Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-26-Speech-2-396"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060926.30.2-396"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, first of all I should like to thank Mrs Barsi-Pataky and Mrs Hall, as well as Mr Rübig and Mr Glante, who should be with us soon. I am grateful to them, and particularly to Mrs Barsi-Pataky, for the close attention they have paid to the development of this great Galileo programme.
The second problem is that of cooperation with third countries. As you will be aware, the international agreements regarding the Galileo programme are negotiated on the basis of Article 300 of the Treaty. The procedure laid down in that article must always include consultation of Parliament before such agreements are concluded, and I will see to it personally that this takes place. It is quite certain that cooperation with third countries regarding Galileo represents an opportunity, but this opportunity must be managed, and the Commission will send another communication to Parliament and the Council this autumn, setting out the broad outline of this cooperation policy.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I do not want to gloss over the difficulties that go hand in hand with the implementation of a project as ambitious as this one, but at the same time I would draw your attention to the risks involved in giving the impression that this programme will in some way be subject to crucial delays that cast doubt on the viability of the project. That is not the case, and nor will it be, because I personally intend, with your help, with the active support of Parliament, to ensure that this great project can be put into practice in accordance with the schedule that we set to guarantee its viability, because you are quite right that there will be no shortage of competitors. Galileo therefore needs to be put into operation within the timeframe I have set out. I really will keep a close eye on this throughout the procedure, aided and supported by your Parliament.
I will try to provide you with some specific answers, because I should like to put to rest certain fears that, in spite of everything, seem to me to be rather excessive. I would remind you that the Galileo programme was designed in three stages. First, there is a development and validation phase, involving the development of the satellites and terrestrial components of the system and their in-orbit validation. This development phase runs from 2003 to 2009, and is currently being managed by the Galileo joint undertaking. This will be followed, from 2009 to 2010, by the deployment phase, involving the production and launching of the satellites and the full instalment of the terrestrial component. Finally, the operating phase will start in 2010.
The deployment and operation phases will be covered by a concession contract lasting around 20 years. The Supervisory Authority, which is a Community agency, will manage these two phases, and will act as the licensing authority.
Within this schedule, there is one date to which we absolutely must stick – and on this point you are quite right – namely the date from which businesses and citizens will be able to receive accurate and reliable signals from Galileo. That will be at the end of 2010, when the first Galileo satellites will start transmitting their signals.
That said, I have no intention of glossing over the difficulties. Galileo is not only a technological innovation, but also, at institutional level, a very particular operation. The project now involves eight industrial players, 25 public players and three institutions. In the long term, this multiple patronage will be Galileo's strength, but it is true that all of these players, all of these supporters of Galileo, will really need to adapt in order to make progress on the matter together.
When, in 2005, I observed the problems between the eight members of the future industrial consortium, I appointed Karel van Miert to resolve the problems, which he did with remarkable success. We also needed to deal with the changes in safety and security requirements that necessitated a further delay for technical examination. Be that as it may, the important thing is the result in 2010.
Having said that, we also need to make steady progress in the schedule of intermediate steps, paying close attention to the quality and viability of the project. For example, the industrial activities of the in-orbit validation phase, which are the responsibility of the European Space Agency, began in December 2004. The contract regarding the completion of this phase was signed on 19 January 2006, and the work is currently progressing satisfactorily. The technical feasibility of the project has been proven, and it is now a question of laying the foundations for a true public/private partnership for the next 20 years. It goes without saying that I will inform you of any problems that arise regarding the signing of the concession contract.
I should now like, in response to your second question, to turn to the European Supervisory Authority. This is the authority responsible for supervising the future concessionaire. The Supervisory Authority will have to ensure that the concessionaire complies with the concession contract and the annexed terms and conditions, and it will take all appropriate measures to ensure that services are not interrupted if the concessionaire goes bankrupt. In addition, the Supervisory Authority will also have to monitor all the technical, security and financial aspects of the concession. In this regard, I would say that the wording of the concession contract is obviously very important, because it will be the primary instrument on which the Supervisory Authority's ability to monitor the concessionaire will be based. The concession contract must therefore be worded quite unambiguously, and I will of course inform Parliament of it, as the Commission has made a commitment to inform you of the content of the concession contract before it is signed by the Supervisory Authority.
Two final problems remain to be addressed: first of all, the financial issue. The distribution of financial contributions between the Member States and the industrial players is largely dependent on the risk assessment, but this assessment itself requires the best possible understanding of Galileo's possible applications. That is why, by the end of November, I will publish a communication in the form of a Green Paper on these applications. For that purpose, we have come up with a competition to appeal to the imaginations of the European people regarding the possible applications of Galileo. I am quite sure that we are still underestimating the potential of Galileo, and I would urge you, ladies and gentlemen, to make efforts yourselves to encourage all our European industries to contribute to this discovery of the possible applications of Galileo."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples