Mua 2010 Final

1,124 views

Published on

John Francis MUA2010
PPT 2003

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,124
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • All of these ships awaiting export coal cargoes are foreign flagged. The same can be said of the ships waiting at any other major Australian dry bulk export terminal
  • The Australian shipping industry involves a wide variety of sectors such as: coastal and international trading, passenger vessels (cruise and ferry),tourism and recreational vessels, offshore oil and gas, harbour towage and salvage tugs etc. We will focus primarily on the dry bulk trades because they represent the most substantial sector of the Australian industry from a volume perspective. And this volume is slated to grow considerably in the near future. Reference will be made to submissions made by industry to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development & Local Government, Inquiry into Coastal Shipping Policy and Regulation. See generally: http://www.aph.gov.au/House/committee/itrdlg/coastalshipping/report.htm Reference will also be made to the Independent Review of Australian Shipping (2003) (IRAS) conducted by The Hon Peter Morris and The Hon John Sharp: http://www.asa.com.au/upload/news/IRAS%20Blueprint%20Final.pdf
  • Iron ore and coal represent well over half of Australia’s exports by volume. Nevertheless, there are still substantial tonnages of other bulk commodities including alumina, grains and minerals
  • Fertilizers, Pb and Zn ores and concentrates are important to the local market because much of that business is controlled locally.
  • A significant percentage of the imported phosphates and finished fertilizer business is controlled by Australian interests.
  • The total volume speaks for itself...
  • LONDON COURAGE Marshall Island Flag, Blt'07 – 205,000 DWT on 18.1 metres draft – 292 metres LOA and 50 metres beam – maiden voyage loading coal at Hay Point for Gijon 22Nov07.
  • Newcastle 04Apr06, capes “HUI TAI” + “HEBEI DRAGON” + “HANJIN MADRAS” loading coat at Kooragang loaders.
  • Ore carriers AQUAFAITH (167110 dwt) , CIC ELLIS, CHANNEL ALLIANCE (171978 dwt) + dredger VOLVOX ASIA at Parker Pt, Dampier 02Apr07.
  • Newcastle 01Mar07 - Panamax HALO OLYMPUS inbound passing Cape STAR EUROPE.
  • BETEIGEUZE Liberian Flag Blt'07 – Panamax bulk carrier 77,053dwt on 12.4 mtrs - 225 mtrs LOA – 32 mtrs beam - maiden voyage loading coal at Hay Pt for India.
  • SANKO KING 56,000 dwt supramax bulk carrier – 5 holds and 5 hatches – 4 cranes with grabs on board – strengthened to carry cargo in alternate holds.
  • Loading shredded scrap
  • *Timecharters give the charterer commercial control of the vessel subject to agreed restrictions on trading area and cargoes that can be carried. The owner has to warrant the performance of the vessel in terms of carrying capacity, speed and fuel consumption, lifting capacity of cranes etc. Charterer effectively stands in the shoes of the owner when chartering (usually referred to as ‘fixing’) the ship on a voyage basis. Master follows charterers orders on trading matters. Charterer pays for bunkers, port charges and canal dues. In voyage and timecharter agreements, owners are responsible for paying brokerage.
  • ML McConnell :- “ While issues such as safety and protection of seamen were part of the rationale for such legislation it seems evident from the discussions and the provisions themselves that the motivation was, as suggested, essentially economic. A Report in 1924 of an Australian Royal Commission on the Navigation Act commented - [I]t is necessary to look closely into the reasons why the Parliament, after such exhaustive consideration, finally placed the Navigation Bill upon the statute-book. Your Commissioners have studied these reasons, have perused the reports of the Royal Commission and of the Imperial Shipping Conference, and read every important speech on the Navigation Bill by Ministers, members of the House of Representatives, and Senators, with the result that your Commissioners find that the main reason which actuated Parliament in placing the Act upon the statute-book, and which lifted the subject ro the plane of great national importance above the ordinary considerations of party politics, was the desire to build up an Australian Mercantile Marine. To build up an Australian Mercantile Marine it was necessary to extend the protective policy of Australia to its merchant shipping . . . The Australian coastal trade was to be reserved for Australian owned ships.”
  • Australian registered fleet such that numbers of ships have declined and the average age of ships has increased from 11 years in 1996 (ASA 2004, p. 5) to 18.7 years in 2009 for ships over 2000 DWT. This is the reverse of the world fleet where, according to Ship Chartering (2009), there has been ‘ a recent decrease in the average age of the world fleet to 11.8 years’ from 15 years in 1996.
  • Minister Reith said no financial support for the industry would be forthcoming until the Seamen’s Engagement System was dismantled. It was.
  • This extraordinary statement is widely seen as the rationale for the policy inaction during the years of the Howard Government.
  • Restricting the carriage of coastal cargoes to licensed vessels, or a requirement that only ships flying the national flag can carry coastal cargoes, provides the foundation for a cabotage regime. Some countries, such as the USA, strictly enforce cabotage, (and this policy creates its own difficulties through a lack of flexibility). Australia does not.
  • In Australia, if the Minister considers it desirable, he or she may grant a permit to unlicensed ships to carry domestic cargo.
  • The permit system has allowed foreign vessels, operating with foreign labour to enter the Australian domestic shipping market and offer to carry freight on a cost-base that is not available to Australians who wish to compete for the contracts to carry those cargoes.
  • By way of background, it is Protection & Indemnity Associations that provide insurance cover for crew liabilities . The SRC imposes liabilities for employers that go beyond the terms of P&I cover and therefore additional insurances have to be purchased by Australian operators but not by the foreign flag operator.
  • 457’s require the Dept of Immigration to be satisfied that there is insufficient Australian labour available to perform that work.
  • The first set of guidelines in 1990, which were approved by the Hon Ralph Willis, to take effect from 1 March 1990 contained the statement that “Government policy is that Australia’s coastal trade is to be carried in Australian controlled and crewed ships whenever possible. Permits will be issued when suitable licensed ships are not available and it is in the public interest.” The guidelines contained a comprehensive consultation process with relevant stakeholders, including the ASA and all the maritime unions. With the change of government in 1996, policy changed and the 1998 guidelines, amongst other things, removed the policy statement...
  • Q - What would a shipper do if they wanted to avoid chartering an available Australian ship? A - Change the deadweight required to carry the cargo or change shipment dates.
  • What is reasonable? Is reasonableness determined by a comparison with the international spot market? Does this mean that the freight rate offered by the owners of a licensed ship can remain relatively static over a period of time and be seen to be reasonable when the spot market is firm and unreasonable as soon as the market eases? The guidelines do not articulate the basis of this evaluation so that it is transparent and applied consistently.
  • The freight market always contains some volatility but it was particularly volatile during the boom/bust that occurred between 2007-2009.
  • 3 days may be a reasonable spread for some container shipments of manufactured goods from eastern States to WA (see Boral’s submission to HRSC). It may also be reasonable for a time-sensitive bulk cargo such as alumina. It may however, be entirely unreasonable for other dry bulk cargoes, particularly where no attempt has been made to engage with owners of licensed vessels in addressing forward shipping requirements. Whilst certainty is always desirable wherever possible, it is unfortunate that this general rule is now seen by some sections of the market as articulating a strategy to avoid cabotage. IRAS Report noted: “If all sectors of the industry are unanimous on any single issue, it is the need for Government to enunciate a clear, certain and consistent policy towards the industry, and for regulatory activities to be carried out in a consistent way...(page 20) “ The process most criticised was the administration of Part VI of the Navigation Act 1912 and in particular the issue of single voyage and continuous voyage permits. While no one suggested to the Review that there is never any justification for the carriage of cargo by foreign ships, there is a widespread view that the permit system is being misused to enable foreign ships to become regular operators on the coast. Development of regular coastal services is being inhibited by what is seen as capricious administration of the permit system that favours foreign operators at the expense of Australian enterprises.” (pp 20-21)
  • To evaluate commercial terms for their reasonableness and the reasonableness or otherwise of the stated needs of a shipper is not an easy task to accomplish in a strongly contested case, particularly if bureaucrats charged with that task have no experience in commercial shipping . In many instances the process is straight forward but by no means always, as we saw when containers had to be discharged from a permit vessel during the PAN Shipping era. Is it reasonable to ask people without the requisite background to adjudicate on these issues?
  • Minister Albanese’s recognition of the importance of shipping in national and international supply chains is, of course, widely supported by industry. As far as the potential for coastal shipping is concerned, here is an edited extract from a submission by consultants Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd.
  • Minister Albanese’s recognition of the importance of shipping in national and international supply chains is, of course, widely supported by industry. As far as the potential for coastal shipping is concerned, here is an edited extract from a submission by consultants Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd.
  • The deteriorating freight services imbalance has been of concern to industry stakeholders for many years. However, the Australian register is not an attractive register for ship owners, hence the imbalance continues to deteriorate. The Commonwealth Government is well justified in giving consideration to creating a second register. Such a measure, if well designed and attractive to ship owners, would rapidly reverse this freight imbalance.
  • Mua 2010 Final

    1. 1. Commercial shipping operations in Australia and the diminishing involvement of Australian registered ships Shipping Industry Policy John Francis │ Director │ Maritime Transport Policy Centre (MTPC)
    2. 2. Dalrymple Bay Anchorage MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    3. 3. Declining involvement of Australian ships in the Australian dry bulk trades <ul><li>Australian international + coastal freight task </li></ul><ul><li>Involvement of Australian flagged ships in these trades </li></ul><ul><li>Ship types engaged in the dry bulk trades and their place of registry </li></ul><ul><li>How are these ships contracted to carry Australian bulk cargoes? </li></ul><ul><li>Reasons for the decline of the Australian register </li></ul>MTPC
    4. 4. Australia’s exports by commodity 2007-08 MTPC Source: BITRE 2009 Commodity Exports (tonnes) Commodity rank (tonnes) Iron ore & concentrates 314 738 744 1 Coke, coal & briquettes 252 920 470 2 Petroleum oil 12 162 333 3 Confid transactions NES 24 966 000 4 Aluminium ores & alumina 24 377 928 5 Petroleum oils & refined products 2 250 762 6 Cork & wood 13 154 304 7 Crude minerals 11 420 940 8 Cereals 11 791 978 9 Other metallic ores & scrap 10 040 760 10
    5. 5. Australia’s exports by commodity 2007-08 MTPC Source: BITRE 2009 Commodity Exports (tonnes) Commodity rank (tonnes) Iron & steel 1 663 538 12 Fertilisers, manufactured 672 494 15 Lead & zinc ores & concentrates 2 825 517 17 Animal feed 1 496 591 20 Copper ores & concentrates 1 787 134 25 Sugars and honey 548 011 36 Mineral sands 435 347 43 Liquefied natural gas (LNG) 5 854 240 ($,000) 14 (ranked by value)
    6. 6. Australia’s imports by commodity 2007-08 MTPC Source: BITRE 2009 Commodity Imports (tonnes) Commodity rank (tonnes) Chemicals 6 214 422 11 Fertilisers, manufactured 2 863 134 15 Fertilisers, crude 718 258 34
    7. 7. Australia’s exports by destination 2007-08 MTPC Source: BITRE 2009 Destination Export weight (tonnes) Japan & N Asia 317 903 221 E Asia 249 723 231 Europe 43 219 971 South Asia 28 935 905 South East Asia 24 402 366 Middle East 9 313 879 South America 8 588 326 Destination Export weight (tonnes) N & Central USA 8 294 819 Africa 6 030 812 New Zealand 5 149 194 Rest of the world 2 341 834 Pacific Is & PNG 1 940 763 Total 705 844 322
    8. 8. WSJ forecast growth in ore exports (March 2010) <ul><li>300 million tonnes </li></ul><ul><li> $38 billion </li></ul>Combined trade of Dampier and Port Hedland in 2009 Combined value of the commodities exported from the ports MTPC Source: Wall Street Journal
    9. 9. WSJ forecast growth in ore exports (March 2010) <ul><li>$25 billion </li></ul><ul><li> $12 billion </li></ul>In Iron Ore, Volumes could triple within 5 years in LNG Smaller volumes of other bulk minerals, salt and general cargo MTPC Source: Wall Street Journal
    10. 10. Australian coastal freight <ul><li>Summary of Australian coastal freight, 10 years to 2007-08 </li></ul>MTPC Source: BITRE 2009
    11. 11. Coastal permits Freight Carried Under Permit (Tonnes) 1990/00 – 2008/09 MTPC Source: BITRE 2009
    12. 12. Coastal permits <ul><li>Impact of voyage permits on coastal trade 2007-08 </li></ul>MTPC Source: BITRE 2009
    13. 13. Coastal permits Permit voyages undertaken as per cent of coastal tonnes MTPC Source: BITRE 2009
    14. 14. Deadweight <ul><li>A vessel’s carrying capacity at a particular draft expressed in metric tons. Normally refers to capacity on summer salt water </li></ul>MTPC Source: BITRE 2009
    15. 15. Classes of bulk carrier by deadweight Source: H Clarkson & Co. Ltd. MTPC Capesize 100,000 dwt+ (typically ~150,000 dwt for older vessels. Modern units 170,000 dwt +) Panamax Over 60,000 dwt (typically ~75,000 dwt) max 32 mtrs beam Handymax 40-60,000 dwt Note Supramax >50,000 dwt Handysize 10,000 dwt +
    16. 16. MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    17. 17. MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    18. 18. MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    19. 19. MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    20. 20. MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    21. 21. Source: Sanko Kisen MTPC
    22. 22. MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    23. 23. Discharging sodium sulphate (1) MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    24. 24. Discharging sodium sulphate (2) MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    25. 25. Imported hot rolled coils MTPC Source: Southern Cross Maritime
    26. 26. Australian dry bulk tonnage <ul><li>The Australian flag is not competitive for ships engaged in the Australian dry bulk export trades </li></ul>MTPC
    27. 27. Australian LNG tankers <ul><li>There are just 4 Australian flagged LNG tankers engaged in the North West Shelf LNG export trade </li></ul>MTPC Source: North West Shelf Shipping
    28. 28. The net result.... <ul><li>Less than 1% of Australia’s exports carried by Australian flagged vessels </li></ul>MTPC Source: ASA, MUA
    29. 29. Major foreign registries <ul><li> 6 flags of registration with the largest share of registered deadweight tonnage as of January 2009: </li></ul>MTPC Source: UNCTAD “Review of Maritime Transport 2009” Panama 8,065 vessels 22.98% (274 mill dwt) Liberia 2,306 10.57 Marshal Is. 1,265 5.74 Hong Kong 1,371 5.38 Greece 1,498 5.29 Bahamas 1,446 5.20
    30. 30. Nationality of controlling interests MTPC Source: UNCTAD “Review of Maritime Transport 2009” Panama Japanese ship owners who account for more than half of the registry’s tonnage (128.4 million dwt of ships > 1,000 GT) Owners from China (22.8 million dwt) Greece (19.4 million dwt) Rep of Korea (19.2 million dwt). 74.1% of Japanese tonnage is registered in Panama
    31. 31. <ul><li>Germany (39.5 million dwt) Greece (23.2 million dwt) </li></ul><ul><li>Liberia </li></ul>Nationality of controlling interests MTPC Source: UNCTAD “Review of Maritime Transport 2009”
    32. 32. A small and declining fleet.... <ul><li>95 </li></ul><ul><li>the number of Australian ships </li></ul><ul><li>over 300 gross tons </li></ul><ul><li>in 1983 </li></ul><ul><li>37 </li></ul><ul><li>the number of Australian ships over 300 gross tons in 2008 </li></ul>MTPC Source: BP Shipping
    33. 33. Contracting vessels to carry Australian cargo to overseas markets <ul><li>Sale terms: FOB – free on board </li></ul><ul><li>CFR – cost and freight or CIF – cost, insurance and freight </li></ul><ul><li>Critical issue is whether seller or buyer is responsible for ocean freight </li></ul><ul><li>See generally the international commercial terms (“INCOTERMS”) published by the International Chamber of Commerce </li></ul>MTPC Source: INCOTERMS 2000
    34. 34. Major terms under a voyage charter party (single voyage or COA) MTPC
    35. 35. Timecharter MTPC
    36. 36. The rationale for the Navigation Act 1912 <ul><li>...that the main reason which actuated Parliament in placing the Act upon the statute-book, and which lifted the subject to the plane of great national importance above the ordinary considerations of party politics, was the desire to build up an Australian Mercantile Marine. </li></ul><ul><li>The Report of the Royal Commission on the Navigation Act, 1923-24 Cth 103, Vol 2, 1019 at 1024 – cited in ML McConnell “Cabotage and the colonial corset: The great Australian bind” (1988) 5 MLAANZ Journal p3 . </li></ul>MTPC
    37. 37. The Australian mercantile marine Age of Australian trading fleet 2007 (percentage of total in terms of deadweight tonnage) MTPC Source: BITRE 2008
    38. 38. <ul><li>Crawford Committee recommendation </li></ul><ul><li>depreciation of 20% p.a. commencing in the year prior to commissioning, provided manning levels were in accordance with levels determined by the manning committee </li></ul>Some industry milestones 1984-99 1984 1985 1987 Source: IRAS p.14, MUA Submission 45 p.26 MTPC
    39. 39. <ul><li>Maritime Industry Development Committee </li></ul><ul><li>produced a report “Moving Ahead” envisaged crew reductions to 21/vessel (in 1994 improved to 18/vessel or less) </li></ul>1984 1985 1987 Source: IRAS p.14 MUA Submission 45 p.27 MTPC Some industry milestones 1984-99
    40. 40. <ul><li>Ships (Capital Grants) Act </li></ul><ul><li>Taxable grant equivalent to 7% of the purchase price of the vessel, provided vessel crewed by Australian seafarers </li></ul>1984 1985 1987 Source: IRAS p.14 and ASA Submission 29 p.99 MTPC Some industry milestones 1984-99
    41. 41. <ul><li>International Shipping (Australian-resident Seafarers) Grants Act </li></ul><ul><li>provided a rebate of Group Tax remitted by employer on behalf of crew in vessels that traded overseas for >50%. </li></ul>1994 1996 1998 Source: ASA Submission 29 p.99 1999 MTPC Some industry milestones 1984-99
    42. 42. <ul><li> Coalition elected to office – financial support repealed </li></ul>1994 1996 1998 Source: IRAS p.14 and MUA Submission 45 p.28 1999 MTPC Some industry milestones 1984-99
    43. 43. <ul><li>Minister Anderson commissioned and received a report to advise on the development of a competitive shipping industry </li></ul>1994 1996 1998 Source: ASA Submission 29 p.100 1999 MTPC Some industry milestones 1984-99
    44. 44. <ul><li> December industry dinner John Anderson: “Australia is a shipper nation, not a shipping nation” </li></ul>1994 1996 1998 Source: IRAS and ASA Submission 29 p.100 1999 MTPC Some industry milestones 1984-99
    45. 45. The Australian coasting trade <ul><li>A vessel must be licensed to engage in the Australian coasting trade - s 288 Navigation Act 1912 (Cth) </li></ul><ul><li>See generally Part VI of the Act (ss 284-293A) at: </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/na1912123/ </li></ul>MTPC
    46. 46. Permits to engage in the coasting trade <ul><li>Section 286 Navigation Act 1912 (Cth) </li></ul><ul><li>...and the Minister is satisfied that it is desirable in the public interest that unlicensed ships be allowed to engage in that trade, the Minister may grant permits to unlicensed ships to do so, either unconditionally or subject to such conditions as he or she thinks fit to impose . S 286(1). </li></ul>MTPC
    47. 47. Owners of licensed vessels at a disadvantage <ul><li>The permit system has for many years disadvantaged Australian ship owners operating licensed ships. </li></ul><ul><li>The differential between the cost-base of foreign flag ship operators and Australian flag ship operators derives from the fact that foreign vessels are exempted from the application of Australian law. </li></ul>MTPC Source: ASA Submission 29
    48. 48. Statutes that create cost disadvantage (1) <ul><li>Customs Act 1901 </li></ul><ul><li>Vessels that are licensed under the Navigation Act 1912 are ‘imported’ under the terms of the Customs Act. </li></ul><ul><li>Vessels imported under the Customs Act are covered by Part II of the Navigation Act and consequently covered by the Seafarers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1992 and the Occupational Health and Safety (Maritime Industry) Act 1993 </li></ul>MTPC Source: ASA Submission 29 pp.64-69
    49. 49. Statutes that create cost disadvantage (2) <ul><li>Migration Act 1958 </li></ul><ul><li>When foreign ships visit Australia to carry coastal cargo, their crew are required to hold a Maritime Crew Visa. </li></ul><ul><li>If a ship is imported under the Customs Act, MCV’s are not available. A Long Stay Business Visa (“a 457”) is required. </li></ul><ul><li>457’s are the exception rather than the rule on Australian ships because Australian ships are generally manned by Australian crews. </li></ul>MTPC Source: ASA Submission 29 pp.64-69
    50. 50. Cost differential of Australian crews <ul><li>BP operates 12 identical new product tankers (Virtue Class), 2 of which are manned by Australians, 5 manned by British officers and Filipino crew, while the remaining 5 vessels are manned by Indian officers and crew. The 2007 operating costs are – </li></ul><ul><li>Australian officers and crew US$ 10,100 / day </li></ul><ul><li>British officers / Filipino crew US$ 5,500 / day </li></ul><ul><li>Indian officers and crew US$ 4,100 / day” </li></ul>MTPC Source: BP Shipping – Submission 16 to HRSC
    51. 51. Coastal permit policy <ul><li>Regulating a coastal cabotage regime inevitably produces a clash between the interests of domestic ship owners and their crews and the interests of shippers and receivers. </li></ul><ul><li>Clear policy statement is important to guide the administration of cabotage (particularly given there is no appeal process) </li></ul><ul><li>Investor confidence is easily undermined. </li></ul>MTPC
    52. 52. SVP/CVP Administrative Guidelines <ul><li>The Independent Review of Australian Shipping, 2003 (The Hon John Sharp and The Hon Peter Morris) observed: </li></ul><ul><li> “ The Review heard overwhelming evidence that over the past few years the [Administrative Guidelines] criteria have been administered in such a way that the coastal trade could now be regarded as virtually de-regulated.” </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.asa.com.au/upload/news/IRAS%20Blueprint%20Final.pdf </li></ul>MTPC Source: IRAS, page 13
    53. 53. Why is the coast ‘virtually de-regulated’ if Australia has a cabotage regime? MTPC Source: Sanko Kisen
    54. 54. Amending Ministerial Guidelines <ul><li>1998 and 2004 amendments to Ministerial Guidelines steadily reduced the protection to Australian flag ship operators. </li></ul>
    55. 55. Ministerial Guidelines - 1998 <ul><li>The question of whether licensed ships are available and adequate is addressed on a case by case basis </li></ul><ul><li>“ The delivery requirements of shippers are the primary determinants of whether licensed vessels are adequate ....” </li></ul>MTPC Source: See the DITRDLG website for Ministerial Guidelines
    56. 56. Ministerial Guidelines - 2004 <ul><li>[For a licensed ship] to be considered adequate, carriage must be available to the shipper on reasonable commercial terms </li></ul><ul><li>What is ‘reasonable’? </li></ul><ul><li>Is ‘reasonable’ a static concept, based for example on ROCE or is it a market driven concept? </li></ul>MTPC Source: MUA Submission 45 pp.28-30
    57. 57. Large bulk carrier market Source: H Clarkson Ltd. MTPC
    58. 58. Ministerial Guidelines - 2004 <ul><li>A licensed ship may be considered unavailable if the operator cannot guarantee that it will be presented to ship cargo according to a schedule that meets the reasonable needs of the shipper. As a general rule, the Department will consider a licensed ship available if it can carry the cargo within a window of 3 clear days either side of the sailing date stipulated in the application. </li></ul>MTPC Source: Ministerial Guidelines 2004, paragraph 36
    59. 59. Administration of permits - ASA observations <ul><li>Officers of the Department can be placed in an invidious position having to administer the permit system for contestable cargoes </li></ul><ul><li>They have no commercial/shipping background </li></ul><ul><li>Open ended discretion can create commercial uncertainty </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of appeal process </li></ul>MTPC Source: ASA Submission 29, page 72
    60. 60. Anthony Albanese <ul><li>At NATSHIP 2009 the Minister strongly challenged the foundation of the coalition’s “shipper nation” policy. The minister recognised: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The need to integrate shipping into national and international logistics chains; and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>That resource companies have an interest in controlling their supply chains; and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The role played by the shipping industry in training and supplying personnel with maritime skills to shore-based positions (pilots, HM’s, surveyors etc.) </li></ul></ul>MTPC Source: Anthony Albanese, NATSHIP Sydney, 2009
    61. 61. Coastal opportunities – national logistics chains <ul><li>“ Coastal shipping has two major reasons to be taken seriously as the third transport mode (in addition to road and rail) of any national domestic surface transport strategy “ </li></ul>MTPC Source: Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd, Submission 26
    62. 62. Coastal opportunities – national logistics chains <ul><li>1 Its prime long distance infrastructure (open sea and port channels) requires little or no incremental capital investment over and above that already provided for international ship traffic - in stark contrast with the capital cost of overloaded and inadequate road and rail infrastructure </li></ul>MTPC Source: Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd, Submission 26
    63. 63. Coastal opportunities – national logistics chains <ul><li>2 </li></ul><ul><li>Its carbon footprint is (according to EU) statistics - in grammes of CO2 per tonne km) superior to rail and some 5 times better than road.... </li></ul>MTPC Source: Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd, Submission 26
    64. 64. Coastal opportunities – national logistics chains <ul><li>Noting... </li></ul><ul><li>Competitiveness of freight movement by sea, from the customer's cost and service standpoint, is in many cases critically dependent on an efficient interface with land transport, which in turn is dependent on the development of effective land transport corridors particularly in metropolitan areas.....” </li></ul><ul><li>And see the MUA Submission 45 page 61 (placing shipping on an equal footing with road/rail) </li></ul>MTPC Source: Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd, Submission 26
    65. 65. Other impacts of a successful shipping policy MTPC Source: MUA Submission 45 p.68
    66. 66. The future <ul><li>Shipping registries have to compete in the international market. </li></ul><ul><li>Australia would reap substantial rewards from having a thriving first (and second) register. The current freight services imbalance would rapidly improve. </li></ul>MTPC Source: ABS 2009 – and see MUA Submission 45 p.23; BP, BMP, AIMPE, etc Year Freight Service Credit ($mill) Freight Service Debit ($mill) 1997 953 4625 2001 969 5856 2007 625 8163
    67. 67. <ul><li>Some may see the business of ship owning as romantic, but it is rarely sentimental! </li></ul>MTPC We need the Australian first (and second) register(s) to be competitive
    68. 68. Thank you for your attention MTPC Photograph: BP Shipping

    ×