Annexes to COM(2012)671 - Establishing appropriate relations between the EU and the European Space Agency - Main contents

Please note

This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.

dossier	COM(2012)671 - Establishing appropriate relations between the EU and the European Space Agency.
document	COM(2012)671
date	November 14, 2012

agreement with ESA. As the collaboration between the EU and ESA grows, this asymmetry combined with a voting system where each Member State has one vote in the ESA Council and the key decisions within this body are adopted by unanimity gives ESA members, which are not members of the EU, disproportionate leverage over matters that may affect the EU. In addition the asymmetry complicates discussions particularly as regards security and defence matters as indicated below.

2.3.        Asymmetry in security and defence matters

The EU's competence over security and defence matters has grown stronger with the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty and the setting up of the European External Action Service. Space capacities have often the potential to be used for civil and defence purposes. In order to contribute towards objectives of the Common Security and Defence Policy, the EU has to establish ever closer and stronger links and synergies between the civil and defence dimensions of space. The collaboration of the Member States and ESA is essential in this endeavour. However, the relations between EU and ESA are constrained by the fact that ESA's membership includes States not members of the EU, which poses an obvious problem in general and an even more acute problem when it comes to security and defence matters.

2.4.        Absence of mechanisms for policy coordination

ESA's space activities lack a structural connection and coordination mechanism within the wider policy-making of the European Union. The 2004 EU/ESA Framework Agreement[5], in spite of its wide scope, does not provide for them. Specific mechanisms for coordination and cooperation need to be agreed in time-consuming negotiations at programme level. There is no formal mechanism at policy level to ensure that initiatives taken within ESA are consistent with EU policies. This is of particular concern regarding international relations.

2.5.        Missing political accountability for ESA

Finally, the relations between the EU and ESA are affected by the asymmetry regarding political accountability. The fact that ESA as a European agency has no formal link with the European Parliament deprives ESA of the direct link with citizens that any EU policy enjoys.

3. The way ahead

The EU can provide political dimension (including at the international level) and legitimacy, as well as links with other policy areas. The need for greater operational efficiency, symmetry in defence and security matters, political coordination and accountability can only be resolved, in the long term, through the rapprochement of ESA towards the European Union.

The Commission considers that a clear target date should be set between 2020 and 2025 for this long term objective. The Commission, working closely with ESA could present to Member States several possible options for such rapprochement before the end of 2013. These options would include: improved cooperation under the “status quo”, bringing ESA as an intergovernmental organisation under the authority of the European Union (following, to a certain extent, the model of the European Defence Agency), or transforming ESA into an EU agency (following the model of existing regulatory agencies). The Commission, working closely with ESA, will carry out a detailed cost benefit and risk analysis of the different options, with a view to maximising synergies between the different actors including the GSA.

These options would preserve the current essential features of ESA (i.e. optional programmes subscribed by Member States) while giving ESA key EU features – such as qualified majority decision-making or accountability vis-à-vis the European Parliament.

In the meantime, it is possible to ensure a well-functioning cohabitation between EU and ESA that can help achieving the long-term objective of rapprochement. The delegation agreements concluded between the EU and ESA have already contributed to a rapprochement of ESA towards the EU, the leading example being ESA's Navigation Directorate in the framework of Galileo.

In its April 2011 Communication[6] the Commission suggested that ESA should continue to develop into an organisation with an intergovernmental and an EU dimension in which military and civil programmes can coexist. It should continue to develop management structures geared solely towards EU programmes. A flexible membership structure should also be established in order to enable Switzerland and Norway to take part in some programmes, subject to an agreement with the EU.

Building on those initial ideas, the Commission suggests that the EU could:

– Work through the Council of the EU, using as appropriate the open method of coordination to ensure coherence within the EU and consistency of EU Member States' positions in ESA with EU policies;

– Have systematic recourse to ESA for the design and development of EU space infrastructures, whereas exploitation activities will be carried out by other entities, such as the GSA.;

– Ensure a homogeneous approach in line with the EU Financial Regulation for delegating responsibilities over EU space programmes to ESA as a way to prepare ESA to working within the EU environment, and for establishing partnerships with Member States when appropriate.

ESA could:

– Make the necessary structural adaptations (financial and internal decision-making) to ensure that activities delegated to ESA by the Commission are managed within an EU-like environment (e.g. through a dedicated directorate managing EU programmes within ESA);

– Make the necessary changes allowing unrestricted access to the European Commission to ESA's relevant statutory bodies (e.g. ESA Council and its subordinate bodies) in order to give the Commission the possibility to provide input and ensure coordination with EU policies using existing mechanisms within ESA.

4. Conclusion

The Commission invites the Council and the European Parliament to provide feedback on these suggestions concerning the relationship between the EU and ESA, the long term goal of rapprochement of ESA towards the EU framework. On this basis the Commission could provide a detailed cost benefits analysis of the possible options.

[1]               COM(2011)152

[2]               COM(2011)814

[3]               Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, as amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1081/2010

[4]               Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Poland is finalising the ratification process to become ESA's 20th Member State.

[5]               OJ L no 261 of 6.08.2004, p. 64.

[6]               COM(2011)152