Memorandum by the Associated British Ports
(RH 46)
Associated British Ports (ABP) is the United
Kingdom's leading ports business. It owns and operates a network
of 23 ports and two container terminals. ABP handles through its
ports over 120 million tonnes per annum of a wide variety of imports
and exports, about a quarter of the UK's seaborne trade, and its
customer base includes the majority of the UK's principal industries.
Through its position within the UK ports network,
its contacts within Europe and its customer base, ABP feels that
it has a point to make regarding certain issues and the Transport
Sub-Committee will be addressing as part of their inquiry into
the Road Haulage Industry.
ABP are encouraged by broad Government proposals
to reduce the percentage of freight moved by road, which will
contribute to the general health of the national economy and the
development of an Integrated Transport Network. A key element
to this achieving this shift is the promotion of both rail and
seaborne freight transport. ABP take full account of the potential
for rail freight in our individual port development plans and
believes that major ports such as Southampton and Immingham act
as important modal interchanges that can facilitate the generation
and development of the rail freight industry. Their future will
increasingly lie in their potential as trimodal coastal shipping
terminals, and as local Urban Distribution Centres.
While the shift of freight from road to rail
is generally desirable, bottlenecks in the rail network limit
the extent to which modal shift to rail can be achieved. ABP have
always emphasised the importance of reducing such rail bottlenecks
to the UK's major ports. However, such constraints do not apply
to sea transport. To bring about a truly Integrated Transport
Network there needs to be greater emphasis on promoting a shift
of freight from road to water, as well as rail.
ABP wish to emphasise the following points:
— With regard to lorry weight ABP would
argue for an increase in maximum lorry weights to 44 tonnes. It
is generally accepted that the increase would lead to a reduction
in lorry miles, and hence a reduction in road congestion and in
greenhouse gas emissions. ABP believe that with future growth
of traffic to and from ports road congestion will become a factor
that hinders ports operating to maximum efficiency. An increase
in lorry weights to 44 tonnes would go some way to easing congestion
problems thereby assisting the handling of a substantial part
of the nation's trade.
— From an environmental point of view
there is an argument that suggests that six-axle vehicles with
environmentally friendly brakes and suspensions cause less wear
on roads than five-axle vehicles at 40 tonnes. Along with the
drop in greenhouse gases associated with a reduction in road traffic
there are environmental advantages in allowing 44 tonne lorries.
— The fact that 44 tonne loads are
not transportable by road from UK ports means that container goods
being shipped from the far east must be re-packaged in a continental
port into loads consistent with those that can be transported
in the UK. This additional handling and re-packaging means an
increase in price in those goods for the UK consumer. This is
further evidence that allowing 44 tonne lorries would be an economically
sensible decision.
— The present concession allowing 44
tonne lorries to travel to rail terminals, but not ports is difficult
to understand as it has an adverse affect on short-sea shipping
and does nothing to relieve the congestion around busy ports.
Movement of freight by shipping is environmentally superior to
either road or rail, but few practical steps have been taken to
promote short-sea shipping. There would seem to be a good case,
on both environmental and economic grounds, for extending the
present concession to journeys to ports. When it is borne in mind
that ABP handle 25 per cent of the UK's seaborne trade then it
is clearly important that that trade is handled as efficiently
as possible. The current distortions will delay further the re-establishment
of coastal shipping as a major freight mode.
— ABP believe that more needs to be
done on the internalisation of costs. Costs are already substantially
internalised in shipping (for example ships pay navigation charges
and all infrastructure costs are volume related), to a lesser
degree in rail. By contrast, road haulage pays fixed fees irrespective
of mileage and thus marginal rates per mile are lower. The result
of this situation is that shipping finds it more difficult to
compete at the margin. ABP suggest that Government should continue
to internalise transport costs so as not to distort the competitive
balance between rail and sea transport when introducing incentives
designed to produce a modal shift from road transport.
February 2000
|
