Rini Goos, EDA’s Deputy Chief Executive, today addressed Austrian security and defence stakeholders at a seminar in Vienna on EU funding opportunities for defence research (R&T) projects. The event was jointly organised by the EDA, the Austrian Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) with the support of the Austrian Defence & Security Industry (ASW).
Around 80 representatives from the Austrian MoD, the Federal Economic Chamber, the security and defence industry, business associations, defence-related research and technology organisations as well as universities participated in the seminar which included awareness raising and in-depth know-how building sessions.
The seminar showed in concrete terms how to access funding and other instruments available within three European Union funding programmes, i.e. COSME (EU Programme for COmpetitiveness of SMEs), the Structural Funds and the Preparatory Action for Defence Research (PADR).
In his opening speech, Rini Goos said: "We take further legitimation and momentum from a ‘window of opportunities’ opened by the 2016 EU Global Strategy of the High Representative of the Union Ms Mogherini (who is also Vice-President of the European Commission and Head of the EDA), and strengthened by the European Defence Action Plan [EDAP] released by the European Commission. The Global Strategy clearly stated that Union funds - to support defence research and technologies and multinational cooperation - are essential prerequisites for European security and defence efforts, underpinned by a strong European defence industry”.
This seminar was the first delivered by EDA since the EDAP proposed that Structural Funds may fund the defence sector. It was also the first EDA’s seminar in a Member State addressing the forthcoming funding opportunities under the Preparatory Action for Defence Research.
The EDA, the European Commission, the Ministry of Defence and Sports, the Research Promotion Agency (FFG) and the Austrian Conference on Spatial Planning (ÖROK - as national authority in charge of Structural Funds deployment in Austria) delivered effective presentations about EU funding available for the defence sector currently and in the future.
Under the COSME section of the seminar, a particular focus was put on the Enterprise Europe Network’s local free services. Additionally, more than 40 Austrian project managers have been trained to apply for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF, the main among the European Investment and Structural Funds) during a dedicated practical coaching session simulating the application process.
The seminar raised interest across all attending stakeholders who were able to establish promising contacts in view of an effective follow-up aimed at accessing EU funding opportunities.
Taking into account the increasing opportunities arising from the recent statement in the European Defence Action Plan (EDAP) that Structural Funds may be used to fund the defence sector, different stakeholders have been very keen to exchange views with Mr Goos and EDA’s experts on how to take advantage of EDA’s related work in close cooperation with the Austrian Ministry of Defence and Sport.
More information:
Downing Street has been accused of covering up a Trident missile malfunction weeks before a crucial Commons vote on the future of the submarine-based missile system.
A Trident II D5 missile test ended in failure after it was launched from the British submarine HMS Vengeance off the coast of Florida in June 2016. The weapon is 13 metres long, weighs 60 tonnes and can carry nuclear warheads with up to eight times the destructive capacity of the bombs that hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the second world war. Trident missile can hit a target 4,000 nautical miles away and be accurate to within a few metres.
The problem is that when HMS Vengeance, one of the UK’s four nuclear submarines, test-fired the missile off the coast of Florida, the missile was not out by a few metres but several thousand miles. It had been targeted at the southern Atlantic off the coast of west Africa. Instead, it was heading in the opposite direction, over the US.
The four previous UK tests – in 2000, 2005, 2009 and 2012 – were successful, it was the only firing test of a British nuclear missile in four years and raises serious questions about the reliability and safety of the weapons system. But the error was hushed up. The cause of the failure remains top secret, but quotes a senior naval source saying the missile, which was unarmed for the test, suffered an in-flight malfunction after launch. According to defence sources, the missile did not veer off in the wrong direction because it was faulty but because the information relayed to it was faulty. This explanation is not reassuring.
It was reportedly intended to be fired 5,600 miles to a sea target off the west coast of Africa but may have veered off towards America instead. There was a major panic at the highest level of government and the military after the first test of our nuclear deterrent in four years ended in disastrous failure. In July, MPs voted by 472 to 117 to back the renewal of Britain's Trident nuclear deterrence. The overwhelming vote supported the Government's plans to spend up to £40 billion on four new Successor-class submarines.
Some analysts say the fact that UK tests are infrequent is not important because the US tests much more frequently and both share the underlying technology. There are over 150 tests over almost 30 years, with a sub-3% failure rate, and well under 1% since British submarines began carrying the missiles.
Source
http://www.independent.co.uk/
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/
https://www.theguardian.com
Last week (15-20 January), an EDA workshop aimed at training operators and technicians in the daily use of Maritime Surveillance (MARSUR) capabilities was held at the HQ of operation SOPHIA in Rome.
The humanitarian crisis resulting from migration via the Mediterranean has led to EU Member States launching a response. So far there are five Naval Operations led by military and civilian entities as well as numerous operations run by Non-Governmental Organisations. While the focus and the aim of military operations such as the NATO-led Ocean Shield and the EU NAVFORMED Operation SOPHIA may differ, one element is vital to all naval operations: Maritime Situational Awareness.
Naval Forces the world over are striving to establish what is called a recognized maritime picture. In basic terms that means finding out exactly what is happening in any given operational area at sea, including whether ships (‘contacts’ in naval terms) are transiting the area or working within it.
Maritime Situational Awareness also includes knowledge about events taking place in and around a maritime area. Current operations in the Mediterranean have underlined the need to include both military and civilian information to get a full picture. There are many different military and civilians systems around – all of which need to be compiled, verified and analysed – so a significant challenge lies in bringing the relevant information together.
To this end, the European Defence Agency (EDA) helped to design an interface acting as a system of systems to support CSDP operations such as the EU NAVFORMED Operation SOPHIA. It does this by enabling maritime headquarters to exchange data and information with other networks through various services such as chat, email, tactical drawing, video recordings and track streaming. The SOPHIA Operational Headquarters was connected to the MARSUR Networking Community which encompasses 17 EU Member States plus Norway.
To enhance the input of information, EDA has sponsored and designed a complex workshop which trains operators and technicians in the daily use of the MARSUR capability. This training took place from 15-20 Jan 2017 in Rome, Italy. As a lead nation of Operation SOPHIA and a host nation for the training, Italy offered ideal training conditions. 36 participants from 12 Member States and Norway spent a week at the Italian Tor di Quinto Naval Club. The participants were joined by MARSUR contractors’ representatives, trainers and representatives from the MARSUR community and representatives from the Italian Navy and Operational Headquarters.
The week provided a unique opportunity to exchange experience, skills and knowledge about the MARSUR capability and the requirements of Operation SOPHIA. Most of all, meeting counterparts from other Member States helped to personalise the otherwise faceless messages on the screen. The resulting network serves to build up the most important asset of information exchange and cooperation: trust.
To provide even more support to Operation SOPHIA, representatives from EDA met with staff from the SOPHIA Operational Headquarters, the Italian Navy and the MARSUR community to ensure that information is sent not only from those ships engaged in Operation SOPHIA, but also all Member States’ ships transiting the Mediterranean.
This type of cooperation is a good example of the implementation of the EU Maritime Security Strategy which envisions cross-sectoral information exchange among European actors.
More information:
Written by Didier Bourguignon (6th edition)
© daizuoxin / Fotolia
Despite significant progress in recent decades, air pollution levels in the European Union still have adverse impacts on the environment and on health. The European Commission estimates that health-related costs of air pollution in the EU range from 390 to 940 billion euros per year.
The proposed directive, which would replace the current National Emission Ceilings Directive, sets binding national reduction objectives for six air pollutants (SO2, NOx, NMVOCs, NH3, PM2.5 and CH4) to be met by 2020 and 2030. It will also implement the Gothenburg Protocol as amended in 2012. The European Commission estimates that implementation costs would range from 2.2 to 3.3 billion euros per year.
After completion of the legislative procedure at first reading in the European Parliament and the Council, the presidents of the co-legislators signed the final act on 14 December 2016. Member States are required to transpose the new directive into national law by 1 July 2018.
VersionsCommittee responsible:
Rapporteur:
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI)Julie Girling (ECR, UK)
COM(2013)920 of 18.12.2013
procedure ref.: 2013/0443(COD)
Ordinary legislative procedure
Procedure completed: Directive (EU) 2016/2284Click to view slideshow.
Written by Angelos Delivorias (2nd edition),
© duncanandison / Fotolia
The European Venture Capital Funds (EuVECA) and European Social Entrepreneurship Funds (EuSEF) are collective investment schemes that have been harmonised at European Union (EU) level since 2011 by means of two Regulations: (EU) No 345/2013 (EuVECA) and (EU) No 346/2013 (EuSEF). In its 2016 review, the Commission noted that these funds remain small and concentrated in a few Member States and that, while the take-up of EuVECA could be considered successful, the EuSEF results have been disappointing. Three main obstacles to further growth have been identified: limitations imposed on managers; product rules; and the (varying) application of regulatory fees in Member States with regards to funds’ marketing and management. To overcome those obstacles, the Commission has identified some measures that − by removing limitations on larger managers managing EuVECA and EuSEF funds, decreasing costs for EuVECA and EuSEF funds, and broadening the range of eligible assets EuVECA funds may invest in − should increase investment into these funds.
Interactive PDF Proposal for a Regulation amending Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 on European venture capital funds (EuVECA) and Regulation (EU) No 346/2013 on European social entrepreneurship funds (EuSEF) Committee responsible:Rapporteur:
Shadow rapporteurs:
Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)
Sirpa Pietikäinen (EPP, Finland)
Andrea Cozzolino (S&D, Italy)
Syed Kamall (ECR, UK)
Cora Van Nieuwenhuizen (ALDE, the Netherlands)
Marco Zanni (EFDD, Italy)
COM(2016)0461 14.07.2016, 2016/0221(COD)
Ordinary legislative procedure (COD) (Parliament and Council on equal footing – formerly ‘co-decision’)
Next steps expected: Vote in Committee