Memorandum from the UK Maritime Pilots
Association (UKMPA) (DMNB 10)
PEC'S
1. The UKMPA welcomes the Draft Navigation
Bill where a number of longstanding issues regarding the National
Occupational Standards for Pilots and the Port Marine Safety Code
have been addressed.
2. The UKMPA however has considerable reservations
over the proposed changes made to the granting of Pilot Exemption
Certificates from the 1987 Pilotage Act. In particular we would
like to refer to page 39 under Pilotage section 4(1).
3. Whilst it has been intimated that changes
to the STCW certification have been the causal factor in removing
the words "First Mate" we would like further clarification
in addition to Clause 4 (Grant) page 66, over why it has been
thought necessary to remove the words "who is a bona fide
master or first mate of any ship."
4. One of the main reasons that the words
"bona fide" were used in the previous Act was
to ensure that those persons who applied for PEC's were in fact
legitimate officers of the vessel, which they were employed upon.
This in the main was to prevent a shipping company(s) from placing
persons onboard vessels to primarily carry out acts of pilotage
alone, and then once completed, removing them to be placed on
similarly trading vessels for repeated acts.
We would like to draw attention to the recently
published MAIB Report, 10/2008, contact between Ursine and Pride
of Bruges.
5. The removal of the words "bona
fide" would encourage shipping companies to set up what
would be in effect private pilot services, which in turn could
compromise existing Pilot organisations currently run and managed
by the UK CHA's. This practice could spread to placing private
pilots onto even very large vessels, by first attracting currently
serving pilots with large incentives, to join a shipping company,
for the sole purpose of carrying out pilotage acts. In the long
term this would have a destabilising effect on CHA/Pilotage organisations
who, would not then be in full control of the numbers of pilots
that the port may require, and be vulnerable to any changes in
the ports trading position.
6. This concept of competitive pilotage
services is one, which the UKMPA together with all the European
pilotage organisations successfully campaigned against on safety
grounds when it was proposed in the EU Port Package in 2004. The
Port Package Directive was historically defeated on two occasions.
It is with some alarm therefore that we see the removal of safeguards
against such practices presenting itself as a possibility in the
UK.
7. The UKMPA does not have any problem with
the Master and First Mate or even Senior Navigation Officer of
a ship regularly visiting a harbour, being granted a PEC. However
it is very unlikely that a junior officer will have the experience
or competence to navigate and manoeuvre that vessel in a safe
manner. Indeed it is questionable whose opinion would hold sway
on a vessel where a junior officer with a PEC was advising a Master
who did not have one. A PEC holder should be able to exhibit to
the CHA that they are competent in the navigation and manoeuvring
of the vessel to the standards laid down in MIN 307. Section 8.4.3
of this information notice further advises why the words "bona
fide" have been used in the past.
8. In 2004 EMPA produced a recommendation
on the provision of PEC's. This recommendation ratified at the
Genoa Conference was supported by pilotage organisations in countries
that did not have an existing provision for PEC's We submit to
you that the amendment to the Pilotage Act as set down in section
4 presents the possibility for competitive pilotage in the UK
and may compromise in the long term the ability of a CHA to provide
a satisfactory Pilotage service. We therefore request that the
wording is amended to prevent that eventuality. It is suggested
that the EMPA recommendation may contain wording which could be
used to assist in this matter.
PORT MARINE
SAFETY CODE
9. Paragraph 3 states: The Ports Policy
Review Interim Report, issued on 19 July 2007, included a public
statement that we will seek an early opportunity to take forward
appropriate legislation in respect of a number of gaps and anomalies
in the current legislation underpinning the operation of the Port
Marine Safety Code. It is perhaps an opportunity missed if the
PMSC is not made legislative in this Bill.
10. Provision is made for the Secretary
of State to ensure that harbour authorities take all reasonable
steps to comply with the Code, however who will determine when
the SoS should use these powers?
NATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL
STANDARDS FOR
PILOTS
11. Paragraph 3.1.5 Refers to NOS for pilots,
and the UKMPA welcomes the Government's intention to require harbour
authorities to employ only qualified persons as pilots (and Harbour
Masters). These standards should be seen as a minimum standard,
and it is our belief that many, if not all, current pilot organisations
within the UKMPA will meet the Standards. We have worked for a
number of years with BPIT and PSSL, and believe that the Standards
for pilots are completed, have been accredited and are just awaiting
adoption. We offer our services to assist the re-formed PSSL in
any way.
12. All pilots should be trained to the
highest standards, not just the minimum; IMO Recommendation A960
was adopted in December 2003 and requires that "The competent
pilotage authority is responsible for training and certification
or licensing standards". We welcome the proposal for the
standards to be prescribed by the SoS. The aim should be to provide
a properly, and highly trained pilot to every ship.
June 2008
| 
