Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80-94)
23 JUNE 2004
MR MICHAEL
PARKER, MR
MARK BROWNRIGG,
MR EDMUND
BROOKES, MR
MICHAEL HASSING
AND MR
MAURICE STOREY
CB
Q80 Chairman: So we have to take your
promises of more ships with a certain degree of, dare I say it,
salt?
Mr Parker: I think the proof of
the pudding, as they say, will be in the eating.
Q81 Chairman: Ah, a salty pudding!
Mr Parker: There are still more
companies looking to come into the UK as well. That is why we
are so keen—
Q82 Chairman: So in spite of the difficulties
that we have been talking about, there are still more people anxious
to come on our register?
Mr Parker: Yes.
Q83 Chairman: Although some of them have
not done so since the tonnage tax has been introduced?
Mr Brownrigg: Here you are talking
about inward locating companies, who will be growing their fleets.
Q84 Chairman: So anyway they would want
to take advantage of British legislation is what you are saying
and they have taken a commercial decision to come here?
Mr Brownrigg: Yes, exactly, because
of the quality of the UK as a base for shipping.
Q85 Chairman: I see. You were going to
make another point?
Mr Brownrigg: Some of them have
been taken, but I was going to say it really is very early in
the process, as I have said, to take a definitive judgment on
the employment situation. As the President said, without a ship
there is certainly no training, so no fleet, no training, and
that is why the emphasis has been on (i) the fleet, but (ii) on
replenishing and rebuilding skilled employment and hence the increase
from what was a long period of low recruitment. It was not just
a dip down, it was a long period of about 15 years when the average
was around 400, 450 cadets a year and dipped at one stage below
200, and it is now 625, I think, for two years running. So that
is a positive development.
Q86 Miss McIntosh: For the record, does
the MAERSK scheme work because it is voluntary and the Chamber
does not want to have a compulsory scheme of employment link imposed
on them because you believe that would be anti-competitive?
Mr Parker: Yes. Our concern is
that it will frighten people away. They are making a commitment
now for three years for cadet training. If one asks them to make
an employment commitment for four, five, six years, they cannot
see that far ahead. They do not know what their business is going
to be like. They cannot do that with their shore staff and do
not do it with their shore staff, but we do believe that the members
we have—and we talk to them regularly and several of them
are sitting here—will be offering their cadets jobs because
they want them. They need good officers. But it is one thing to
employ people; it is another to have a long term legal obligation
because nobody knows what the business climate is going to be
like in five or six years' time.
Q87 Miss McIntosh: If you look at the
competitor market, had Denmark gone down the path of the tonnage
tax or has it gone down the path of social security, because I
recall we were trying to get a similar situation for seafarers
as with offshore oil workers, which I believe is the path Denmark
went down. Has Denmark gone down a tonnage tax path or have they
gone down a social security reduction?
Mr Hassing: I am not sure about
that. There is a Danish international ships register, but—
Mr Brownrigg: They are not exclusive.
They have a net wage system for their seafarers and they have
also adopted a tonnage tax. Both are within their—
Q88 Miss McIntosh: But my point is that
if we are trying to compete with Dutch and presumably Norwegians
and others, who have both the tonnage tax and a very preferential
social security regime, then we are on the back foot from day
one and following Mr Lucas's question, how do they get it through
state aid and we feel that we could not?
Mr Brownrigg: I think what is
happening in practice is that as a result of the EU state aid
guidelines the different Member States' arrangements are evolving
in their own national context but in the same sort of direction.
Now, the precise details differ but by and large they are compatible
one with another.
Q89 Chairman: So we can take it generally
that although there may be differences at the moment, this is
not going to be a long term problem?
Mr Brownrigg: Not totally, because
training is outside that.
Chairman: Mr Efford, finally.
Q90 Clive Efford: You specifically mentioned
that because marriages on board ships are not recognised under
British law this is a disincentive for ships to register in the
UK. Could you explain what you mean?
Mr Brownrigg: Yes, I can. Basically,
you cannot perform a public marriage on a means of transport which
is not tied up alongside or stationary. That means that our cruise
ships, which are registered in this country, cannot offer the
facility of getting married as part of a cruise package, and equally
a company which has a substantial income from weddings cannot
then register in the UK. That is the precise picture. There are
six ships on the Bermuda register, for example, that cannot come
to this country—
Q91 Clive Efford: So how many ships in
all are affected by this, because it seems that not many ships
would be affected by something like this? Is it something that
we need to be enlightened on?
Mr Brownrigg: Well, they are large
and high earning ships. The Carnival Group, I think—I stand
to be corrected by the audience—has at least 12 sizeable
cruise vessels under the UK register. Now, if that is the case
they cannot take advantage of the wedding market.
Q92 Clive Efford: So it is a niche market
but it is a big one?
Mr Brownrigg: This could apply
to ferries, for example, on scenic routes.
Q93 Chairman: It is going to be rather
rough if you are getting married on a ferry! I know people make
enough mistakes! Perhaps you could do a supermarket marriage,
in on door and out the other!
Mr Brownrigg: I was thinking of
some of the more picturesque CalMac routes, for example.
Q94 Chairman: Mr Brownrigg, I think if
we were to take this suggestion seriously we would definitely
need to know what is the size of this, whether this is a serious
suggestion.
Mr Brownrigg: It is a serious
one and we will present a paper to you.
Chairman: May I say, gentlemen, if you
are going to have any influence it has to be a very rapid presentation
back, very rapid indeed. But if there are indeed many millions
of couples rushing on the cruise ships to get married, all I can
say is it is a very good reason not to go on a cruise! Thank you
very much indeed, gentlemen. You have been very helpful.
| 
