Over the last few years several studies and opinions have been established about a ‘European Coastguard’.

The concept of a coordinated, EU - wide coastguard agency has significant value, not least through its ability to provide consistent levels of service in areas such as search and rescue facilities, pollution prevention, places of refuge and drug enforcement.

It is not a simple question / answer issue of :

1. how to tackle the item and,
   
   
2. how to establish / implement one, for the simple reason that the structure of the European Union is quite complex as such, with 25 member states of which 19 have a coastline, apart of the difference in culture, language and tradition and last but not least traditional relationships with either the Continental legal system, or the Anglo-Saxon principles.

• Some countries are anxious to retain their own competence in the maritime environment and are reluctant to hand such responsibilities over to Brussels. It is also argued that there is such a variety among the 25 member nations that a “one size fits all” approach is not suitable.
• The EU has always been very keen on making laws, directives, rules and regulations, but often lacks execution resolutions or directives which implement these in the national legislation of the Member States.
• Traditional maritime nations, in particular, see little virtue in their own administration being replaced in Brussels although many would concede that smaller, weaker maritime administrations might gain from a more centralised policy. This argument will remain alive for some time yet.
• Although the EU Constitution was rejected by two important founding members of the Union last year, the EU as a large Organisation has an enormous amount of laws, declarations, treaties, conventions , not in the least those , which comply with IMO, IALA, SOLAS, etc, in order to start a preliminary ECG.
• By starting with bi-lateral agreements on the "local" / regional level, such as : monitoring traffic, applying e.g. the Schengen agreements on police and law –enforcement and cross-border assistance and "hot-pursuit", this might form an important basis for a EUCG. We have to keep in mind that the EU started off with first BLEU, then Benelux, EUCS, then the EEC with 6 members, only in 1973 to be extended to 9 members , in 1983 to 12 members , later 15 , and since 2004 with 25.
  The first EEC treaty (Rome 1957) was systematically enlarged. Imposing everything in a short period of time from EU HQ in Brussels would probably take longer then letting the regions prepare their parts (using and developing existing laws, agreements etc).
• The political conditions for cooperation are emerging and the Charter will probably emphasise a "building-block" method by which cooperation can begin at low levels, perhaps bilaterally or sub-regionally in recognition of the diversities that inhibit multilateralism.
• The maritime cooperation envisaged in this paper would also conform to the European Maritime Policies global and consensual approach to security, so as to avoid direct challenges to the core political interests of its member states.

A way of integrating a future EU Coastguard might be to continue working in a modest local way of extending/ integrating the existing coastguards. As an example of a Joint Command Structure one can take the "Admiral Benelux", which is a joint command structure for as well the RNL Navy as the Belgian Navy, at least for a part of their fleet (all within the NATO alliance). In several ways the Coastguards as well as the Navies and the VTS centres, and certainly the N.R.C.C.s work closely together in several parts of the EU. (e.g. Bonn Agreements and their extensions). A cluster has been established from several groups of countries, (as an extension of the Bonn agreement, the Hamburg agreement and several other agreements) in e.g.:

• The Southern North Sea and the Entrance to the English Channel. UK / French / Belgian collaboration).
• The North Sea, (Dutch/German/UK collaboration).
• Scandinavia (Skagerak, Kattegat, Belt and Sund (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Germany,) and Sweden.
• The new Baltic States of the EU for the Eastern Part of the Baltic sea with Finland, Sweden and Poland.
• In the Southern part of the EU there is a close collaboration between France / Spain / Portugal and Italy /Malta/ Greece as well as Greece/Cyprus.

This could be in accordance with the Territorial Co-operation program 2007 – 2013 of The European Commission and the objectives and approaches on interregional co- operation. (INTERREG. IIIC). This could be a valid study, which, if agreed upon , could be implemented in a further stage.
Well-proven procedures for cooperation in these activities already exist in certain areas (Bonn agreements on pollution control, Hamburg agreements on SAR etc …) and whilst there remain some areas where better facilities and closer cooperation in their use is required, it is believed that any proposals should recognise and maximise the use of those that are already available.

The basic principles should be the same as for safety standards, pollution prevention and control, law enforcement, customs and drug control. Also a part of this fishery control should have to be effected. Of course the accents are slightly different ; the border control in the Mediterranean area is much more demanding then in the North Sea. (the Chaillot Paper looks at the question of ‘boat people’ in Europe. See Mediterranean Border and immigration problems).
Drug and smuggling control is an issue for all parts of the EU.

• VTS and control of shipping as well as safe navigation is more demanding between Ushant and the approaches of the North Sea ports.( including Hazmat.)
• There should be much more flexibility in EDI, (Electronic Data Interchange) also with AIS/ Long Range AIS, (+200’ zone), EDI monitoring HAZMAT/ Dangerous goods.

Accordingly the "European Coastguard Agency" should be required to provide guidance and assistance in providing the same levels of training, resources and facilities across all Member States and establish common standards for communication and operations procedures.

In the latter case I believe that regular exchanges of views amongst the national coastguard agencies, and the promotion of best practice, would by themselves contribute greatly to raising standards of operation throughout the EU. Therefore EMSA should continue to play an important role in :

• Developing and Harmonizing the EU Maritime Policy.
• Offering a level playing field through a harmonized enforcement of EU regulations in All Member States.
• While avoiding the duplication of efforts EMPA still sees possibilities for increased co-operation between member states.
• The implementation of Directive 2002/59/EC, as well as provisions contained in other EU legislation, requires the collection and distribution of various kinds of data. Co-ordinated VTS and VTMS improved traffic monitoring including / incorporating the MRCC s.
• It concerns vessel traffic monitoring, dangerous cargo details, results of ship inspections (Port State Control) and information related to ship waste and cargo residue as well as HAZMAT.
• SafeSeaNet has improved data exchange with better standardisation and a profusion of transfer mechanisms – from phone or fax to electronic messages (often via EDIFACT). SafeSeaNet will contribute to the efficient implementation of the EU maritime safety legislation.
In addition, SafeSeaNet has been designed to allow, as necessary, additional services to be provided for a large community of users with the objective of contributing to the implementation of other community policies such as environmental protection, the security, immigration, etc…
Of course we have to be quite careful letting EMSA play it’s role, as private interests still have a large influence in this organisation, which has its value in one way but has particular interests in the other way.

• A European Coast Guard could therefore enhance the efficiency of :
• SAR, also in cooperation with neighbouring countries.
• Pollution prevention and control / sanctioning.
• Control of coasts and seas (incl. drug traffic, smuggling, illegal immigration).
• Criminal sanctions could now, in the most serious cases, even include imprisonment or heavy fines will be supplemented by detailed rules on criminal offences and sanctions in order to strengthen the legal framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution.
• Under the new law all those responsible in the pollution chain could be prosecuted, not only captain and crew.
• It is now up to the Commission to undertake a feasibility study on the coastguard dedicated to pollution prevention and response, making clear the costs and benefits. The major problem within the Commission will be to prove the benefits as an operational service always costs money and it is sometimes hard to prove its gains. This study should be followed by a proposal on a coastguard by the end of 2006.
• It would not be wise to impose a system with "cultural differences" to hastily but it would be more durable and solid to use a more gradual and systematic way. Extending the Bonn agreement (pollution), as well as Hamburg 1979 on SAR, but also working together with EMSA and other agencies so that an extension to a real EUCG might be much more durable and firm in the long run and would also be less expensive and more efficient.
EUROMARFOR can represent a core of European maritime cooperation of more than symbolic importance of working together with the EMSA and in close collaboration with the existing bodies and legislation.

• In France the Navy combines military, police and civilian responsibilities, through the Préfet Maritime system, which integrates the capabilities of a range of French maritime organisations .
• In the Netherlands the Coastguard is part of the Navy but has no means of its own.
• In Germany they have some 17 different authorities forming the ‘Küste Wache’.
• In Belgium it is a different system, with it’s own specific values due to it’s federal structure.
• In the UK the MCA works as a Public / Private Agency with also voluntary groups.
• Other southern EU member states have a CG structure varying from Merchant Marine in Greece to Customs in Italy and to Police Force in Spain.
• However, in most cases, naval forces do not initiate law enforcement but are asked to assist civil authorities. (MACA).

If we take their common goal it roughly comes to the same ,only the way of practicing differs, but we should be quite aware of job protection, protection of its influences as well of its traditions, and there exactly lays the challenge of unifying it in the long run to a structural command , precisely "The EU Coast Guard".

---

The Belgian Coastguard

Due to the federal structure of Belgium, the Belgian Coastguard, due to the (regional) Flemish as well as the (Federal) Belgian public services, challenged with competences and responsibilities through the different constitutional reforms.

In an international context, and certainly in a European context, Belgium couldn’t stay behind on the evolution of the formation of a coastguard as did its neighbouring countries.

No governmental service could deal with these official tasks alone at sea in an independent way. On the contrary , this requires a very extensive collaboration, as in the customs services, who recently set –up a maritime brigade, starting from zero.

Structure of the Belgian Coastguard

       The Council of Ministers agreed upon a draft of the Royal Decree in order to lift the RD of May 13th 2003 for the foundation of the structure for the Coastguard. The bill had approval in a collaboration deal between the Federal State and the Flemish Region for the foundation of a new structure for the Coastguard and was approved by the Council of Ministers on July 20th 2005. As the collaboration deal covers the new structure for the Coastguard, the RD of May 13th 2003 is superfluous.

       The working plan was made up by the "Task Force North Sea", and stipulates the working ‘structure’ of the Coastguard and more particularly the permanent Secretariat, which is the centre of the whole structure. The Coastguard assures the coordination and the consultancy between the administrations competent for the North Sea.

The Government decided the foundation of a triple structure, containing:

• The Management team consists of the Governor of Western Flanders, the presidents of the Board of Directors of the different competent Federal and Provincial Public Services or their delegates competent for the North Sea. The Management team stipulates the general strategies and controls for the Permanent Secretariat. It is presided by the president of the Federal Public Service for the Interior.
• The Consultancy Platform is presided by the Governor of Western Flanders and composed of delegates of federal and regional administrations competent for the North Sea. The platform prepares rules and regulations, sets standards and procedures and advises the Management.
• The Permanent Secretariat is composed of three detached members :
  • one of the Federal Ministry of Defence.
  • one of the Federal Ministry of the Interior.
  • one of the Federal Ministry of the Environment.
         The Permanent Secretariat does the support of the daily tasks and coordination and is the contact point with the sister organizations in neighbouring countries. For each task a time schedule is drawn up and a final responsible is designated. Within a particular time schedule the final responsible will brief the Consultancy Platform as well as the Management Team and Task Force North Sea, with an intermediate and final report.

       As one could see the Belgian Coastguard does not possess means of its own. A major role in its whereabouts is effected by the NRCC , which is a division of the "Shipping Assistance Division" of the Ministry of the Flemish Community, which coordinates the whole system. On June 1st 2006 a new MRCC will be commissioned, offering a state-of-the-art and integrated platform for Vessel Traffic Monitoring , Incident Management, and SAR functionalities to ensure safety and to coordinate rescue actions at sea.

       It uses Naval power where it is required, tugboats, hydrographical research vessels, lifeboats, pollution fighting vessels, from the Ministry of the Flemish Community, Waterways and Maritime Affairs Administration, Fleet Division. A collaboration agreement exists with e.g. the Belgian Air Force (SAR) which provides Seaking helicopters and works closely together with the British CG in the Northern Entrance of the Dover Strait and the Southern North Sea. Naval Alouette III helicopters are also available in these operations. A collaboration in SAR also exists with the Dutch CG, and mutual assistance is granted. In case of necessity privately owned material can be used.(e.g. Noordzee helicopters, URS tugs/ fire-fighters , etc.) This is in order to comply with the contingency plan North Sea in case of necessity.

       As a whole one can say that the ‘Belgian Coastguard ‘ and all its collaborating partners use the highest possible technology available on the Market and can be proud of their (modest) achievements.

Retour au menu