Select Committee on Transport Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 320-339)

19 MAY 2004

MR MARK BROWNRIGG, MR EDMUND BROOKES AND MR DONALD CHARD

  Q320 Clive Efford: Is that not just a response to public concern and public demand that politicians take action?

  Mr Brownrigg: Exactly.

  Q321 Clive Efford: So to say that this is political, as if it is something that has just come out of the ether, is not really accurate?

  Mr Brownrigg: Well, no, I am not saying it has come out of the ether. What I am saying is that had it been dealt with differently there would have been nothing for the public to respond to and that was not in the operator's hands. What I would also add is that the Community put this piece of legislation in place before it went through the IMO.

  Q322 Chairman: It is an example but it is a bad example because in this case you were actually pushing for a better standard, whereas what you are really saying is that you do not want to see the situation where the Commission goes ahead with international standards where it might necessarily be different, not necessarily good or bad. That is really what you are saying?

  Mr Brownrigg: Yes, in a word. What happened was that the international standard came to the European standard.

  Chairman: Good. As long as we are clear.

  Miss McIntosh: I think one of you, it must have been Mr Brookes, said that after the Braer disaster the UK introduced a voluntary routing guide, which was then approved by the IMO. Was it not the case that the Prestige did not follow that, that they had no safe haven that we would have identified by the Secretary of State's Representative?

  Chairman: Forgive me, Mr Brookes, I really do not want to go back to the Prestige.

  Q323 Miss McIntosh: I think it is quite important. It is just a yes or no. Is that a yes?

  Mr Brookes: The Prestige accident happened after the Braer incident and again it was not taken into a safe haven.

  Mr Brownrigg: There were no rules about safe havens then.

  Q324 Miss McIntosh: But now there are?

  Mr Brownrigg: Yes.[1]

  Q325 Miss McIntosh: Is it the case that the master of the Prestige has not returned home, he has not been allowed to return home yet?

  Mr Brownrigg: Correct, yes.

  Q326 Miss McIntosh: Is that of any concern? Is that a good message or a bad message to your colleagues?

  Mr Brownrigg: It is of considerable concern but that is a national issue. Well, it is an international issue as well. It is not a European issue is what I mean specifically, but it is of considerable concern that a master can still effectively be debarred from returning home this length of time after an accident in which no charge has yet been brought. Sorry, a charge has been brought but there is no charge—

  Q327 Chairman: You have made these representations presumably to the British Government and also to the European institutions, because after all what you are saying is not irrespective of the situation in relation to that particular master, you are saying that this sets a precedent?

  Mr Brookes: It is not, unfortunately, the only example where this has happened. This has happened in Pakistan.

  Q328 Chairman: No, on this one, Mr Brookes, have you made representation to the United Kingdom Government and are you pursuing it vigorously?

  Mr Brownrigg: I do not think we have made a formal representation, although our views are known to the Department for Transport.

  Chairman: It is not good enough, Mr Brownrigg. If it is one of your masters it is not good enough that we know your views, is it?

  Miss McIntosh: I was trying to establish the general principle.

  Q329 Chairman: I know very well what you were doing, madam. I am trying my own line. Mr Brownrigg?

  Mr Brownrigg: We have supported representations by the European Community Shipowners' Associations. It is on behalf of a Greek national.

  Chairman: I see. Miss McIntosh, you may now pursue your line.

  Q330 Miss McIntosh: There is a general principle of concern here though to your members?

  Mr Brownrigg: Of course, yes.

  Q331 Miss McIntosh: Is the price of fuel and the additional cost of concern to your members?

  Mr Brownrigg: Yes, but we have yet to see that come through fully. The price of fuel has been very volatile over the years and we have had to live with that.

  Q332 Miss McIntosh: I think you refer in your memorandum rather ecliptically, if that is the right word, between the difference in approach to shipping between northern European countries and southern European countries. I do not know if it affects your particular members but has this situation of access to domestic routes around the Greek Islands been resolved?

  Mr Brownrigg: There was a timetable set, the clock was ticking and that time has expired, so yes.

  Q333 Miss McIntosh: Have British ships got access to plying the trade around the Greek Islands?

  Mr Brownrigg: In formal terms, yes. I am not aware whether British operators have tried hard to get into those routes.

  Q334 Miss McIntosh: Do you have any strong views about the European Intermodal Loading Unit?

  Mr Brookes: I do have strong views about it and I think it is a completely unnecessary proposal from the European Commission. I have explained briefly in our evidence why that is the case and perhaps I could just say so now. For international worldwide transport there is the International Standards Organisation—ISO standard containers. There are 17 million in free circulation in the world. In Europe there is what is called a "swap body" which is an intermodal loading unit but which can take more pallets because it is slightly wider. The European Commission had decided there should be a new unit, which is described as the European Intermodal Loading Unit, to solve this problem. Quite frankly, the problem has been already solved by commercial shipping lines who have developed containers which will go down the cell guides of ships and yet are pallet wide and they can carry two standard pallets across. So there is no need at all for this legislation and we feel that in moving it forward it could hinder in fact the development of intermodalism rather than let the ISO standard and "swap bodies" develop as they have.

  Q335 Miss McIntosh: Thank you. You are quite damning in your memorandum that the Commission does tend to focus in its EU shipping policy on interventionist activity which is of questionable value or practicality?

  Mr Brownrigg: I think we were talking about the relationship between political interference and the issue approach. There are lots of issues on which Community action has been highly—

  Chairman: Mr Brownrigg, we have a little difficulty because you are interpreting "political" as being something—

  Clive Efford: Evil.

  Q336 Chairman: Yes. "Political" is a word we must define carefully. As I understand it, it means of the people. That was its root, was it not?

  Mr Brownrigg: No, I think it was more in the sense that Mr Efford brought forward.

  Q337 Miss McIntosh: So are you happy that there is a level playing field in the world of EU shipping? I cannot record a smile, Mr Brownrigg.

  Mr Brownrigg: There is the opportunity for a level playing field currently if you are talking about state support and assistance and it is then down to individual governments to choose whether they play within that opportunity.

  Q338 Miss McIntosh: And on issues like light dues and paying for the full facilities, do you continue to make representations to our own Government?

  Mr Brownrigg: I would love to bring out all our themes, madam Chairman, but yes, we do.

  Q339 Chairman: I do think I need to ask you why you think the Commission got the business about the Intermodal Loading Unit totally wrong. Do they have not sufficient expertise in your subject?

  Mr Brookes: I believe they have the misguided view that by developing this unit they will develop a new range of containers which in the long term will take over from the International Standard Organisation, standard 20 and 40 ft or 45 ft containers.


1   Note by witness: The EU Directive 2002/59/EC of June 2002 required member state to be prepared to ensure that ships in distress may immediately go to a place of refuge. More detailed guidelines were issued by IMO in its Resolution A.949(23), adopted in December 2003. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 29 June 2004