Memorandum from the United Kingdom Major
Ports Group (UKMPG) (DMNB 02)
1. UKMPG
The United Kingdom Major Ports Group is the
association which represents most of the major commercial ports
in the UK. Our 9 members operate 41 ports which account for some
70% of the cargo passing through UK ports. UK ports as a whole
handle 95% of the nation's international trade by volume and therefore
makes an important contribution to the UK economy.
2. OVERALL REACTION
TO THE
DRAFT MARINE
NAVIGATION BILL
UKMPG has a particular interest in the port
safety provisions of the Bill and broadly welcomes these. While
they are limited in scope and have been a long time in gestation
they do make some useful changes to existing port safety legislation
and tidy up some outdated statutory provisions. UKMPG is pleased
to see that the emphasis continues to be on self regulation of
the ports sector which we believe has contributed to an improvement
in safety and skills standards without significant additional
costs which would ultimately have to be borne by UK consumers.
3. SPECIFIC PROVISIONS
ON WHICH
UKMPG HAS COMMENTS
(FOLLOWING THE
ORDER IN
THE CONSULTATION
DOCUMENT)
(a) Power of general direction (clause 6)
This is a welcome piece of streamlining. Ports
currently have to use HROs or local byelaws to obtain powers of
general direction so that they can give safety and/or environmental
instructions relating to all ships in a harbour area. The proposal
is that in future general direction powers should be conferred
using a negative resolution statutory instrument. Ports would
have to apply for the powers rather than they being conferred
generally so that they would not be given to ports that did not
need them. While UKMPG supports this provision in principle, we
suggest that automatically conferring the power on all commercial
ports would be a more efficient legal route and save administrative
cost for ports and the Department.
(b) Pilotage exemption (clauses 3-5)
This is a mixed bag of provisions some reducing
existing regulation, others tightening up on controls on the use
of PECs eg allowing a PEC to be suspended immediately the harbour
authority believes that there is doubt about a certificate holder's
capacity to act as a pilot. Overall this is a reasonably balanced
package which UKMPG is largely able to support in principle though
we question why it is necessary for so much pilotage activity
to be the subject of primary legislation and not simply left for
harbour authorities to determine as responsible employers. We
also have some concerns about the proposal to remove the current
restriction confining the holding of PECs to masters and first
mates. This would place the responsibility for establishing the
underlying competency of the applicant on the harbour authority
rather than relying on the well established system of internationally
recognised systems of competency and the International Safety
Management (ISM) Code. UKMPG would welcome further discussion
with DfT and the MCA about how the safety and competency assessment
issues can be addressed before reaching a view on whether we can
support this particular provision. Finally the provision allowing
(but not requiring) a harbour authority to make a compensation
payment where a certificate has been wrongly suspended needs to
be expressed in clear terms so there is clarity about the extent
of liability.
(c) Power to direct harbour authorities (clause
7)
UKMPG is strongly of the view that the voluntary
approach set out in the Port Marine Safety Code remains appropriate.
Safety standards in the industry continue to improve and ports
recognize the importance of implementing the standards and procedures
set out in the Code. UKMPG welcomes the action being taken by
the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to check full compliance with
the Code and the recently launched programme of MCA port visits
for example to follow up findings in reports by the Marine Accident
Investigation Branch. Because of the priority that ports give
to safety it is unlikely that the proposed direction power in
clause of the Bill would need to be used in practice, but UKMPG
has no objections to its inclusion in the Bill on the basis that
it would only be used as a last resort and that the Port Marine
Safety Code remains voluntary.
(d) Compulsory national occupational standards
(clauses 2, 8 and 17)
The draft Bill rightly confirms the approach
in the Port Safety Marine Code of non statutory qualifications
for harbour masters and pilots. However the Bill provides for
powers for the Government to prescribe standards of competence
to be achieved by harbourmasters and pilots and to require harbour
authorities to employ only those with these qualifications. It
is arguable whether these provisions are needed as the ports industry
is now working closely with the MCA, the educational sector and
others to put standards, courses and qualifications in place within
the next two to three years. This is a complex task as the roles
of harbourmasters and pilots vary depending on port circumstances
and there are practical problems converting the standards into
useable training packages. UKMPG questions whether this statutory
provision is really necessary at this stage though we are prepared
to accept it if it is clearly recognized to be a last resort power
which would only be used should industry fail to adopt non legislative
standards.
(e) General Lighthouse Authority pensions
(clause 14)
UKMPG supports in principle the proposed modernization
of the GLA pension arrangements so that they are more in line
with those which apply generally in the UK economy. However we
would be concerned if changes to the funding of deficits in the
schemes added to user costs in such a way that this discouraged
shipping from using UK ports in favour of continental ports where
similar charges are not applied.
June 2008
| 
