Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-30-Speech-3-211"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051130.19.3-211"6
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@en4
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@cs1
"Hr. formand, Kommissionen har i de seneste tre år revideret Rådets forordning 4056/86 om anvendelse af EU's konkurrenceregler for linjeskibsfart. Efter omfattende høringer af transportvirksomheder, transportbrugere, medlemsstater og tredjelande mener vi, at rederiernes mulighed for at fastsætte priser og regulere kapaciteten ikke længere kan retfærdiggøres i de aktuelle markedsforhold. Den nuværende fritagelse er enestående. Ingen anden økonomisk sektor - heller ikke dem, der konkurrerer direkte med rederierne - nyder godt af så stor en fritagelse.
Et mere konkurrencedygtigt miljø vil betyde konkurrence og vækst for EU's transportvirksomheder. De mindre transportvirksomheder vil også få mulighed for at vokse sig større, hvis de følger en innovativ virksomhedsmodel. Man regner ikke med nogen indvirkning på beskæftigelsen eller investeringen i nye fartøjer. Både transportvirksomhederne og speditørerne har erkendt, at den seneste undersøgelse fra konsulentfirmaet Global Insight var af høj kvalitet, og at resultaterne byggede på en grundig research.
Vi har solid opbakning fra speditørorganisationen ESC, der repræsenterer mere end 100.000 europæiske udførsler fra de mindste til de multinationale virksomheder. Vi har opbakning fra UNICE. Selve linjeindustrien er mere delt, hvilket kun er forventeligt, da industrien har været mere isoleret fra konkurrence og nydt godt af et legaliseret kartel. Ikke desto mindre accepterer størstedelen af branchen nu, at fremtiden skal bygge på konkurrence, og at særordningernes dage er talte.
Under alle omstændigheder skal vi som tilsynsmyndigheder se på de store træk. Vi bekymrer os om konkurrenceevnen i EU's industri. Det gælder både rederierne og deres kunder, som er vores eksportører. Hvis vi ser på størstedelen af rederierne, bliver prisfastsættelser af stadig mindre betydning for deres virksomhedsstrategier i deres søgen efter mere effektive måder at sikre deres overlevelse på i et foranderligt og udfordrende miljø.
Jeg vil også forsikre Parlamentet om, at Kommissionen er meget opmærksom på de internationale virkninger af enhver lovgivning vedrørende søfartssektoren. Vi er klar over, at linjekonferencer tolereres i andre jurisdiktioner, og vi har indledt bilaterale kontakter for at sikre os, at vores partnere er opmærksomme på eventuelle ændringer i lovgivningen.
Skønt Kommissionen er overbevist om fordelene ved at afskaffe konferencesystemet, er den også overbevist om, at industrien skal have den fornødne tid til at tilpasse sig et fuldt konkurrencedygtigt marked. Jeg agter at stille et forslag til kommissærkollegiet om ophævelse af Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 4056/86 inklusive en betydelig overgangsperiode, inden konferencesystemet afskaffes.
Afslutningsvis vil jeg sige, at Kommissionen fuldt ud støtter en bedre lovgivning samt Lissabon-dagsordenen. Jeg mener, at afskaffelsen af konferencesystemet vil gøre anvendelsen af konkurrencereglerne for den maritime sektor lettere, mere rentabel og mere rimelig. En afskaffelse af konferencesystemet vil give store muligheder. Jeg er overbevist om, at både linjeindustrien og dens kunder vil få fordel heraf.
Kollektiv prisfastsættelse og kapacitetsregulering er pr. definition stærke begrænsninger af konkurrencen. Disse typer af begrænsning har en kunstig fastholdelse af høje priser som deres mål. Kartellets deltagere kan nyde godt af det, men deres kunder gør det bestemt ikke. Det gør den øvrige økonomi heller ikke. Det nuværende system kan kun forklares i en historisk sammenhæng.
Linjekonferencernes prisfastsættelser giver faktisk højere priser for eksportørerne. EU's rederier får en god pris. Fire ud af verdens fem største transportvirksomheder er hjemmehørende i EU. Ikke desto mindre gør vores eksportører fortsat opmærksom på behovet for at forbyde prisfastsættelser.
Som tilsynsmyndigheder er det vores pligt at sørge for, at reglerne harmonerer med markedsforholdene. Undtagelsen fra konkurrencereglerne vedrørende linjekonferencer er et levn fra fortiden. I de seneste 20 år er der sket været betydelige ændringer i linjemarkedet med en stigning i samarbejdsaftalerne mellem rederierne i form af konsortier og globale alliancer, der ikke omfatter prisfastsættelse. Det viser, at konferencerne ikke har afgørende betydning for de maritime erhvervs fortsatte gode sundhedstilstand.
Sektoren er vigtig for økonomiens overordnede sundhed. Planlagte tjenester inden for containertransport tegner sig for ca. 40 % af EU-25's udenrigshandel med skib målt i værdi. I dag har konferencerne lov til at fastsætte priser på alle de vigtigste shippingruter, og disse priser fungerer generelt set som referencepriser for alle shippingruter til og fra EU.
Ud over konferencetakstens benchmarkingeffekt består gennemsnitligt 30 % af transportprisen af afgifter og tillægsafgifter, som fastsættes i fællesskab af de rederier, der deltager i konferencerne, og meget ofte benytter de rederier, der ikke deltager i konferencerne, et lignende afgiftsniveau. Det betyder, at 18 % af importen til og 21 % af eksporten fra EU-25 er berørt af transportvirksomhedernes evne til i fællesskab at fastsætte priser i henhold til gruppefritagelsen for linjekonferencer. Disse tal viser, hvor vigtigt det er at frigive yderligere konkurrencekræfter i linjesektoren i overensstemmelse med dagsordenen fra Lissabon og i tråd med målet om at gøre Europa til den mest konkurrencedygtige økonomi.
Jeg glæder mig over Parlamentets arbejde med at reagere på Kommissionens hvidbog fra oktober 2004. Jeg glæder mig specielt over Parlamentets erkendelse af, at reglerne for sektoren skal være i overensstemmelse med artikel 81.
Jeg er opmærksom på visse gruppers bekymring over konsekvenserne af at afskaffe gruppefritagelsen for linjekonferencer. Hvad betyder en afskaffelse af konferencer? Den betyder, at man skal stole på, at markedsmekanismerne kan fastsætte prisen og kapaciteten på samme måde som i alle andre af økonomiens sektorer.
Vi har foretaget en omfattende vurdering af de økonomiske virkninger. Der blev bestilt tre uafhængige undersøgelser. Resultaterne viser, at hvis rederierne ikke længere for lov til at operere som et kartel, så vil det formentlig betyde lavere transportomkostninger til fordel for eksporten i hele EU og med positiv betydning for udviklingslandene. Det vil sandsynligvis også være ensbetydende med bedre service og mere innovation."@da2
"Herr Präsident! In den letzten drei Jahren hat die Kommission die Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 4056/86 des Rates über die Anwendung der EG-Wettbewerbsregeln auf den Seeverkehr überprüft. Nach umfassenden Beratungen mit Unternehmen der Seeschifffahrt, Verkehrsnutzern, Mitgliedstaaten und Drittstaaten sind wir zu der Überzeugung gelangt, dass es unter den heutigen Marktbedingungen nicht mehr gerechtfertigt ist, dass Linienreedereien Tarife festlegen und Kapazitäten regulieren können. Die gegenwärtige Freistellung ist einzigartig. Kein anderer Wirtschaftszweig – nicht einmal solche, die unmittelbar mit Linienkonferenzen im Wettbewerb stehen – kommt in den Genuss einer so großzügigen Freistellung.
Ein wettbewerbsfreundlicheres Umfeld könnte dafür sorgen, dass EU-Unternehmen miteinander in Wettstreit treten und wachsen. Auch kleinere Unternehmen hätten eine Möglichkeit zu wachsen, wenn sie ein innovatives Unternehmensmodell anwenden. Auswirkungen auf die Beschäftigung oder auf Investitionen in neue Schiffe sind nicht zu erwarten. Sowohl Verkehrsunternehmen als auch Verlader sind der Meinung, dass die jüngste Studie von Global Insight ein hohes Niveau aufweist und dass ihre Ergebnisse auf gründlichen Untersuchungen beruhen.
Wir haben die volle Unterstützung des European Shippers’ Council, der über 100 000 europäische Exporteure - vom kleinsten bis zu multinationalen Unternehmen - vertritt. Wir erhalten auch Rückendeckung von UNICE. Die Industrie selbst ist da eher geteilter Meinung. Das war auch nicht anders zu erwarten, da es in diesem Sektor keinen Wettbewerb gab und er von einem legalisierten Kartell profitierte. Im Übrigen akzeptiert die Industrie nunmehr im Wesentlichen, dass die Zukunft auf Wettbewerb ausgerichtet sein muss und dass die Tage von Sonderregelungen gezählt sind.
Wie dem auch sei, als Regulierungsbehörde müssen wir das größere Umfeld sehen. Wir sind an der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der EU-Industrie interessiert. Dazu gehören Linienreedereien sowie deren Kunden, unsere Exporteure. Wenn wir uns einmal die Mehrzahl der Linienreedereien ansehen, dann spielt die Preisfestsetzung in den Unternehmensstrategien eine immer geringere Rolle, da sie nach effektiveren Möglichkeiten suchen, um ihr Überleben in einem sich verändernden und durch große Herausforderungen geprägten Umfeld zu sichern.
Ich möchte dem Parlament ferner versichern, dass die Kommission den internationalen Auswirkungen jeglicher Regulierung, die sich mit der Schifffahrtsindustrie befasst, großes Augenmerk schenkt. Wir sind uns bewusst, dass Linienkonferenzen in anderen Rechtsordnungen toleriert werden, und haben bilaterale Verhandlungen aufgenommen, um sicherzustellen, dass unsere Partner genau wissen, welche Veränderungen in unserer Rechtsprechung vorgenommen werden.
Auch wenn die Kommission fest davon überzeugt ist, dass eine Beendigung des Konferenzsystems Vorteile bringt, ist sie sich gleichermaßen der Notwendigkeit bewusst, dass der Industrie genügend Zeit gegeben werden muss, um sich auf einen wirklich wettbewerbsorientierten Markt einzustellen. Ich beabsichtige, dem Kollegium der Kommissare vorzuschlagen, die Verordnung (EWG) des Rates Nr. 4056/86 aufzuheben. Dazu gehört auch die Festlegung einer erheblichen Übergangszeit, bevor das Konferenzsystem abgeschafft wird.
Abschließend möchte ich erklären, dass sich die Kommission einer besseren Regulierung sowie der Lissabonner Agenda verpflichtet fühlt. Meiner Meinung nach wird die Anwendung der Wettbewerbsregeln auf den Seeverkehr durch die Abschaffung des Konferenzsystems einfacher, kosteneffizienter und gerechter. Die Abschaffung des Konferenzsystems wird große Möglichkeiten eröffnen. Ich bin überzeugt, dass sowohl die Liniendienste als auch ihre Kunden davon profitieren werden.
Eine kollektive Festsetzung der Preise und die Regulierung der Kapazitäten sind ihrer Natur nach ernste Beschränkungen des Wettbewerbs. Diese Art von Beschränkung hat zum Ziel, hohe Preise künstlich beizubehalten. Davon können die Mitglieder eines solchen Kartells profitieren. Auf keinen Fall jedoch ihre Kunden, und auch die Wirtschaft insgesamt nicht. Das gegenwärtige System ist nur aus historischer Sicht zu verstehen.
Die Festsetzung von Preisen durch Linienkonferenzen führt eigentlich zu höheren Preisen für Exporteure. Den Schifffahrtsunternehmen in der EU geht es recht gut. Vier der fünf führenden Unternehmen der Welt haben ihren Sitz in der EU. Unsere Exporteure verweisen allerdings immer wieder auf die Notwendigkeit, die Festsetzung der Preise nicht mehr zu genehmigen.
Als Regulierungsbehörde ist es unsere Pflicht sicherzustellen, dass sich die Regelungen mit den Marktbedingungen in Einklang befinden. Die Freistellung der Linienkonferenzen von den Wettbewerbsregeln ist ein Überbleibsel aus der Vergangenheit. In den letzten zwanzig Jahren war der Schifffahrtsmarkt beträchtlichen Veränderungen unterworfen – die Zahl der Kooperationsvereinbarungen zwischen Linienreedereien in Form von Konsortien und globalen Allianzen, bei denen es keine Preisfestsetzung gibt, hat zugenommen. Daraus ist zu ersehen, dass Konferenzen für das weitere Wohlergehen der Schifffahrtsindustrie nicht ausschlaggebend sind.
Der Sektor ist für die Gesundheit der Wirtschaft insgesamt wichtig. Auf regelmäßige Containerverkehrsdienste entfallen wertmäßig etwa 40 % des Außenhandels der 25 EU-Mitgliedstaaten auf dem Seeweg. Gegenwärtig ist es Konferenzen gestattet, die Preise für alle wichtigen Schifffahrtsrouten festzusetzen, und es wird im Allgemeinen davon ausgegangen, dass diese Preise als Maßstab für die Preise auf allen Schifffahrtswegen in die und aus der EU gelten.
Abgesehen vom Benchmark-Effekt, den der Konferenztarif hat, bestehen durchschnittlich 30 % des Beförderungstarifs aus Gebühren und Aufschlägen, die von den Linien, die an den Konferenzen teilnehmen, gemeinsam festgelegt werden, und sehr oft werden Gebühren in gleicher Höhe von der Konferenz nicht angehörenden Unternehmen verlangt. Das bedeutet, dass 18 % der Einfuhren und 21 % der Ausfuhren der 25 EU-Mitgliedstaaten davon betroffen sind, wenn Unternehmen in ihrer Gruppenfreistellung für Linienkonferenzen gemeinsam Preise festlegen können. Diese Zahlen belegen, wie wichtig es ist, weitere Wettbewerbskräfte im Liniendienst freizusetzen, die mit der Lissabonner Agenda und dem Ziel in Einklang stehen, Europa zum wettbewerbsfähigsten Wirtschaftsraum zu machen.
Ich begrüße die vom Parlament als Reaktion auf das Weißbuch der Kommission vom Oktober 2004 geleistete Arbeit. Insbesondere freue ich mich, dass das Parlament anerkennt, dass die Regelung für diesen Sektor mit Artikel 81 übereinstimmen muss.
Ich weiß von den Bedenken einiger Kreise hinsichtlich der Folgen der Abschaffung der Gruppenfreistellung von Linienkonferenzen. Was bedeutet die Abschaffung der Konferenzen? Sie bedeutet, dass bei der Festlegung der Tarife und Kapazitäten Marktmechanismen zur Anwendung kommen wie in allen anderen Wirtschaftszweigen auch.
Wir haben die wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen gründlich untersucht: Es wurden drei unabhängige Untersuchungen in Auftrag gegeben. Die Ergebnisse zeigen: Wenn es Linienreedereien nicht mehr gestattet ist, als Kartell zu operieren, dann könnten sich geringere Transportkosten ergeben, die für Exporte innerhalb der gesamten EU von Nutzen sein würden, was sich auch auf die Entwicklungsländer positiv auswirken würde. Auch die Qualität der Leistungen und die Innovation dürften sich verbessern."@de9
"Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Επιτροπή αναθεωρεί τον κανονισμό του Συμβουλίου (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 4056/86 που επιβάλλει κανόνες ανταγωνισμού της ΕΕ στις ναυτιλιακές εταιρείες τακτικών γραμμών εδώ και τρία χρόνια. Κατόπιν εκτεταμένων διαβουλεύσεων με τους μεταφορείς, τους χρήστες των μέσων μεταφοράς, τα κράτη μέλη και τρίτες χώρες, πιστεύουμε ότι η ικανότητα που διαθέτουν οι ναυτιλιακές εταιρείες για τον καθορισμό των ναύλων και τη ρύθμιση της χωρητικότητας δεν δικαιολογείται πλέον στις σημερινές συνθήκες της αγοράς. Η τρέχουσα εξαίρεση είναι μοναδική. Κανένας άλλος οικονομικός τομέας –ακόμη και αυτοί που ανταγωνίζονται άμεσα με τις εταιρείες τακτικών γραμμών– δεν επωφελείται από μία τόσο γενναιόδωρη εξαίρεση.
Ένα πιο ανταγωνιστικό περιβάλλον θα πρέπει να επιτρέπει στους μεταφορείς να ανταγωνίζονται και να αναπτύσσονται. Οι μικρότεροι μεταφορείς θα έχουν επίσης τη δυνατότητα να αναπτυχθούν εάν ακολουθήσουν ένα καινοτόμο επιχειρηματικό μοντέλο. Δεν προβλέπονται επιπτώσεις στην απασχόληση ή στις επενδύσεις σε νέα σκάφη. Και οι μεταφορείς και οι φορτωτές αναγνώρισαν ότι η πιο πρόσφατη μελέτη της Global Insight ήταν υψηλών προδιαγραφών και ότι τα αποτελέσματά της βασίστηκαν σε ενδελεχή έρευνα.
Έχουμε τη σθεναρή υποστήριξη του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου Φορτωτών το οποίο αντιστοιχεί σε περισσότερες από 100 000 ευρωπαϊκές εξαγωγικές επιχειρήσεις από τις μικρότερες έως τις πολυεθνικές. Έχουμε την υποστήριξη της Ένωσης συνομοσπονδιών βιομηχανίας και εργοδοτών της Ευρώπης. Η βιομηχανία των ναυτιλιακών εταιρειών τακτικών δρομολογίων αυτή καθεαυτή είναι πιο διασπασμένη. Αυτό είναι αναμενόμενο, καθώς η βιομηχανία έχει προστατευτεί από τον ανταγωνισμό και έχει επωφεληθεί από ένα νομιμοποιημένο καρτέλ. Όμως ακόμη και έτσι, το μεγαλύτερο μέρος της βιομηχανίας δέχεται τώρα ότι το μέλλον πρέπει να βασιστεί στον ανταγωνισμό και ότι οι ημέρες των ειδικών καθεστώτων είναι μετρημένες.
Εν πάση περιπτώσει, ως ρυθμιστές πρέπει να εξετάσουμε το ευρύτερο πλαίσιο. Μέλημά μας είναι η ανταγωνιστικότητα της βιομηχανίας της ΕΕ. Αυτό περιλαμβάνει τις ναυτιλιακές γραμμές καθώς και τους πελάτες τους, τους εξαγωγείς μας. Εάν εξετάσουμε την πλειονότητα των ναυτιλιακών γραμμών, ο καθορισμός των τιμών καθίσταται όλο και λιγότερο σχετικός για τις επιχειρηματικές στρατηγικές τους καθώς αναζητούν περισσότερο αποτελεσματικούς τρόπους διασφάλισης της επιβίωσής τους σε ένα μεταβαλλόμενο και γεμάτο προκλήσεις περιβάλλον.
Θα ήθελα, επίσης, να διαβεβαιώσω το Κοινοβούλιο ότι η Επιτροπή δίνει μεγάλη προσοχή στις διεθνείς επιπτώσεις οιασδήποτε ρύθμισης που θίγει τη ναυτιλία. Γνωρίζουμε ότι οι διασκέψεις των ναυτιλιακών εταιρειών τακτικών γραμμών είναι ανεκτές σε άλλες έννομες τάξεις και έχουν αρχίσει διμερείς επαφές προκειμένου να διασφαλιστεί ότι οι εταίροι μας είναι ενήμεροι τυχόν αλλαγών στη νομοθεσία μας.
Αν και η Επιτροπή είναι απολύτως πεπεισμένη για τα οφέλη τερματισμού του συστήματος των διασκέψεων, είναι εξίσου πεπεισμένη για την ανάγκη να δοθεί στη βιομηχανία ο κατάλληλος χρόνος να προσαρμοστεί σε μία πλήρως ανταγωνιστική αγορά. Προτίθεμαι να υποβάλω πρόταση στην Επιτροπή για την ανάκληση του κανονισμού του Συμβουλίου (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 4056/86, συμπεριλαμβανομένης μίας σημαντικής μεταβατικής περιόδου πριν από την κατάργηση του συστήματος διασκέψεων.
Κλείνοντας, η Επιτροπή δείχνει προσήλωση στην καλύτερη ρύθμιση και την ατζέντα της Λισαβόνας. Πιστεύω ότι η κατάργηση του συστήματος των διασκέψεων θα καταστήσει τους κανόνες ανταγωνισμού στον τομέα της ναυτιλίας απλούστερους, οικονομικά αποδοτικότερους και δικαιότερους. Η κατάργηση του συστήματος των διασκέψεων θα φέρει σημαντικές ευκαιρίες. Είμαι πεπεισμένος ότι θα είναι επωφελής και για τη βιομηχανία των ναυτιλιακών εταιρειών τακτικών γραμμών και για τους πελάτες της.
Ο συλλογικός καθορισμός ναύλων και η ρύθμιση της χωρητικότητας είναι εξ ορισμού σκληροπυρηνικοί περιορισμοί στον ανταγωνισμό. Αυτοί οι τύποι περιορισμών έχουν ως στόχο την τεχνητή διατήρηση των υψηλών τιμών. Οι συμμετέχοντες στο εν λόγω καρτέλ ενδέχεται να ωφεληθούν. Οι πελάτες τους βεβαιότατα όχι· ούτε και η ευρύτερη οικονομία. Το παρόν σύστημα μπορεί να εξηγηθεί μόνον σε ιστορικό πλαίσιο.
Ο καθορισμός των ναύλων από ναυτιλιακές διασκέψεις έχει κατ’ ουσίαν ως αποτέλεσμα υψηλότερες τιμές για τους εξαγωγείς. Οι ναυτιλιακές γραμμές της ΕΕ ευημερούν. Οι τέσσερις από τους πέντε μεγαλύτερους μεταφορείς παγκοσμίως έχουν έδρα στην ΕΕ. Ωστόσο, οι εξαγωγείς μας επανειλημμένως εφιστούν την προσοχή μας στην ανάγκη να σταματήσουμε να επιτρέπουμε τον καθορισμό των ναύλων.
Ως ρυθμιστές, είναι καθήκον μας να διασφαλίσουμε ότι οι κανόνες συνάδουν με τις συνθήκες της αγοράς. Η εξαίρεση των ναυτιλιακών διασκέψεων από τους κανόνες ανταγωνισμού αποτελεί κατάλοιπο του παρελθόντος. Τα τελευταία είκοσι χρόνια έχουν σημειωθεί σημαντικές αλλαγές στην αγορά των ναυτιλιακών εταιρειών τακτικών γραμμών, με αύξηση των συνεταιριστικών συμφωνιών μεταξύ των ναυτιλιακών εταιρειών υπό τη μορφή κοινοπραξιών και παγκόσμιων συμμαχιών στις οποίες δεν περιλαμβάνεται ο καθορισμός των ναύλων. Αυτό τείνει να δείξει ότι οι διασκέψεις δεν είναι ζωτικής σημασίας για τη συνέχιση της ευρωστίας της ναυτιλίας.
Ο τομέας είναι σημαντικός για την υγεία της οικονομίας στο σύνολό της. Οι προγραμματισμένες υπηρεσίες στις μεταφορές εμπορευματοκιβωτίων ανέρχονται περίπου στο 40% του εξωτερικού θαλάσσιου εμπορίου της ΕΕ των 25 από την άποψη της αξίας. Σήμερα, επιτρέπεται στις διασκέψεις να καθορίζουν ναύλους για όλα τα κύρια δρομολόγια και οι ναύλοι αυτοί εικάζεται εν γένει ότι δρουν ως ναύλοι αναφοράς για τις τιμές όλων των δρομολογίων από και προς την ΕΕ.
Επιπλέον του αποτελέσματος αναφοράς του ναυλολογίου των διασκέψεων, ένα μέσο ποσοστό 30% της τιμής του ναύλου αποτελείται από επιβαρύνσεις και προσεπιβαρύνσεις που καθορίζονται από κοινού από τις ναυτιλιακές γραμμές που συμμετέχουν στις διασκέψεις και τα ίδια επίπεδα επιβαρύνσεων εφαρμόζονται συχνά σε μεταφορείς εκτός διάσκεψης. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι το 18% των εισαγωγών και το 21% των εξαγωγών της ΕΕ των 25 επηρεάζονται από την ικανότητα των μεταφορέων να καθορίζουν από κοινού τους ναύλους στην ομαδική εξαίρεση της διάσκεψης των ναυτιλιακών εταιρειών τακτικών γραμμών. Αυτά τα στοιχεία δείχνουν πόσο σημαντικό είναι να αποδεσμευτούν επιπλέον ανταγωνιστικές δυνάμεις στον τομέα των ναυτιλιακών εταιρειών τακτικών γραμμών, που είναι σε συμφωνία με την ατζέντα της Λισαβόνας και διατηρώντας τον στόχο να μετατραπεί η Ευρώπη στην πλέον ανταγωνιστική οικονομία.
Χαιρετίζω το έργο που επιτελείται από το Κοινοβούλιο σε ανταπόκριση στη Λευκή Βίβλο της Επιτροπής του Οκτωβρίου 2004. Χαιρετίζω ιδιαίτερα την αναγνώριση ότι οι κανόνες του τομέα πρέπει να συνάδουν με το άρθρο 81.
Γνωρίζω την ανησυχία που εκφράζουν ορισμένες πλευρές για τις συνέπειες της κατάργησης της ομαδικής εξαίρεσης υπέρ των διασκέψεων. Τι σημαίνει η κατάργηση των διασκέψεων; Σημαίνει εμπιστοσύνη στους μηχανισμούς της αγοράς για τον καθορισμό των τιμών και της χωρητικότητας, όπως σε όλους τους άλλους τομείς της οικονομίας.
Έχουμε διεξάγει εκτεταμένη αξιολόγηση οικονομικού αντίκτυπου: ζητήθηκαν τρεις ανεξάρτητες μελέτες. Τα αποτελέσματα δείχνουν ότι εάν δεν επιτρέπεται πλέον στις ναυτιλιακές εταιρείες να λειτουργούν ως καρτέλ, αυτό είναι πιθανό να έχει ως αποτέλεσμα χαμηλότερο κόστος μεταφορών προς όφελος των εξαγωγών σε ολόκληρη την ΕΕ με θετικές επιπτώσεις και για τις αναπτυσσόμενες χώρες. Η ποιότητα των υπηρεσιών και η καινοτομία ενδέχεται να βελτιωθούν."@el10
"Señor Presidente, la Comisión ha revisado el Reglamento (CEE) nº 4056/86 del Consejo sobre la aplicación de las normas europeas de competencia en el ámbito del transporte marítimo de línea en los últimos tres años. Después de amplias consultas con transportistas, usuarios del transporte, Estados miembros y terceros países, creemos que las posibilidades que tienen las navieras de línea regular para fijar precios y regular la capacidad ya no están justificadas en las circunstancias actuales del mercado. La exención actual es única. Ningún otro sector económico, ni siquiera los que compiten directamente con los servicios de transporte marítimo de línea, se benefician de una exención tan generosa.
Un entorno más competitivo debería permitir a los transportistas de la UE competir y crecer. Los pequeños transportistas tendrán además la oportunidad de crecer si aplican un modelo empresarial innovador. No se prevé ningún efecto en el empleo ni en la inversión en buques nuevos. Tanto los transportistas como los cargadores han reconocido que el estudio más reciente realizado por
es de gran calidad y que sus resultados se han basado en una investigación meticulosa.
Tenemos el firme respaldo del
que representa a más de 100 000 exportadores europeos, desde los más pequeños hasta las multinacionales. Tenemos el respaldo de UNICE. El sector del transporte marítimo de línea regular está más dividido. Eso era previsible, puesto que el sector se ha mantenido al margen de la competencia y se ha beneficiado de un cártel legalizado. Pero aún así, gran parte del sector acepta ahora que el futuro tiene que basarse en la competencia y que los días de los regímenes especiales están contados.
En cualquier caso, como reguladores nosotros tenemos que considerar la situación en su conjunto. Nuestra preocupación es la competitividad de la industria de la UE. Eso incluye a las navieras de línea regular, así como a sus clientes, nuestros exportadores. Si contemplamos la mayoría de las navieras de línea regular, la fijación de precios tiene cada vez menos peso en sus estrategias comerciales y han empezado a buscar formas más eficaces de garantizar su supervivencia en un entorno difícil y cambiante.
Quiero asegurar también al Parlamento que la Comisión presta gran atención a las consecuencias internacionales de cualquier reglamento que afecte al sector del transporte marítimo. Somos conscientes de que las conferencias marítimas se toleran en otras jurisdicciones y hemos establecido contactos bilaterales para asegurar que nuestros socios estén informados de cualquier cambio que introduzcamos en nuestra legislación.
Aunque la Comisión está firmemente convencida de las ventajas de poner fin al sistema de conferencias, también está convencida de la necesidad de dar al sector tiempo suficiente para que se adapte a un mercado plenamente competitivo. Tengo la intención de proponer al Colegio de Comisarios la revocación del Reglamento (CEE) nº 4056/86 del Consejo, con un período de transición suficiente antes de abolir el sistema de conferencias.
Para terminar, la Comisión tiene el firme propósito de mejorar la legislación y aplicar la Agenda de Lisboa. Creo que la eliminación del sistema de conferencias hará que la aplicación de las normas de la competencia en el sector marítimo resulte más sencilla, más eficiente y más justa. La abolición del sistema de conferencias brindará importantes oportunidades. Estoy convencido de que tanto el sector del transporte marítimo de línea regular como sus clientes se beneficiarán de ello.
La fijación colectiva de precios y la regulación de la capacidad son, por definición, restricciones claras de la competencia. Estos tipos de restricciones sirven para mantener artificialmente precios elevados. Es posible se beneficien que los participantes en ese cártel. Pero, desde luego, no sus clientes. Tampoco se beneficiará la economía en su conjunto. El sistema actual solo puede explicarse en un contexto histórico.
La capacidad de las conferencias marítimas para fijar precios comporta unos precios más altos para los exportadores. Las navieras de línea regular de la UE atraviesan un buen momento. Cuatro de los cinco principales transportistas del mundo tienen su sede en la UE. Aún así, los exportadores europeos llaman repetidamente nuestra atención sobre la necesidad de no seguir permitiendo la fijación de precios.
Como reguladores, nuestra obligación es asegurar que las normas estén en sintonía con la condiciones de mercado. La exención de las normas de competencia para las conferencias marítimas es una reliquia del pasado. Los últimos veinte años han sido testigos de importantes cambios en el mercado de los servicios de línea regular, con un aumento de los acuerdos de cooperación entre navieras de línea regular en forma de consorcios y alianzas globales que no incluyen la fijación de precios. Esto demuestra que las conferencias no son fundamentales para que el sector del transporte marítimo siga gozando de buena salud.
El sector es importante para la salud de la economía en su conjunto. Los servicios regulares de transporte en contenedores representan en torno al 40 % del comercio exterior por mar de la UE-25 en términos de valor. En la actualidad, las conferencias pueden fijar los precios en todas las grandes rutas marítimas y, en general, se supone que esos precios sirven de referencia para los precios de todas las rutas marítimas que tienen su origen o destino a la UE.
Además de este efecto de referencia de las tarifas fijadas por las conferencias, el 30 % del precio del transporte, por término medio, corresponde a tarifas y recargos fijados conjuntamente por las navieras que participan en las conferencias y con mucha frecuencia se aplican las mismas tarifas a los transportistas no pertenecientes a la conferencia. Eso significa que el 18 % de las importaciones y el 21 % de las exportaciones de la UE-25 se ven afectados por la capacidad de los transportistas de fijar precios conjuntamente en la exención por categorías que disfrutan las conferencias marítimas. Estas cifras demuestran lo importante que es dar rienda suelta a otras fuerzas competitivas en el sector del transporte marítimo de línea, muy de acuerdo con la Agenda de Lisboa y el objetivo de convertir a Europa en la economía más competitiva del mundo.
Celebro el trabajo realizado por el Parlamento en respuesta al Libro Blanco de la Comisión de octubre de 2004. Celebro en particular que el Parlamento haya reconocido que las normas aplicadas al sector deben cumplir el artículo 81.
Soy consciente de la preocupación que existe en algunos círculos por las consecuencias de la abolición de la exención por categorías que disfrutan las conferencias. ¿Qué significa la abolición de las conferencias? Significa depender de los mecanismos del mercado para determinar el precio y la capacidad, como en todos los demás sectores de la economía.
Hemos realizado una extensa evaluación del impacto económico: se han encargado tres estudios independientes. Los resultados indican que si deja de permitirse que las navieras de línea regular actúen como un cártel, probablemente se podrán reducir los costes del transporte y eso beneficiará a los exportadores de toda la UE y tendrá un efecto positivo en los países en desarrollo. Lo más probable es que con eso mejoren la calidad del servicio y la innovación."@es20
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@et5
"Arvoisa puhemies, komissio on viimeisten kolmen vuoden ajan tarkastellut EY:n kilpailusääntöjen soveltamisesta meriliikenteeseen annettua asetusta (ETY) N:o 4056/86. Kuultuamme laajasti varustamoja, kuljetuspalvelujen käyttäjiä, jäsenvaltioita ja kolmansia maita olemme tulleet siihen tulokseen, että nykyisissä markkinaoloissa ei ole enää perusteltua se, että linjaliikennettä harjoittavat varustamot voivat määrätä hinnat ja säännellä kapasiteettia. Nykyinen poikkeus on ainutlaatuinen. Millään muulla toimialalla ei sovelleta näin ylenpalttista poikkeusta – ei edes suoraan varustamojen kanssa kilpailevilla aloilla.
Kilpailulle avoimempien markkinoiden pitäisi tarjota EU:n varustamoille tilaisuus kilpailla ja kasvaa. Myös pienemmät varustamot saavat mahdollisuuden kasvaa, jos ne noudattavat innovatiivista liiketoimintamallia. Poistamisen ei odoteta vaikuttavan työllisyyteen eikä uusiin aluksiin tehtäviin investointeihin. Sekä varustamot että rahdinantajat pitivät tuoreinta, Global Insightin laatimaa tutkimusta korkealaatuisena ja sen tuloksia syvälliseen tutkimustyöhön perustuvina.
Euroopan rahdinantajien neuvosto (ESC), joka edustaa yli 100 000 eurooppalaista viejää pienimmästä ylikansallisiin, tukee meitä täysin. Meillä on myös Euroopan teollisuuden ja työnantajain keskusjärjestön (UNICE) tuki. Linjaliikenneala sinänsä ei ole yhtä yksimielinen, mikä ei ole yllättävää, sillä se on ollut suojassa kilpailulta ja saanut nauttia laillisesta kartellista. Siitä huolimatta suuri osa alasta hyväksyy nyt, että tulevaisuuden on perustuttava kilpailuun ja erityisjärjestelyjen aika on ohi.
Lainsäätäjinä meidän on joka tapauksessa katsottava kokonaisuutta. Meidän on pidettävä huoli EU:n teollisuuden kilpailukyvystä. Tähän kuuluvat niin linjaliikennevarustamot kuin niiden asiakkaat, EU:n vientiteollisuus. Hintojen vahvistamisen merkitys useimpien varustamojen liiketoimintastrategioille on vähenemässä niiden hakiessa tehokkaampia tapoja elinkelpoisuutensa varmistamiseksi muuttuvassa ja haastavassa ympäristössä.
Haluan myös vakuuttaa parlamentille, että komissio kiinnittää suurta huomiota kaiken meriliikennealaa koskevan lainsäädännön kansainvälisiin vaikutuksiin. Tiedämme, että linjakonferensseja siedetään muilla oikeudenkäyttöalueilla, ja olemme solmineet kahdenvälisiä suhteita sen varmistamiseksi, että kumppanimme ovat tietoisia lainsäädäntöömme tehtävistä muutoksista.
Vaikka komissio on vakuuttunut hyödyistä, joita konferenssijärjestelmän lopettaminen tuo tullessaan, se on yhtä vakuuttunut siitä, että alalle on annettava riittävästi aikaa sopeutua kilpailulle täysin avoimiin markkinoihin. Aion ehdottaa kollegiolle neuvoston asetuksen (ETY) N:o 4056/86 kumoamista ja huomattavan pitkää siirtymäkautta ennen konferenssijärjestelmän lopettamista.
Lopuksi totean, että komissio on sitoutunut parantamaan lainsäädäntöä ja toteuttamaan Lissabonin strategiaa. Uskon, että konferenssijärjestelmän poistamisen ansiosta kilpailusääntöjen soveltamisesta meriliikenteeseen tulee yksinkertaisempaa, kustannustehokkaampaa ja oikeudenmukaisempaa. Konferenssijärjestelmän poistaminen luo merkittäviä mahdollisuuksia. Olen varma, että siitä on hyötyä sekä meriliikennealalle että sen asiakkaille.
Kollektiivinen hintojen vahvistaminen ja kapasiteetin sääntely ovat itsestään selvästi mitä vakavimpia kilpailunrajoituksia. Tällaisilla rajoituksilla pyritään pitämään hinnat korkeina keinotekoisesti. Kartelliin osallistuvat saattavat hyötyä järjestelystä, mutta asiakkaat eivät varmastikaan – ei liioin talous laajemmin. Nykyinen järjestelmä onkin mahdollista ymmärtää ainoastaan sen syntymisajankohtana vallinneen tilanteen valossa.
Hintojen vahvistaminen linjakonferensseissa johtaa itse asiassa siihen, että viejät maksavat korkeampia hintoja. EU:n linjavarustamoilla menee hyvin. Viidestä maailman suurimmasta varustamosta neljä toimii EU:sta käsin. Tästä huolimatta viejät huomauttavat meille jatkuvasti, että hintojen vahvistamisen salliminen on lopetettava.
Lainsäätäjinä velvollisuutemme on huolehtia siitä, että säännöt ovat markkinaolosuhteiden mukaiset. Linjakonferensseille myönnetty poikkeus kilpailusäännöistä on menneisyyden jäänne. Viimeisten 20 vuoden aikana linjaliikennemarkkinat ovat muuttuneet huomattavasti: linjavarustamojen väliset yhteistyöjärjestelyt, kuten konsortiot ja maailmanlaajuiset liittoutumat, joihin ei kuulu hintojen vahvistaminen, ovat lisääntyneet. Tämä osoittaa, että konferenssit eivät ole välttämättömiä merenkulkualan säilymiselle hyväkuntoisena.
Ala on tärkeä kokonaistalouden terveyden kannalta. Konttikuljetuksia koskevien säännöllisten palvelujen osuus EU-25:n merivientikaupan arvosta on 40 prosenttia. Tällä hetkellä konferenssit saavat vahvistaa hinnat kaikilla pääreiteillä, ja näitä hintoja pidetään yleisesti viitehintoina kaikilla reiteillä, joiden määrä- tai lähtöpaikka on EU:ssa.
Konferenssitariffin viite-efektin lisäksi kuljetuksen hinnasta keskimäärin 30 prosenttia koostuu maksuista ja lisämaksuista, jotka konferenssiin osallistuvat laivalinjat vahvistavat yhdessä. Myös konferenssiin kuulumattomat varustamot soveltavat hyvin usein samoja maksutasoja. Tämä merkitsee, että varustamojen kyky vahvistaa yhdessä hinnat linjakonferensseille myönnetyn ryhmäpoikkeuksen puitteissa vaikuttaa 18 prosenttiin tuonnista ja 21 prosenttiin EU-25:n viennistä. Luvut osoittavat, kuinka tärkeää on uusien kilpailuvoimien vapauttaminen linjaliikennealalla. Se olisi pitkälti Lissabonin strategian ja sen tavoitteen mukaista, että Euroopasta on tarkoitus tehdä maailman kilpailukykyisin talous.
Olen tyytyväinen siihen, miten parlamentti on vastannut lokakuussa 2004 annettuun komission valkoiseen kirjaan. Olen erityisen tyytyväinen siihen, että parlamentinkin mielestä alaa koskevien sääntöjen on oltava perustamissopimuksen 81 artiklan mukaiset.
Tiedän, että tietyt tahot ovat huolissaan linjakonferensseille myönnetyn ryhmäpoikkeuksen poistamisen seurauksista. Mitä konferenssien poistaminen merkitsee? Se merkitsee luottamusta markkinamekanismien kykyyn määrätä hinnat ja kapasiteetit kuten kaikilla muillakin toimialoilla.
Olemme suorittaneet laajan taloudellisen vaikutustutkimuksen tilaamalla kolme riippumatonta tutkimusta. Tulokset osoittavat, että jos linjaliikennettä harjoittavat varustamot eivät enää saa toimia kartellina, kuljetuskustannukset todennäköisesti laskevat. Siitä hyötyy vienti kaikkialla EU:ssa, ja sillä on myönteisiä vaikutuksia kehitysmaihin. Palvelujen laatu ja innovaatio parantuvat todennäköisesti myös."@fi7
".
Monsieur le Président, cela fait trois ans que la Commission revoit le règlement (CEE) n° 4056/86 du Conseil déterminant les modalités d’application des règles de concurrence aux transports maritimes. Après une consultation extensive des transporteurs, des utilisateurs, des États membres et des pays tiers, nous pensons que la capacité des transporteurs maritimes à fixer les prix et à réguler la capacité n’est plus justifiée dans les conditions actuelles marché. L’exemption actuelle est unique. Aucun autre secteur économique - même ceux en concurrence directe avec les transporteurs maritimes - ne bénéficie d’une exemption aussi généreuse.
Un environnement plus compétitif devrait permettre aux transporteurs européens de se concurrencer et de grandir. Les petites compagnies auront également la possibilité de croître si elles suivent un modèle commercial innovateur. Aucun impact n’est prévu sur l’emploi ni sur les investissements dans les nouveaux navires. Les transporteurs et les armateurs ont tous reconnu que l’étude la plus récente de Global Insight était d’un niveau élevé et que ses résultats étaient basés sur une recherche approfondie.
Nous jouissons du soutien sans réserve de l’European Shippers’ Council, qui représente plus de 100 000 exportations, des plus petites entreprises aux grandes multinationales. Nous avons l’appui de l’UNICE. L’industrie elle-même est plus divisée. Il fallait s’y attendre vu qu’elle était protégée contre la concurrence et bénéficiait d’un cartel légalisé. Quoi qu’il en soit, une grande partie du secteur accepte maintenant l’idée que l’avenir soit basé sur la concurrence et que les jours des régimes spéciaux soient comptés.
En tout cas, en tant que législateurs, nous devons envisager la question sous un angle plus large. Notre préoccupation, c’est la compétitivité de l’industrie européenne. Cela englobe les transporteurs maritimes mais aussi leurs clients, nos exportateurs. Si on prend la majorité des transporteurs, la fixation des prix devient de moins en moins importante pour leurs stratégies commerciales parce qu’ils cherchent des manières plus efficaces d’assurer leur survie dans un environnement changeant et de plus en plus exigeant.
Je voudrais aussi assurer au Parlement que la Commission accorde une grande attention aux implications internationales de tout règlement touchant l’industrie du transport maritime. Nous sommes conscients du fait que les conférences de transporteurs sont tolérées dans d’autres juridictions et avons noué des contacts bilatéraux afin de garantir que nos partenaires soient au courant des changements éventuels dans notre législation.
Bien que la Commission soit fermement convaincue des bienfaits de la fin du système des conférences, elle est également convaincue de la nécessité de donner à l’industrie suffisamment de temps pour s’adapter à un marché placé sous le signe de la concurrence. J’ai l’intention de présenter au collège des commissaires une proposition visant à abroger le règlement (CEE) n° 4056/86 du Conseil prévoyant une période de transition substantielle avant l’abolition totale du système des conférences.
Pour conclure, la Commission s’est engagée à améliorer la législation et à respecter l’agenda de Lisbonne. Je pense que l’abolition du système des conférences rendra l’application des règles de concurrence au secteur maritime plus simple, plus rentable et plus juste. Elle offrira de grandes chances. Je ne doute pas que les transporteurs maritimes et leurs clients sauront les saisir.
La fixation collective des prix et la régulation de la capacité constituent par définition des restrictions pures et dures de la concurrence. Ces types de restrictions ont pour objectif de maintenir les prix artificiellement haut. Si les participants à un tel cartel peuvent en profiter, leurs clients n’en tirent certainement aucun bénéfice, et l’économie au sens large non plus. Le système actuel ne peut s’expliquer que dans un contexte historique.
La fixation des prix par les conférences de transporteurs entraîne en réalité une hausse des prix pour les exportateurs. Les compagnies de transport maritime européennes se portent bien. Quatre des cinq plus gros transporteurs mondiaux sont basés dans l’UE. Et pourtant, nos exportateurs ne cessent d’attirer notre attention sur la nécessité de ne plus autoriser la fixation des prix.
En tant que législateurs, notre devoir est de veiller à ce que les règles soient en phase avec les conditions du marché. L’exemption des règles de concurrence pour les conférences de transporteurs est une relique du passé. Les vingt dernières années ont vu d’importants changements dans le marché du transport maritime, accompagnés d’une augmentation du nombre d’accords de coopération entre les compagnies, sous la forme de consortiums et d’alliances mondiales qui n’englobent pas la fixation des prix. Cela prouve que les conférences ne sont pas indispensables à la bonne santé de l’industrie maritime.
Le secteur est important pour la santé de l’économie dans son ensemble. Les lignes régulières de transport de conteneurs représentent quelque 40 % du commerce extérieur par voie maritime de l’UE-25 en termes de valeur. Aujourd’hui, les conférences sont autorisées à fixer les prix sur toutes les grandes routes, et ces prix sont généralement considérés comme un repère pour les prix sur toutes les routes en provenance et à destination de l’UE.
Outre l’effet d’étalonnage des tarifs fixés par les conférences, le prix du transport est en moyenne composé à 30 % de charges et surcharges imposées conjointement par les compagnies participant aux conférences, et les mêmes taux de charges sont très souvent appliqués par les autres transporteurs. Autrement dit, 18 % des importations et 21 % des exportations de l’UE-25 sont touchés par la capacité des transporteurs à fixer ensemble les prix dans le cadre de l’exemption par catégorie accordée aux conférences. Ces chiffres montrent combien il est important de libérer la concurrence dans le secteur du transport maritime, dans l’esprit de l’agenda de Lisbonne et dans la recherche de l’objectif de faire de l’Europe l’économie la plus compétitive.
Je me félicite du travail accompli par le Parlement en réaction au Livre blanc de la Commission d’octobre 2004. Je me réjouis en particulier que le Parlement ait reconnu que les règles imposées au secteur devaient être conformes à l’article 81.
Je suis conscient des préoccupations de certains milieux quant aux conséquences de l’abolition de l’exemption par catégorie. Que signifie l’abolition des conférences? Elle signifie: se fier aux mécanismes du marché pour déterminer les prix et les capacités, comme dans tous les autres secteurs de l’économie.
Nous avons mené une évaluation extensive de l’impact économique: trois études indépendantes ont été commandées. Les résultats montrent que si les transporteurs maritimes ne sont plus autorisés à opérer comme un cartel, cela entraînera probablement une baisse des prix, ce qui profitera aux exportations partout dans l’UE et aura un impact positif sur les pays en développement. La qualité du service et l’innovation seront sans doute elles aussi renforcées."@fr8
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@hu11
"Signor Presidente, la Commissione ha rivisto il regolamento n. 4056/86 del Consiglio che ha fissato le modalità di applicazione delle regole europee di concorrenza ai trasporti marittimi di linea per i tre anni passati. In seguito a estesa consultazione con trasportatori, utenti dei trasporti, Stati membri e paesi terzi, riteniamo che la facoltà delle linee di trasporto marittimo di fissare i prezzi e regolare la capacità di trasporto non sia più giustificata nell’odierna situazione del mercato. L’attuale esenzione è unica. Nessun altro settore economico – nemmeno quelli in diretta concorrenza con le linee marittime – beneficia di un’esenzione tanto generosa.
Un ambiente più competitivo dovrebbe permettere ai trasportatori comunitari di concorrere e crescere. I trasportatori più piccoli avranno inoltre l’occasione di crescere se seguiranno un modello d’impresa innovativo. Non si prevede alcun impatto sull’occupazione o sugli investimenti in nuove navi. Sia i trasportatori che i caricatori hanno riconosciuto che l’ultimo studio condotto da
era di alto livello e che i suoi risultati si fondavano su una ricerca accurata.
Abbiamo il solido sostegno del consiglio dei caricatori europei, che rappresenta più di 100 000 esportatori europei, dai più piccoli fino alle multinazionali. Abbiamo il supporto di UNICE. L’industria dei servizi di linea vera e propria è più divisa. Ciò non deve sorprendere, poiché l’industria è rimasta isolata dalla concorrenza e ha beneficiato di un cartello legalizzato. Ciononostante, buona parte dell’industria ora accetta che il futuro deve fondarsi sulla concorrenza e che i giorni di regime speciale sono contati.
Ad ogni modo, in quanto legiferatori, dobbiamo considerare il quadro d’insieme. La nostra preoccupazione è la competitività dell’industria comunitaria. Ciò comprende tanto i servizi di linea quanto i loro clienti, i nostri esportatori. Se consideriamo la maggior parte dei servizi di linea, la fissazione dei prezzi diventa sempre meno rilevante per le loro strategie d’impresa, poiché cercano metodi più efficaci di assicurarsi la sopravvivenza in un ambiente mutevole e stimolante.
Vorrei inoltre assicurare al Parlamento che la Commissione è molto attenta alle implicazioni internazionali di qualsiasi regolamento che interessi l’industria di navigazione marittima. Siamo consapevoli che le conferenze marittime vengono tollerate in altre giurisdizioni e abbiamo avviato contatti bilaterali in modo da assicurare che i nostri
siano al corrente di ogni eventuale cambiamento apportato alla nostra legislazione.
Pur essendo fermamente convinta dei vantaggi dell’abolizione del sistema delle conferenze, la Commissione è altrettanto convinta dell’esigenza di concedere al settore tempo sufficiente per adattarsi a un mercato pienamente competitivo. Intendo presentare al Collegio dei Commissari una proposta di abrogazione del regolamento n. 4056/86 del Consiglio, che comprenda un notevole periodo di transizione prima dell’abolizione del sistema delle conferenze.
In conclusione, la Commissione si è impegnata in favore di una migliore regolamentazione e dell’agenda di Lisbona. Ritengo che l’abolizione del sistema delle conferenze renderà l’applicazione delle regole di concorrenza al settore marittimo più semplice, efficiente ed equa. L’abolizione del sistema delle conferenze creerà occasioni significative. Confido che sia il settore dei trasporti marittimi che i relativi clienti ne raccolgano i frutti.
La fissazione di prezzi collettivi e la regolazione della capacità di trasporto sono per definizione severe restrizioni alla concorrenza. Restrizioni di tal genere hanno lo scopo di mantenere artificialmente prezzi elevati. Forse ne trarranno beneficio coloro che partecipano a tale cartello, ma certamente non i consumatori né l’economia in generale. L’attuale sistema è spiegabile solo in un contesto storico.
La fissazione di prezzi da parte di conferenze marittime comporta effettivamente prezzi più alti per gli esportatori. Le linee comunitarie di trasporto marittimo stanno andando bene. Quattro dei cinque maggiori trasportatori mondiali hanno sede nell’Unione europea. Eppure i nostri esportatori richiamano continuamente la nostra attenzione sull’esigenza di porre fine al permesso di fissare i prezzi.
In quanto legiferatori, è nostro dovere assicurare che le norme siano in sintonia con le condizioni del mercato. L’esenzione dalle regole di concorrenza per le conferenze marittime è un retaggio del passato. Gli ultimi vent’anni hanno visto notevoli cambiamenti nel mercato dei trasporti marittimi, con un aumento degli accordi di cooperazione tra compagnie di navigazione sotto forma di consorzi e alleanze tra società a livello mondiale che non comprendono la fissazione dei prezzi. Ciò dimostra che le conferenze non sono cruciali per il perdurare della buona salute del settore marittimo.
Il settore è importante per la salute dell’economia nel suo complesso. I servizi di linea per il trasporto di
ammontano a circa il 40 per cento del valore del commercio marittimo esterno dei 25 Stati membri. Oggi le conferenze possono fissare prezzi su tutte le maggiori rotte marittime, e in genere si presume che tali prezzi agiscano come punti di riferimento per i prezzi di tutte le rotte marittime in entrata e in uscita dall’Unione europea.
Oltre all’effetto di
delle tariffe delle conferenze, in media il 30 per cento del prezzo dei trasporti è rappresentato da tasse e soprattasse fissate congiuntamente da linee che partecipano a conferenze, e tasse di pari entità molto spesso vengono applicate da trasportatori non appartenenti a conferenze. Questo significa che il 18 per cento delle importazioni e il 21 per cento delle esportazioni dei 25 Stati membri dell’Unione risentono della capacità dei trasportatori di fissare insieme i prezzi nell’esenzione per categoria della conferenza marittima. Queste cifre dimostrano quanto sia importante liberare ulteriori forze concorrenziali nel settore dei servizi di linea, nettamente in linea con l’agenda di Lisbona e in accordo con l’obiettivo di trasformare l’Europa nell’economia più competitiva.
Accolgo con favore il lavoro svolto dal Parlamento in reazione al Libro bianco della Commissione dell’ottobre 2004. In particolare apprezzo il fatto che il Parlamento abbia riconosciuto che le regole per il settore devono conformarsi all’articolo 81.
Sono consapevole della preoccupazione di taluni ambienti per le conseguenze dell’abolizione dell’esenzione per categoria delle conferenze. Che cosa significa abolizione delle conferenze? Significa affidarsi ai meccanismi di mercato per determinare prezzo e capacità di trasporto come in tutti gli altri settori dell’economia.
Abbiamo condotto un’ampia valutazione dell’impatto economico: sono stati commissionati tre studi indipendenti. I risultati dimostrano che, se ai servizi di trasporto marittimo non verrà più permesso di comportarsi come un cartello, ne scaturiranno probabilmente un abbassamento dei costi di trasporto a beneficio delle esportazioni dell’intera Unione europea e un impatto positivo sui paesi in via di sviluppo. E’ probabile che la qualità del servizio e l’innovazione vengano migliorate."@it12
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@lt14
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@lv13
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@mt15
"Mijnheer de Voorzitter, de Commissie heeft verordening (EEG) nr. 4056/86 van de Raad inzake de toepassing van de communautaire mededingingsregels op de lijnvaart voor de afgelopen drie jaar herzien. Na uitvoerig overleg met vervoerders, vervoersgebruikers, lidstaten en derde landen zijn wij tot het standpunt gekomen dat het onder de huidige marktomstandigheden niet langer gerechtvaardigd is dat lijnvaartmaatschappijen de prijzen vaststellen en de vervoerscapaciteit regelen. De huidige vrijstelling is uniek. Geen enkele andere economische sector – zelfs sectoren die rechtstreeks met de lijnvaart concurreren – geniet de voordelen van zo’n royale vrijstelling.
In een meer concurrerende omgeving zouden de vervoerders in de EU zelf meer concurrerend kunnen worden en beter kunnen groeien. Ook de kleinere vervoerders zullen kunnen groeien als zij een innovatieve weg inslaan. Er zijn geen gevolgen voorzien voor de werkgelegenheid of voor de investeringen in nieuwe vaartuigen. Zowel vervoerders als verladers hebben erkend dat de meest recente studie door Global Insight van hoog niveau was, en dat de conclusies daarvan op grondig onderzoek berustten.
We hebben de solide steun van de European Shippers Council, die meer dan 100 000 Europese exporteurs vertegenwoordigt, van de allerkleinste tot multinationals. We hebben de steun van de UNICE. De lijnvaartsector zelf is meer verdeeld, wat ook te verwachten viel, omdat deze branche van concurrentie gevrijwaard was en de voordelen van een wettig kartel genoot. Desondanks ziet een groot deel van de sector nu wel in dat de toekomst gebaseerd moet zijn op mededinging en dat de dagen van de speciale regelingen geteld zijn.
In elk geval moeten we als regelgevers de dingen in breder perspectief zien. Waar het ons om gaat, is het concurrentievermogen van de communautaire industrie. De lijnvaartmaatschappijen en hun klanten, de exporteurs, vallen hier ook onder. Als je kijkt naar het merendeel van de lijnvaartmaatschappijen, dan zie je dat prijsafspraken een steeds minder belangrijke rol spelen in hun zakelijke strategie nu zij op zoek zijn naar efficiëntere methoden om ervoor te zorgen dat ze kunnen overleven in een veranderende en uitdagende wereld.
Verder zou ik het Parlement willen verzekeren dat de Commissie de internationale impact van elke vorm van regelgeving inzake de scheepvaartindustrie nauwlettend in de gaten houdt. We weten dat de lijnvaartconferences in andere rechtsgebieden getolereerd worden, en we hebben bilaterale contacten gelegd om ervoor te zorgen dat onze partners weten op welke punten onze wetgeving eventueel gewijzigd wordt.
Hoewel de Commissie stellig overtuigd is van de voordelen van afschaffing van het stelsel van conferences, is zij ook overtuigd van de noodzaak om de sector voldoende tijd te gunnen om zich aan te passen aan een volledig concurrerende markt. Ik ben van plan het college van leden van de Commissie een voorstel voor te leggen om verordening (EEG) nr. 4056/86 van de Raad in te trekken, en onder meer een substantiële overgangsperiode in te stellen voordat het stelsel van conferences wordt afgeschaft.
Ten slotte moet gezegd dat de Commissie zich verbonden heeft tot realisering van betere regelgeving en uitvoering van de Lissabonagenda. Ik denk dat afschaffing van het stelsel van conferences zal leiden tot een eenvoudiger, meer kostenbeperkende en eerlijker toepassing van de mededingingsregels voor de scheepvaartsector. Er zullen nieuwe kansen ontstaan. Ik heb er alle vertrouwen in dat zowel de lijnvaartsector als zijn klanten hiervan profijt zullen hebben.
Collectieve prijsvaststelling en capaciteitsregulering zijn per definitie essentiële beperkingen voor de mededinging. Doel van dit soort beperkingen is de prijzen op kunstmatige wijze hoog te houden. Deelnemers aan zo’n kartel hebben er misschien profijt van, maar de klanten zijn er beslist niet bij gebaat, noch de economie in het algemeen. Het bestaan van het huidige systeem valt alleen te verklaren vanuit historisch perspectief.
Het vaststellen van de prijzen door de lijnvaartconferences leidt in feite tot hogere prijzen voor de exporteurs. De communautaire lijnvaartmaatschappijen doen echter goede zaken: vier van de vijf topvervoerders in de wereld zijn gevestigd in de Europese Unie. Toch vestigen onze exporteurs steeds maar weer onze aandacht op de noodzaak om een einde te maken aan de mogelijkheid tot het maken van prijsafspraken.
Als regelgevers hebben wij de plicht ervoor te zorgen dat de regels zijn toegesneden op de marktomstandigheden. De vrijstelling van mededingingsregels voor lijnvaartconferences is een overblijfsel uit het verleden. De afgelopen twintig jaar hebben zich op de lijnvaartmarkt aanzienlijke veranderingen voorgedaan, met een toename van het aantal collectieve regelingen tussen lijnvaartmaatschappijen in de vorm van consortia en wereldwijde allianties die geen prijsafspraken bevatten. Hieruit blijkt dat de conferences niet per se noodzakelijk zijn om ook in de toekomst een gezonde zeescheepvaart te garanderen.
De sector is van belang voor de gezondheid van de economie in het algemeen. In financiële termen gesproken zijn de lijndiensten in het containervervoer goed voor zo’n 40 procent van de buitenlandse handel over zee van de EU-25. Tegenwoordig mogen de conferences voor alle grotere lijnvaartroutes prijsafspraken maken, en deze prijzen gelden algemeen als standaard voor de prijzen voor alle scheepvaartroutes van en naar de Europese Unie.
Naast het feit dat het tarief van de conferences als standaardtarief beschouwd wordt, is er het feit dat de vervoerskosten voor gemiddeld 30 procent uit kosten en toeslagen bestaan die gezamenlijk zijn vastgesteld door lijnvaartmaatschappijen die bij conferences zijn aangesloten, en diezelfde kostenniveaus worden vaak gehanteerd door vervoerders die niet bij een conference zijn aangesloten. Dit houdt in dat er bij 18 procent van de invoer in de EU-25 en 21 procent van de uitvoer sprake is van prijsafspraken die vervoerders samen kunnen maken in het kader van de groepsvrijstelling voor lijnvaartconferences. Deze percentages tonen aan hoe belangrijk het is om de concurrentie meer de vrije hand te geven in de lijnvaartsector, wat in overeenstemming is met de Lissabonagenda en met het doel om Europa tot de meest concurrerende economie te maken.
Ik ben blij met het werk dat het Parlement verricht heeft naar aanleiding van het Witboek van de Commissie van oktober 2004. Waar ik vooral blij om ben, is dat het Parlement erkend heeft dat de regels voor deze sector in overeenstemming moeten zijn met artikel 81.
Ik ben mij bewust van de ongerustheid die in sommige kringen is ontstaan over de gevolgen van de afschaffing van de groepsvrijstelling voor conferences. Wat betekent de afschaffing van de conferences? Het betekent dat we vertrouwen op de marktmechanismen om de prijzen en capaciteit vast te stellen, net zoals in alle overige sectoren van de economie.
We hebben uitvoerig onderzoek gedaan naar de economische impact: in opdracht van de Commissie zijn er drie los van elkaar staande studies uitgevoerd. De resultaten tonen aan dat als lijnvaartmaatschappijen niet langer als kartel mogen opereren, de vervoerskosten waarschijnlijk zullen dalen, wat in het voordeel is van de exporteurs in de hele EU en positieve gevolgen heeft voor de ontwikkelingslanden. De kwaliteit van de diensten en de innovatiemogelijkheden zullen waarschijnlijk verbeteren."@nl3
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@pl16
".
Senhor Presidente, nestes últimos três anos, a Comissão tem procedido à revisão do Regulamento (CEE) nº 4056/86 relativo à aplicação das regras comunitárias em matéria de concorrência aos transportes marítimos. Após uma consulta alargada junto das companhias de transportes marítimos, utentes, Estados-Membros e países terceiros, consideramos que a possibilidade legal que as companhias de navegação têm de fixar preços e regular a capacidade já não se justifica nas actuais circunstâncias do mercado. A actual isenção é única. Nenhum outro sector económico – mesmo aqueles que competem directamente com as companhias de transportes marítimos regulares – beneficia de uma isenção tão generosa.
Um ambiente mais competitivo deverá permitir às companhias de transportes marítimos da UE competir e crescer. As transportadoras mais pequenas terão igualmente uma oportunidade de crescer se seguirem um modelo empresarial inovador. Não está previsto qualquer impacto no emprego ou no investimento em novos navios. Quer as transportadoras, quer os carregadores, reconheceram que o estudo mais recente, efectuado pela Global Insight, foi de elevada qualidade e que os seus resultados tiveram por base uma pesquisa exaustiva.
Temos o sólido apoio do Conselho dos Carregadores Marítimos Europeus, que representa mais de 100 000 exportações europeias, desde as mais pequenas às multinacionais. Temos o apoio da UNICE (União Europeia das Confederações de Industriais e Empresários). O próprio sector dos transportes marítimos regulares está mais dividido. Isto só é de esperar, na medida em que o sector tem estado isolado da concorrência e beneficiado de um cartel legalizado. Mas, mesmo assim, grande parte do sector aceita, hoje, que o futuro tem de ser baseado na concorrência e que os dias de regime especial estão contados.
De qualquer das formas, como reguladores, temos de ter uma visão mais alargada da questão. A nossa preocupação é a competitividade da indústria da UE. Isto inclui as companhias de transporte marítimo bem como os seus clientes, os nossos exportadores. Se olharmos para a maioria das companhias de transportes marítimos, a fixação de preços está a tornar-se cada vez menos relevante para as suas estratégias empresariais, uma vez medida que procuram meios mais eficazes de assegurar a sua sobrevivência num ambiente de mudança e instabilidade.
Gostaria de assegurar ao Parlamento que a Comissão dá grande atenção às implicações internacionais de qualquer regulamento que afecte o sector dos transportes marítimos. Sabemos que as conferências marítimas são toleradas noutras jurisdições e que deram início a contactos bilaterais de forma a garantir que os nossos parceiros estão cientes de quaisquer mudanças na nossa legislação.
Embora a Comissão esteja inteiramente convencida dos benefícios que representa o fim do sistema das conferências, está igualmente convencida da necessidade de o sector dispor de tempo suficiente para se adaptar a um mercado inteiramente competitivo. Tenciono apresentar uma proposta ao Colégio de Comissários relativamente à revogação do Regulamento do Conselho (CEE) No 4056/86, incluindo um período substancial de transição antes do sistema de conferências ser abolido.
A terminar, a Comissão está empenhada numa melhor legislação e na agenda de Lisboa. Creio que a abolição do sistema de conferências tornará a aplicação das regras de concorrência ao sector marítimo mais simples, mais eficaz do ponto de vista económico e mais equitativo. A abolição do sistema de conferências trará importantes oportunidades. Estou em crer que o sector do transporte marítimo regular e os seus clientes colherão os benefícios.
A fixação colectiva dos preços e a regulação da capacidade são, por definição, duras restrições à concorrência. Estes tipos de restrições têm como objectivo a preservação artificial de preços elevados. Os participantes num cartel como este poderão beneficiar, mas os seus clientes não, seguramente, nem sequer a economia em geral. O actual sistema só pode ser explicado num contexto histórico.
A fixação de preços pelas conferências marítimas dá origem, de facto, a preços mais elevados para os exportadores. As companhias de transporte marítimo são prósperas. Quatro das cinco transportadoras mundiais de topo estão sedeadas na UE. No entanto, os nossos exportadores chamam repetidamente a atenção para a necessidade de deixar de permitir a fixação de preços.
Como reguladores, o nosso dever é assegurar que as regras estejam em sintonia com a situação do mercado. A isenção das regras de concorrência para as conferências marítimas é uma relíquia do passado. Nos últimos vinte anos, assistimos a mudanças consideráveis no mercado de serviços regulares, com um aumento dos acordos cooperativos entre companhias de transportes marítimos, sob a forma de consórcio ou alianças globais que não incluem a fixação de preços. Isto vem mostrar que as conferências não são centrais para a eficácia continuada do sector marítimo.
O sector é importante para a eficácia da economia no seu conjunto. Os serviços programados no transporte de contentores representam, em termos de valor, aproximadamente 40% do comércio externo da UE-25 efectuado por mar. Hoje, as conferências podem fixar preços relativamente às principais rotas de navegação, e, na generalidade, assume-se que estes preços actuam como critério de referência para os preços relativos a todas as rotas de navegação com destino à UE e a partir desta.
Para além do efeito “referência” da tarifa estabelecida na conferência, uma média de 30% do preço do transporte é composto de taxas e sobretaxas fixadas em conjunto por companhias que participam nas conferências, sendo que os mesmos níveis de encargos são frequentemente aplicados pelas transportadoras que não participam na conferência. Isto significa que 18% das importações e 21% das exportações da UE-25 são afectadas pela possibilidade de as companhias de transportes marítimos fixarem preços em conjunto no âmbito da isenção por categoria concedida às conferências marítimas. Estes números mostram quão importante é despoletar outras forças concorrenciais no sector do transporte marítimo regular, muito na linha da Agenda de Lisboa e da ideia de manter o objectivo de transformar a Europa na economia mais competitiva do mundo.
Congratulo-me com o trabalho levado a cabo pelo Parlamento em resposta ao Livro Branco da Comissão, de Outubro de 2004. Congratulo-me, em especial, com o reconhecimento do Parlamento de que as regras para o sector devem ser conformes ao artigo 81º.
Estou ciente da preocupação de alguns sectores sobre as consequências da abolição da isenção por categoria concedida à conferência. Que significa a abolição das conferências? Significa depender dos mecanismos de mercado para determinar preços e capacidade, como em todos os outros sectores da economia.
Levámos a cabo uma avaliação alargada do impacto económico: foram encomendados três estudos independentes. Os resultados mostram que se as companhias de transportes marítimos deixarem de poder operar como um cartel, o resultado será, provavelmente, uma descida nos custos de transporte, o que beneficia as exportações em toda a UE e tem um impacto positivo nos países em desenvolvimento. A qualidade do serviço e a inovação sofrerão provavelmente melhorias."@pt17
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@sk18
"Mr President, the Commission has been reviewing Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 applying EU competition rules to liner shipping for the past three years. After extensive consultation with carriers, transport users, Member States and third countries, we believe that the ability that shipping lines have to fix prices and regulate capacity is no longer justified in today’s market circumstances. The current exemption is unique. No other economic sector – even those that directly compete with liners – benefits from such a generous exemption.
A more competitive environment should allow EU carriers to compete and grow. Smaller carriers will also have an opportunity to grow if they follow an innovative business model. No impact is foreseen on employment or in investment in new vessels. Both carriers and shippers recognised that the most recent study by Global Insight was of a high standard and that its results were based on thorough research.
We have the solid backing of the European Shippers’ Council representing more than 100 000 European exports from the smallest to multinationals. We have the support of UNICE. The liner industry itself is more divided. This is only to be expected as the industry has been insulated from competition and benefited from a legalised cartel. But even so, much of the industry now accepts that the future must be based on competition and that the days of special regimes are counted.
In any event, as regulators we have to look at the larger picture. Our concern is the competitiveness of EU industry. This includes shipping lines as well as their clients, our exporters. If we look at the majority of shipping lines, price-fixing is becoming less and less relevant to their business strategies as they seek more effective ways of ensuring their survival in a changing and challenging environment.
I would also like to assure Parliament that the Commission pays great attention to the international implications of any regulation that touches the shipping industry. We are aware that liner conferences are tolerated in other jurisdictions and have engaged in bilateral contacts so as to ensure that our partners are aware of whatever changes are brought to our legislation.
Although the Commission is firmly convinced of the benefits of putting an end to the conference system, it is equally convinced of the need to give the industry sufficient time to adapt to a fully competitive market. I intend to put a proposal to the College of Commissioners for the repeal of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, including a substantial transition period before the conference system is abolished.
To conclude, the Commission is committed to better regulation and to the Lisbon Agenda. I believe that abolishing the conference system will make the application of competition rules to the maritime sector simpler, more cost effective and fairer. Abolition of the conference system will bring significant opportunities. I am confident that both the liner industry and its clients will reap the benefits.
Collective price-fixing and capacity regulation are by definition hard-core restrictions to competition. These types of restriction have as their goal the artificial maintenance of high prices. Participants in such a cartel may benefit. Their customers most certainly do not. And nor does the wider economy. The present system can only be explained in an historic context.
Price-fixing by liner conferences actually results in higher prices for exporters. EU shipping lines are faring well. Four out of the top five world carriers are EU based. Yet our exporters repeatedly draw our attention to the need to stop allowing price-fixing.
As regulators, our duty is to ensure that the rules are in tune with market conditions. The exemption from competition rules for liner conferences is a relic of the past. The last twenty years have seen considerable changes in the liner market, with an increase in cooperative arrangements between shipping lines in the form of consortia and global alliances that do not include price-fixing. This goes to show that conferences are not central to the continued good health of the maritime industry.
The sector is important for the health of the economy as a whole. Scheduled services in container transport account for approximately 40% of the EU-25’s external trade by sea in value terms. Today, conferences are allowed to fix prices on all major shipping routes and these prices are generally assumed to act as a benchmark for prices on all shipping routes to and from the EU.
In addition to the benchmark effect of the conference tariff, an average of 30% of the price of transport is made up of charges and surcharges jointly fixed by lines participating in conferences and the same levels of charges are very often applied by non-conference carriers. This means that 18% of imports and 21% of EU-25 exports are affected by carriers’ ability to jointly fix prices in the liner conference block exemption. These figures show how important it is to unleash further competitive forces in the liner sector, much in line with the Lisbon Agenda and in keeping with the goal to transform Europe into the most competitive economy.
I welcome the work carried out by Parliament in reacting to the Commission’s White Paper of October 2004. I welcome in particular Parliament’s recognition that the rules for the sector must comply with Article 81.
I am aware of the concern in certain quarters about the consequences of abolishing the conference block exemption. What does abolition of conferences mean? It means reliance on market mechanisms to determine price and capacity as in all other sectors of the economy.
We have carried out an extensive economic impact assessment: three independent studies were commissioned. The results show that if shipping lines are no longer allowed to operate as a cartel, that is likely to result in lower transport costs to the benefit of exports throughout the EU and with a positive impact on developing countries. Service quality and innovation are likely to be improved."@sl19
".
Herr talman! Kommissionen har gjort en översyn av rådets förordning (EEG) nr 4056/86 om hur EG:s konkurrensregler ska tillämpas på linjesjöfart de senaste tre åren. Efter omfattande samråd med transportörer, transportanvändare, medlemsstater och tredjeländer menar vi att linjerederiernas möjlighet att fastställa priser på förhand och reglera kapaciteten inte längre är berättigad med dagens omständigheter på marknaden. Det aktuella undantaget är unikt. Ingen annan ekonomisk sektor – inte ens de som konkurrerar direkt med linjekonferenserna – åtnjuter ett så generöst undantag.
Transportörer i EU kan konkurrera och växa i en mer konkurrenskraftig omgivning. Mindre transportörer får också en chans att växa med en innovativ affärsmodell. Man räknar inte med några konsekvenser för sysselsättningen eller investeringar i nya fartyg. Både transportörer och befraktare ansåg att den senaste studien från Global Insight höll hög kvalitet och att dess resultat grundades på omsorgsfulla efterforskningar.
Vi har ett starkt stöd från Europeiska sammanslutningen för transportköpare (ESC) som företräder mer än 100 000 europeiska exportörer, från de allra minsta till multinationella företag. Vi har stöd från Unice. Inställningen inom näringen är mer kluven. Det är inget annat att vänta sig eftersom näringen har varit isolerad, skyddad från konkurrens och gynnats av legaliserade karteller. Trots det accepterar nu en stor del av näringen att konkurrens kommer att vara grunden i framtiden och att dagarna med specialregler är räknade.
Hur som helst måste vi lagstiftare se på helhetsbilden. Vi tänker främst på konkurrenskraften hos EU:s industri. Denna omfattar såväl linjerederier som deras kunder, våra exportörer. För majoriteten av linjerederierna blir fastställda priser av allt mindre betydelse för deras affärsstrategi eftersom de försöker hitta mer effektiva sätt att säkra sin överlevnad i en föränderlig och utmanande omvärld.
Jag vill också försäkra parlamentet att kommissionen är mycket uppmärksam på de internationella konsekvenserna av alla förordningar som berör sjöfarten. Vi är medvetna om att linjekonferenser är tillåtna inom andra jurisdiktioner och har inlett bilaterala kontakter för att se till att våra partner är medvetna om vilka förändringar som sker i vår lagstiftning.
Kommissionen är fast övertygad om fördelarna med att avskaffa systemet med konferenser men också om behovet av att näringen får tillräckligt med tid för att anpassa sig till en marknad där en fullständig konkurrens råder. Jag har för avsikt att lägga fram ett förslag för kommissionen om att upphäva rådets förordning (EEG) nr 4056/86, med en omfattande övergångsperiod innan systemet med konferenser avskaffas.
Sammanfattningsvis vill jag säga att kommissionen arbetar för bättre lagstiftning och för Lissabonmålen. Jag menar att ett avskaffande av systemet med konferenser kommer att göra tillämpningen av konkurrensregler på sjöfartssektorn enklare, mera kostnadseffektiv och mera rättvis. Ett avskaffande av systemet med konferenser kommer att skapa stora möjligheter. Jag är säker på att både sjöfarten och dess kunder kommer att dra nytta av det.
Kollektivt fastställda priser och kapacitetsreglering är per definition kraftigt konkurrensbegränsande. Den typen av begränsningar har som mål att på ett artificiellt sätt upprätthålla höga priser. De som är med i en sådan kartell kan tjäna på det. Deras kunder gör det med största säkerhet inte. Inte heller gör ekonomin i stort det. Det nuvarande systemet kan bara förklaras i ett historiskt sammanhang.
Att priserna fastställs på förhand av linjekonferenser leder i själva verket till högre priser för exportörer. Linjerederierna i EU klarar sig bra. Fyra av världens största transportörer har sin bas i EU. Och våra exportörer fortsätter att peka på vikten av att förbjuda fastställda priser.
Som lagstiftare är det vår plikt att se till att reglerna står i samklang med marknadens förutsättningar. Undantaget från konkurrensregler för linjekonferenser är en kvarleva från det förflutna. De senaste åren har det skett omfattande förändringar på marknaden med en ökning av samarbetet mellan linjerederier i form av konsortier och globala allianser som inte omfattar fastställande av priser. Det visar att konferenser inte är nödvändiga för att sjöfartsindustrin ska fortsätta må bra.
Sektorn är viktig för att ekonomin som helhet ska må bra. Transport av containrar i linjetrafik utgör ungefär 40 procent av värdet av den externa sjöfartshandeln för EU-25. I dag har linjekonferenserna rätt att bestämma priser på förhand på alla större rutter, och dessa priser antas allmänt utgöra ett riktmärke för priserna på alla rutter till och från EU.
Linjekonferensernas prissättning får en riktmärkeseffekt, och därutöver består i genomsnitt 30 procent av priset för transporten av kostnader och tilläggsavgifter som har fastställts gemensamt av de linjer som är med i konferenser. Samma nivå på avgifter tillämpas ofta även av transportörer utanför konferenser. Det innebär att 18 procent av importen till och 21 procent av exporten från EU-25 beror av transportörernas förmåga att gemensamt fastställa priser inom gruppundantaget för linjekonferenser. Dessa siffror visar hur viktigt det är att släppa konkurrensen fri inom linjesjöfartssektorn, något som ligger i linje med Lissabonmålen och målet att göra EU till den mest konkurrenskraftiga ekonomin.
Jag välkomnar det arbete som parlamentet har gjort som svar på kommissionens vitbok från oktober 2004. Jag välkomnar särskilt parlamentets erkännande av att reglerna för sektorn inte får strida mot artikel 81.
Jag är medveten om den oro som finns i vissa kretsar för följderna av ett avskaffande av gruppundantaget för konferenser. Vad innebär det då att avskaffa konferenserna? Det innebär att man förlitar sig på marknadsmekanismerna för att bestämma pris och kapacitet, precis som i alla andra delar av ekonomin.
Vi har genomfört en omfattande ekonomisk konsekvensanalys: tre oberoende undersökningar har beställts. Resultaten visar att om linjerederier inte längre får arbeta i kartell leder det sannolikt till lägre transportkostnader, vilket gynnar exporten från EU och är positivt för utvecklingsländerna. Kvaliteten på tjänsterna och förnyelse kommer sannolikt att gynnas."@sv21
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Charlie McCreevy,"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,11,13,4
"European Shipper´s Council"20
"Global Insight"20,12
"Member of the Commission"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,11,13,4
"benchmarking"12,12
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples