialogue between the
ports and cities and, finally, work in ports.
ESPO has given a positive response to the
Commission’s communication. We believe the
new policy generally reflects the balanced picture
that emerged from the stakeholders consultation.
We have also welcomed the broad perspective
of the communication which included
topics such as capacity expansion and port-city
relations, which were never thoroughly discussed
at a European level despite their vital importance
for many ports on the continent. ESPO
agrees with the general focus of the communication
on soft law measures and instruments,
which complement the diversity of European
ports better than stringent legislation.
Let the market find its solutions
In this respect, we especially appreciate the
Commission’s recognition of the pivotal role of
port authorities, notably with regard to the use
of concessions. Defined in a broad sense, concessions
are very useful governance instruments for
public landlord port authorities and often the
only tools they have at their disposal to protect
the legitimate interests of their ports. The interpretation
given by the Commission broadly
corresponds to the principles we believe port
authorities should apply when granting concessions,
i.e., in regard to selection criteria, durations
as well as performance, and ownership clauses.
ESPO is currently undertaking a study on how
European port authorities are using concession
instruments. The results will be presented at our
annual conference to be held in Hamburg on
Patrick Verhoeven is the Secretary General,
the European Seaports Organisation
(ESPO).
May 29-30, 2008. The results may lead to further
comments and initiatives at a later stage.
ESPO has also welcomed the fact that the
Commission is not seeking to develop measures
which would alter the distribution of traffic across
Europe. The market, in combination with policies
of regional and national authorities, is largely capable
of finding its own solutions. The European
port scene is indeed becoming more diverse in
terms of the number of ports involved along with
the scope of port functions and services which, in
turn, are leading to more routing options for shippers.
It is our belief that the Commission should
refrain, now and in future, from any interventionist
policies which, directly or indirectly, aim at reorienting
traffic flows in Europe.
Finally, we look forward to continuing the
constructive dialog with the services of the Commission
and other stakeholder organizations on
the instruments and measures which are announced
in the communication. ESPO is particularly
interested in contributing to the guidelines
on the application of Community environmental
legislation to port development and State aid
guidelines.
Patrick Verhoeven
Find more on this
topic at TOC Europe
Conference,
17-19 June in Amsterdam,
where
Mr Verhoeven will
be a panelist in the
plenary session: The Outlook for Europe.
3/2008 | Baltic Transport Journal | 17