PURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: to reduce the occurrence of major accidents\nrelated to offshore oil and gas activities and to limit their\nconsequences.
\nPROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament\nand of the Council.
\nBACKGROUND: the magnitude and characteristics of\naccidents affecting offshore oil and gas operations (for example,\nDeepwater Horizon in the US in 2010, Montara in\nAustralia in 2009, Usumacinta in Mexico in 2007) which have\nbeen reported worldwide, including the Union, demand\naction.
\nStudies, stakeholder consultations and risk analyses\nconducted since 2010 have identified the main problems for the\nUnion as:
\nBased on frequency analysis of industry performance in\nEurope to date and on documented costs of past accidents, the\nestimated average annual economic losses and damage from\noffshore oil and gas accidents in the Union range from EUR 205\nmillion to EUR 915 million. This range is used as the empirical\nbasis of baseline risk in the impact assessment. It is estimated\nthat the benefits accruing to the Union and Member States\nsignificantly outweigh the costs of introducing higher\nstandards.
\nAccording to the Commission, the control of major\nhazard risks in the offshore industry needs to be raised to\nconsistently high standards throughout the Union. Four\nspecific objectives need to be pursued:
\n\n1) Ensure a consistent use of best practices for\nmajor hazards control by oil and gas industry offshore operations\npotentially affecting Union waters or shores;
\n\n2) Implement best regulatory practices in all\nEuropean jurisdictions with offshore oil and gas\nactivities;
\n\n3) Strengthen Union's preparedness and response\ncapacity to deal with emergencies potentially affecting Union\ncitizens, economy or environment;
\n\n4) Improve and clarify existing Union liability\nand compensation provisions.
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: in addition to the reference option\nwhich would preserve the status quo (Option 0), four strategic\noptions were evaluated:
\nThe preferred policy option is Option 2, i.e. a\ncomprehensive offshore reform raising throughout Union, through new\nlaw, the level of risk management and emergency preparedness in the\noffshore industry. The cost of the proposed measures (EUR 134\n– 140 million/year) is modest when compared with the risk\nreduction that they would guarantee (EUR 103-455\nmillion/year).
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 192 of the TFEU\n(Environment) for its environmental protection purposes and\nArticle 194 (Energy) for minimising adverse effects on Union\nsecurity of energy supply and the functioning of the internal\nenergy market.
\nCONTENT: the proposed regulation creates duties for\noperators, Member States and the Commission as follows.
\nOperator:
\nMember States: Member\nStates licensing authorities would assess in an appropriate manner\nthe potential safety and environmental performance (and financial\ncapacity to deal with safety failures) of applicants when\nconsidering awards for exploration or production\nlicenses.
\nMember States:
\nMeasures will be taken to ensure interoperability of\nexpertise and physical assets to support cross Union intervention\nincluding by EMSA. Member States and the industry will prepare and\nperiodically test emergency response plans.
\nCommission: the\nCommission is to establish an EU Offshore Authorities Group with\nrepresentatives from the competent authorities responsible for\noffshore oil and gas activities in Union Member States. The\nCommission is to amend Environmental Liability Directive\n(2004/35/EC) within the regulation.
\nBUDGETARY IMPACT: the budgetary implication of the\nproposal is approx EUR 2.5 million in the period 2013-2016,\nincluding compensations for committee participation.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions\nempowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European\nUnion.
\nIn a public session, information on a proposal for a\nregulation on safety of offshore oil and gas prospecting,\nexploration and production activities was presented to the Council.\nThis new proposal, adopted by the Commission in October, is aimed\nat reducing the risk of a major accident in the EU offshore oil and\ngas sector and limiting the consequences should such an accident\nnonetheless occur.
\nIn response to the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig\ndisaster in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010, the Commission\npresented its communication \"Facing the challenge of the safety of offshore\noil and gas activities\". The communication indicated first areas\nfor action at EU level including revision of existing legislation\nas well as new proposals.
\nBuilding on this communication, in December the\nCouncil adopted conclusions on the safety of offshore oil and\ngas activities setting out a way forward for possible further\naction in relation to offshore exploration and production of\nhydrocarbons, notably to ensure the highest possible level of\nsafety and protection of the environment as well as provisions for\nliability.
\nThe Committee on Industry, Research and Energy adopted\nthe report by Ivo BELET (EPP, BE) on the proposal for a regulation\nof the European Parliament and of the Council on safety of offshore\noil and gas prospection, exploration and production\nactivities.
\nThe Committee on the Environment, Public Health and\nFood Safety, exercising its prerogatives as an associated committee\nin accordance with Article\n50 of the Rules of Procedure of the European\nParliament, has also been consulted for an opinion on the\nreport.
\nThe two committees recommend that the position of the\nEuropean Parliament adopted in first reading following the ordinary\nlegislative procedure should amend the Commission proposal as\nfollows:
\nLegal form: Members\nsuggest amending the legal basis of the proposed act by replacing\nthe proposed Regulation with a proposed Directive of the European\nParliament and of the Council on safety of offshore oil and gas\noperations and amending Directive 2004/35/EC. This Directive\nestablishes minimum requirements for preventing major accidents and\nlimiting the consequences of major accidents in offshore oil and\ngas operations.
\nSafety and environmental considerations relating to\nlicences: when assessing the\ntechnical and financial capability of the applicant for a licence\nto carry out offshore oil and gas operations, due account shall be\ntaken of the following:
\nMember States shall ensure that the licensing\nauthority does not grant a license unless it is satisfied\nthat the applicant has provided evidence that adequate provision\nhas been or will be made on the basis of arrangements to be decided\nby Member States, to cover liabilities potentially deriving from\nits offshore oil and gas operations.
\nPublic participation : the drilling of an exploration well from a\nnon-production installation shall not be commenced unless the\nrelevant authorities of the Member State have previously ensured\nthat early and effective public participation on the possible\neffects of planned offshore operations.
\nLiability for environmental damage : without prejudice to the existing scope of\nliability relating to the prevention and remediation of\nenvironmental damage pursuant to Directive 2004/35/EC, Member\nStates shall ensure that the licensee is financially liable for\nthe prevention and remediation of environmental damage as\ndefined in that Directive, caused by offshore oil and gas\noperations carried out by, or on behalf of, the licensee or the\noperator.
\nIndependenceof\nauthorities : Members consider\nthat it is crucial it is to ensure the independence of the\nauthorities responsible for assessing the safety and environmental\nrisks of operations, from those competent for issuing the drilling\nauthorisations.
\nImplications of the European Maritime Security Agency\n(EMSA) : the Agency has the\nobligation to ensure a high and effective level of maritime safety,\nmaritime security, prevention of, and response to, pollution caused\nby ships as well as response to marine pollution caused by oil and\ngas installations. In order to secure this objective, the Agency\nshould assist Member States and the Commission in detecting and\nmonitoring the extent and environmental impact of an oil spill and\nsafety risks from installations or vessels operating around them;\nupon request from Member States, assist those Member States with\nremediation and clean-up efforts and coordinate transboundary\nemergency response following a major accident, including in the\ncase of transboundary impacts beyond Union waters.
\nDocuments to be submitted for undertaking offshore oil\nand gas operations and operating installations: according to the amended text, Member States shall\nensure that the operator or the owner of a non-production\ninstallation submits to the competent authority a copy or an\nadequate description of the corporate major accident prevention\npolicy, the company safety and environmental management system\napplicable to the installation, a report on major hazards\nbefore the planned commencement of the operations.
\nMember States shall ensure that workers'\nrepresentatives are consulted at the relevant stages in the\npreparation of the report on major hazards for a production\ninstallation, and that evidence is provided to this\neffect.
\nInternal and external emergency response\nplans: Member States shall ensure\nthat operators prepare internal emergency response plans taking\ninto account the major accident risk assessment undertaken during\npreparation of the most recent report on major hazards. This shall\ninclude an analysis of the oil spill response\neffectiveness.
\nMember States shall prepare external emergency\nresponse plans covering all offshore oil and gas installations or\nconnected infrastructure and potentially affected areas within\ntheir jurisdiction. Member States shall specify the role and\nfinancial obligation of licensees and operators in the external\nemergency response and include reference to such information in the\nexternal emergency response plans.
\nIndependent verification: Member States shall ensure that the operator or the\nowner of a non-production installation submits to the competent\nauthority a description of the scheme of independent verification.\nMember States shall ensure that operators and owners of non\nproduction installations respond to and take appropriate action\nbased on the advice of the independent verifier.
\nMajor accident prevention by operators and owners of\nnon-production installations :\nthe major accident prevention policy shall take account of the\noperators' primary responsibility for, inter alia, the control of\nmajor hazard risks, which are a result of its operations and for\ncontinuously improving control of said risks so as to ensure a high\nlevel of protection at all times. Operators should ensure they have\naccess to sufficient physical, human and financial resources\nto minimise and rectify the impact of a major accident. The major\naccident prevention policy shall be in writing and shall\nestablish the overall aims and organisation for control of major\naccident hazards, and how these arrangements are put into\neffect at corporate level. Member States shall ensure that\noperators and owners of non-production installations prepare and\nmaintain a complete inventory of emergency response equipment\npertinent to their offshore oil and gas operation.
\nCross-border effects : in the event of a major accident, the competent\nauthority of the Member State in whose waters the accident has\noccurred shall, without delay, notify the Commission, other\nconcerned Member States and their competent authorities and the\npublic concerned about the accident and the steps being taken to\nlimit the effects on the environment and human health. It shall\nsubmit, before the start of the operation, useful\ninformation to the Member States likely to be\naffected.
\nCooperation between Member States: the Member State shall ensure that its competent\nauthority regularly exchanges knowledge, information and experience\nwith other competent authorities inter alia through the European\nUnion Offshore Oil and Gas Authorities Group (EUOAG),\nand that it engages in consultations on the application of relevant\nnational and Union legal frameworks with the industry, other\nstakeholders and the Commission.
\nCoordinated approach at international\nlevel: the Commission should :\n(i) encourage cooperation with third countries that undertake\noffshore oil and gas operations in the same marine regions as\nMember States ; (ii) facilitate the exchange of information in\norder to promote preventive measures and regional emergency\nresponse plans ; (iii) promote high safety standards for\noffshore oil and gas operations at international level in relevant\nglobal and regional fora.
\nPURPOSE: to reduce the occurrence of major accidents\nrelated to offshore oil and gas activities and to limit their\nconsequences.
\nPROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament\nand of the Council.
\nBACKGROUND: the magnitude and characteristics of\naccidents affecting offshore oil and gas operations (for example,\nDeepwater Horizon in the US in 2010, Montara in\nAustralia in 2009, Usumacinta in Mexico in 2007) which have\nbeen reported worldwide, including the Union, demand\naction.
\nStudies, stakeholder consultations and risk analyses\nconducted since 2010 have identified the main problems for the\nUnion as:
\nBased on frequency analysis of industry performance in\nEurope to date and on documented costs of past accidents, the\nestimated average annual economic losses and damage from\noffshore oil and gas accidents in the Union range from EUR 205\nmillion to EUR 915 million. This range is used as the empirical\nbasis of baseline risk in the impact assessment. It is estimated\nthat the benefits accruing to the Union and Member States\nsignificantly outweigh the costs of introducing higher\nstandards.
\nAccording to the Commission, the control of major\nhazard risks in the offshore industry needs to be raised to\nconsistently high standards throughout the Union. Four\nspecific objectives need to be pursued:
\n\n1) Ensure a consistent use of best practices for\nmajor hazards control by oil and gas industry offshore operations\npotentially affecting Union waters or shores;
\n\n2) Implement best regulatory practices in all\nEuropean jurisdictions with offshore oil and gas\nactivities;
\n\n3) Strengthen Union's preparedness and response\ncapacity to deal with emergencies potentially affecting Union\ncitizens, economy or environment;
\n\n4) Improve and clarify existing Union liability\nand compensation provisions.
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: in addition to the reference option\nwhich would preserve the status quo (Option 0), four strategic\noptions were evaluated:
\nThe preferred policy option is Option 2, i.e. a\ncomprehensive offshore reform raising throughout Union, through new\nlaw, the level of risk management and emergency preparedness in the\noffshore industry. The cost of the proposed measures (EUR 134\n– 140 million/year) is modest when compared with the risk\nreduction that they would guarantee (EUR 103-455\nmillion/year).
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 192 of the TFEU\n(Environment) for its environmental protection purposes and\nArticle 194 (Energy) for minimising adverse effects on Union\nsecurity of energy supply and the functioning of the internal\nenergy market.
\nCONTENT: the proposed regulation creates duties for\noperators, Member States and the Commission as follows.
\nOperator:
\nMember States: Member\nStates licensing authorities would assess in an appropriate manner\nthe potential safety and environmental performance (and financial\ncapacity to deal with safety failures) of applicants when\nconsidering awards for exploration or production\nlicenses.
\nMember States:
\nMeasures will be taken to ensure interoperability of\nexpertise and physical assets to support cross Union intervention\nincluding by EMSA. Member States and the industry will prepare and\nperiodically test emergency response plans.
\nCommission: the\nCommission is to establish an EU Offshore Authorities Group with\nrepresentatives from the competent authorities responsible for\noffshore oil and gas activities in Union Member States. The\nCommission is to amend Environmental Liability Directive\n(2004/35/EC) within the regulation.
\nBUDGETARY IMPACT: the budgetary implication of the\nproposal is approx EUR 2.5 million in the period 2013-2016,\nincluding compensations for committee participation.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions\nempowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European\nUnion.
\nPURPOSE: to reduce the occurrence of major accidents\nrelated to offshore oil and gas activities and to limit their\nconsequences.
\nPROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament\nand of the Council.
\nBACKGROUND: the magnitude and characteristics of\naccidents affecting offshore oil and gas operations (for example,\nDeepwater Horizon in the US in 2010, Montara in\nAustralia in 2009, Usumacinta in Mexico in 2007) which have\nbeen reported worldwide, including the Union, demand\naction.
\nStudies, stakeholder consultations and risk analyses\nconducted since 2010 have identified the main problems for the\nUnion as:
\nBased on frequency analysis of industry performance in\nEurope to date and on documented costs of past accidents, the\nestimated average annual economic losses and damage from\noffshore oil and gas accidents in the Union range from EUR 205\nmillion to EUR 915 million. This range is used as the empirical\nbasis of baseline risk in the impact assessment. It is estimated\nthat the benefits accruing to the Union and Member States\nsignificantly outweigh the costs of introducing higher\nstandards.
\nAccording to the Commission, the control of major\nhazard risks in the offshore industry needs to be raised to\nconsistently high standards throughout the Union. Four\nspecific objectives need to be pursued:
\n\n1) Ensure a consistent use of best practices for\nmajor hazards control by oil and gas industry offshore operations\npotentially affecting Union waters or shores;
\n\n2) Implement best regulatory practices in all\nEuropean jurisdictions with offshore oil and gas\nactivities;
\n\n3) Strengthen Union's preparedness and response\ncapacity to deal with emergencies potentially affecting Union\ncitizens, economy or environment;
\n\n4) Improve and clarify existing Union liability\nand compensation provisions.
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: in addition to the reference option\nwhich would preserve the status quo (Option 0), four strategic\noptions were evaluated:
\nThe preferred policy option is Option 2, i.e. a\ncomprehensive offshore reform raising throughout Union, through new\nlaw, the level of risk management and emergency preparedness in the\noffshore industry. The cost of the proposed measures (EUR 134\n– 140 million/year) is modest when compared with the risk\nreduction that they would guarantee (EUR 103-455\nmillion/year).
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 192 of the TFEU\n(Environment) for its environmental protection purposes and\nArticle 194 (Energy) for minimising adverse effects on Union\nsecurity of energy supply and the functioning of the internal\nenergy market.
\nCONTENT: the proposed regulation creates duties for\noperators, Member States and the Commission as follows.
\nOperator:
\nMember States: Member\nStates licensing authorities would assess in an appropriate manner\nthe potential safety and environmental performance (and financial\ncapacity to deal with safety failures) of applicants when\nconsidering awards for exploration or production\nlicenses.
\nMember States:
\nMeasures will be taken to ensure interoperability of\nexpertise and physical assets to support cross Union intervention\nincluding by EMSA. Member States and the industry will prepare and\nperiodically test emergency response plans.
\nCommission: the\nCommission is to establish an EU Offshore Authorities Group with\nrepresentatives from the competent authorities responsible for\noffshore oil and gas activities in Union Member States. The\nCommission is to amend Environmental Liability Directive\n(2004/35/EC) within the regulation.
\nBUDGETARY IMPACT: the budgetary implication of the\nproposal is approx EUR 2.5 million in the period 2013-2016,\nincluding compensations for committee participation.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions\nempowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European\nUnion.
\nPURPOSE: to reduce the occurrence of major accidents\nrelated to offshore oil and gas activities and to limit their\nconsequences.
\nPROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament\nand of the Council.
\nBACKGROUND: the magnitude and characteristics of\naccidents affecting offshore oil and gas operations (for example,\nDeepwater Horizon in the US in 2010, Montara in\nAustralia in 2009, Usumacinta in Mexico in 2007) which have\nbeen reported worldwide, including the Union, demand\naction.
\nStudies, stakeholder consultations and risk analyses\nconducted since 2010 have identified the main problems for the\nUnion as:
\nBased on frequency analysis of industry performance in\nEurope to date and on documented costs of past accidents, the\nestimated average annual economic losses and damage from\noffshore oil and gas accidents in the Union range from EUR 205\nmillion to EUR 915 million. This range is used as the empirical\nbasis of baseline risk in the impact assessment. It is estimated\nthat the benefits accruing to the Union and Member States\nsignificantly outweigh the costs of introducing higher\nstandards.
\nAccording to the Commission, the control of major\nhazard risks in the offshore industry needs to be raised to\nconsistently high standards throughout the Union. Four\nspecific objectives need to be pursued:
\n\n1) Ensure a consistent use of best practices for\nmajor hazards control by oil and gas industry offshore operations\npotentially affecting Union waters or shores;
\n\n2) Implement best regulatory practices in all\nEuropean jurisdictions with offshore oil and gas\nactivities;
\n\n3) Strengthen Union's preparedness and response\ncapacity to deal with emergencies potentially affecting Union\ncitizens, economy or environment;
\n\n4) Improve and clarify existing Union liability\nand compensation provisions.
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: in addition to the reference option\nwhich would preserve the status quo (Option 0), four strategic\noptions were evaluated:
\nThe preferred policy option is Option 2, i.e. a\ncomprehensive offshore reform raising throughout Union, through new\nlaw, the level of risk management and emergency preparedness in the\noffshore industry. The cost of the proposed measures (EUR 134\n– 140 million/year) is modest when compared with the risk\nreduction that they would guarantee (EUR 103-455\nmillion/year).
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 192 of the TFEU\n(Environment) for its environmental protection purposes and\nArticle 194 (Energy) for minimising adverse effects on Union\nsecurity of energy supply and the functioning of the internal\nenergy market.
\nCONTENT: the proposed regulation creates duties for\noperators, Member States and the Commission as follows.
\nOperator:
\nMember States: Member\nStates licensing authorities would assess in an appropriate manner\nthe potential safety and environmental performance (and financial\ncapacity to deal with safety failures) of applicants when\nconsidering awards for exploration or production\nlicenses.
\nMember States:
\nMeasures will be taken to ensure interoperability of\nexpertise and physical assets to support cross Union intervention\nincluding by EMSA. Member States and the industry will prepare and\nperiodically test emergency response plans.
\nCommission: the\nCommission is to establish an EU Offshore Authorities Group with\nrepresentatives from the competent authorities responsible for\noffshore oil and gas activities in Union Member States. The\nCommission is to amend Environmental Liability Directive\n(2004/35/EC) within the regulation.
\nBUDGETARY IMPACT: the budgetary implication of the\nproposal is approx EUR 2.5 million in the period 2013-2016,\nincluding compensations for committee participation.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions\nempowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European\nUnion.
\nPURPOSE: to reduce the occurrence of major accidents\nrelated to offshore oil and gas activities and to limit their\nconsequences.
\nPROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament\nand of the Council.
\nBACKGROUND: the magnitude and characteristics of\naccidents affecting offshore oil and gas operations (for example,\nDeepwater Horizon in the US in 2010, Montara in\nAustralia in 2009, Usumacinta in Mexico in 2007) which have\nbeen reported worldwide, including the Union, demand\naction.
\nStudies, stakeholder consultations and risk analyses\nconducted since 2010 have identified the main problems for the\nUnion as:
\nBased on frequency analysis of industry performance in\nEurope to date and on documented costs of past accidents, the\nestimated average annual economic losses and damage from\noffshore oil and gas accidents in the Union range from EUR 205\nmillion to EUR 915 million. This range is used as the empirical\nbasis of baseline risk in the impact assessment. It is estimated\nthat the benefits accruing to the Union and Member States\nsignificantly outweigh the costs of introducing higher\nstandards.
\nAccording to the Commission, the control of major\nhazard risks in the offshore industry needs to be raised to\nconsistently high standards throughout the Union. Four\nspecific objectives need to be pursued:
\n\n1) Ensure a consistent use of best practices for\nmajor hazards control by oil and gas industry offshore operations\npotentially affecting Union waters or shores;
\n\n2) Implement best regulatory practices in all\nEuropean jurisdictions with offshore oil and gas\nactivities;
\n\n3) Strengthen Union's preparedness and response\ncapacity to deal with emergencies potentially affecting Union\ncitizens, economy or environment;
\n\n4) Improve and clarify existing Union liability\nand compensation provisions.
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: in addition to the reference option\nwhich would preserve the status quo (Option 0), four strategic\noptions were evaluated:
\n