Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2019)88 - Aspects of railway safety and connectivity with regard to the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2019)88 - Aspects of railway safety and connectivity with regard to the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2019)88  |
| date | 12-02-2019 |
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
The United Kingdom submitted on 29 March 2017 the notification of its intention to withdraw from the Union pursuant to Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. This means that, if the Withdrawal Agreement 1 is not ratified, the Union’s primary and secondary law will cease to apply to the United Kingdom from 30 March 2019 (‘the withdrawal date’). The United Kingdom will then become a third country.
The withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union without an agreement affects the validity of safety authorisations issued under Article 11 of Directive 2004/49/EC to infrastructure managers for the management and operation of cross-border infrastructure linking the Union and the United Kingdom..
In the Commission Communication on ‘Preparing for the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union on 30 March 2019: a Contingency Action Plan’ 2 the Commission set the principles underlying the contingency measures including that they shall not remedy the lack of preparedness measures by stakeholders, or delays in their implementation. In that Communication, the Commission listed the actions it considered necessary while recalling that additional actions may be necessary at a later stage.
The European Council (Article 50) reiterated its call, on 13 December 2018, for work on preparedness at all levels for the consequences of the United Kingdom's withdrawal to be intensified, taking into account all possible outcomes.
The Commission discussed with the Member States the possible consequences of the withdrawal in the context of seminars organised by the Council of the European Union in 2018. Moreover, the impacts of the withdrawal as well as preparedness measures were extensively discussed during a series of visits to all Member States.
In the area of rail transport, in most cases the effect of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union on certificates, authorisations and licences can be remedied by stakeholders through various measures, in particular by their establishment in a Member State and through obtaining the appropriate authorisations, certificates and licences there.
However, the negotiation and signature of agreements between the EU Member States concerned and the UK would be necessary to address issues relating directly to rail cross-border operations, ensure their continuity after the withdrawal date, and thereby mitigate disruptions in the Union. The conclusion of such bilateral agreements would only be possible after the UK becomes a third country.
In particular the situation regarding the binational safety authority, set up under the Treaty of Canterbury relating to the Channel Tunnel would have to be adapted taking into account the new status of the United Kingdom as third country.
Therefore it is appropriate that the Commission proposes measures ensuring continued validity of authorisations for certain parts of the rail infrastructure in line with the relevant EU law.
Such extended validity should be limited in time to what is strictly necessary in order to give the United Kingdom and the Members States concerned the time necessary for concluding the necessary agreements.
This concerns only the safety authorisations issued under Article 11 of Directive 2004/49/EC to infrastructure managers for the management and operation of cross-border infrastructure linking the Union and the United Kingdom.
The provisions proposed are intended to ensure the continuity limited to cross-border operations and services in compliance with applicable Union legal requirements. An interruption in these activities would cause significant social and economic problems. In ensuring organisations' compliance with EU law, the proposal will also ensure the protection of consumers and citizens.
The measures in this proposal are conditional on safety standards identical with the EU requirements being applied to the infrastructure on the UK territory, which are used for the purposes of ensuring cross-border rail connectivity.
Major disruption can however only be avoided if the rail operators and the national authorities take all required measures speedily to ensure that market access licences, train drivers licences, as well as all other certificates and authorisations required to operate on Union territory are issued in good time before 30 March 2019.
• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area
This proposal is intended as a lex specialis that would address some of the consequences ensuing from the fact that the Directive 2004/49/EC will no longer apply to the United Kingdom.The proposed terms are strictly limited to what is necessary in this respect, so as to avoid disruptions of cross-border operations. They are also intended to apply only for a limited period of time. The general provisions of those acts will otherwise continue to apply. This proposal is thus fully consistent with the existing legislation.
• Consistency with other Union policies
The proposal concerns railway safety and connectivity, complementing Directive 2004/49/EC to deal specifically with the situation of the United Kingdom withdrawing from the Union without a withdrawal agreement.
2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY
• Legal basis
The legal basis is Article 91(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)
As the proposal complements existing Union law, with provisions facilitating their orderly application following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union, its objective can only be achieved through an act at the level of the Union.
• Proportionality
The proposed Regulation is considered proportionate as it is capable of avoiding disruptions through providing for a limited and necessary legal change, which covers the need to ensure continuity of the cross-border rail services with the United Kingdom. It does not go beyond what it necessary to achieve this objective and it refrains from any broader changes or any permanent measures.
• Choice of the instrument
This proposal contains a limited set of provisions to address a very specific and one-off situation. Therefore, it is not appropirate to modify Directive 2004/49/EC and Directive 2016/798 by which it is replaced with effect from 16 June 2019. Relevant provisions concerning the affected authorisations are covered by Directive 2004/49/EC. Taking this into consideration a regulation of the European Parliament and Council appears to be the only adequate form of legal act.
3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
• Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation
Not applicable due to the exceptional and one-off nature of the event necessitating this proposal.
• Stakeholder consultations
The specific circumstances surrounding the negotiations for the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union and the continuously evolving situation posed major limitations on the possibility to consult publicly on the proposal. However, the challenges arising from the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the EU and possible solutions have been raised by various rail stakeholders and a Member State’s representatives.
• Collection and use of expertise
This information has been subject to in-house legal and technical analysis to ensure the proposed measure achieves its intended purpose, but is at the same time limited to what is strictly necessary.
• Impact assessment
An impact assessment is not needed, due to the exceptional nature of the situation and limited needs of the period during which the change of status of the United Kingdom is implemented. There are no materially different policy options available except for the one proposed.
• Fundamental rights
The proposal has no impact on the application or protection of fundamental rights.
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS
Not applicable.
5. OTHER ELEMENTS
• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements
Not applicable due to the short-term nature of the proposed measure.