|
|
AS ANNOUNCED BY
THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FORUM
MR. MICHAEL GREY
ISSUES WHICH HAVE
ARISEN
1. There is a public demand for quality in port operations , with a
commensurate requirement for ports to be more aware of the need to promote
sustainable development. This probably requires to be addressed as part of a
regional or national consensus in which both governments and the population
in the vicinity of the port need to feel involved.
2. A serious handicap in the development of safe, high quality ports
is the fragmentation of authorities that have to be satisfied from a
regulatory point of view. The huge plethora of agencies in the United States,
and the
rapidly increasing paperwork burden in Europe, much fuelled by environmental
demands and contradictory requirements point to a need for simplification in
the planning and development processes.
3. There was clear endorsement of the importance of ports - efficient,
safe and responsive ports that are able to make a major contribution to the
landside congestion problems that are afflicting most industrialised
countries and in which the maritime industry might hold several of the
solutions. A useful slogan for the future might be : "water is safer –
but could even be faster".
4. Of all the major handicaps faced by ports, the issue of increased
liabilities was one that stood out as important. Ports find themselves under
pressure from all sides. They are called upon to operate more commercially;
to accommodate bigger ships that require to be handled faster. They are
required to expand without harm to the environment, or any perceptible
increase in risks. The demand from customers is that ports are
fluent, safe and profitable.
Clearly there is a need for balance and some compromise here.
5. It could be that we need better criteria for the assessment of
marine risk, which tends to manifest itself in very practical ways. Every
port is physically unique , but is there not a need for some criteria for the
safe
movement of vessels that will remove from
harbourmasters, pilots and other operating people the difficult
decisions that they have to make as they
attempt to balance safety with commercial considerations. The development of
international pilotage standards and port operating codes are clearly
positive developments in this respect.
6. On the issue of self-regulation, competition in port services and
the role of the regulator, it is clear that these are changing times.
Nevertheless speakers from all parts of the port-shipping company spectrum
warned against the proliferation of regulation, and regulation as a means in
itself.
"More rules don't bring more certainty"
"We must not over-regulate"
"Too much incompatibility between regulators"
"We need joined-up government"
were quotations with this theme. There is perhaps a sense that ports, like
marine people in general, are becoming overwhelmed and dispirited by
regulation. "Don't regulate the business out of existence" said one
speaker.
7. There is an obvious wish for the industry to be let alone to do
more to address problems it fully recognises. It would like to undertake more
of its own risk management , and can lay hold of most of the tools to do
this. It would like to use the carrot more than the stick ; offering
incentives for quality rather than penalties for the lack of it. Auditing,
benchmarking, the promotion of international safety standards are valuable.
The recognition of "model" ports to promote the development of best
practice is
a technique that is becoming well recognised.
8. There is a certain impatience and exasperation that there is not
more recognition by regulators of the substantial achievements in risk
reduction, hazard management and tangible improvements in safety standards.
"Leave us alone to get on with the job" is an often repeated
sentiment, although it cannot be denied that the interest of the public in a
perfect, risk-free
operation is a fact of life along with the public's intolerance of any
accident, along with widespread ignorance of the maritime industry and its
world. This is a handicap that all elements of the industry will recognise,
but there is a widespread wish that regulators would look and consult rather
more closely before they leap into regulation after an incident.
There are a few basic NEEDS which seemed to be communicated from the Forum:
a. For regulators to be better informed by practical people
b. For there to be more co-operation between port people.
c. For regular practice and improvement in risk management techniques
d. For the development of better tools to model best practice
e. For liabilities to be kept within the bounds of reason
f. For better competence and
higher skill levels afloat
g. For the strengthening of communication and
co-ordination between organisations that can make a
difference: port management/pilotage services/ship operators/harbourmasters/
and ultimately the regulators.
|
CONFERENCE COMMITTEE:
Michael
GREY
Conference Chairman
Lloyd’s List
Jannis KOSTOULAS
Managing
Director
Mare
Forum
Pieter STRUIJS
Executive Director
Port of Rotterdam
Vice-President IAPH
Raymond SEIGNETTE
Managing Director
Global Maritime
Harilaos PSARAFTIS
Managing Director
Piraeus Port Authority S.A.
Rear Adm. Robert C. NORTH USCG(Ret.)
President,
North Star Maritime, Ltd.
Ferry VAN DER LAAR
Chairman, Port Safety & Environment
Operations Committee (IAPH)
Head, Safety & Environment Department
Amsterdam
Port Authority
Cees VAN DER SLIKKE
Managing Director
AON Marine Energy & Construction
Insurance Brokers
Capt. Harry TABAK
Vice President
European Maritime Pilots’ Association
(EMPA)
|
