NEWS

Transport Minister Warren Truss has outlined the coalition's plan to amend the previous Labor government's shipping laws at a Shipping Australia Luncheon in Sydney.

Read his speech here.

Ladies and gentlemen, eight months ago I spoke to you about the need for coastal shipping reform in Australia.

For an island nation like Australia, with vast distances between most of our major cities, all of which are by the sea, it makes sense for coastal shipping to play a vital role in our transport network.
 Yet as we have seen, coastal shipping volumes have continued to decline and the number of Australian flagged vessels continues to slip with only 15 major trading vessels remaining with a general licence to undertake coastal trading.

Ships in Australia on transitional licences are leaving too. When the current system started there were 16, now there are just 8. The case for reform is crystal clear. So, today I want to talk to you about the next steps the Government plans to take to address these problems and fix Labor's failed coastal shipping legislation.

What I am announcing today is a substantial deregulation of coastal shipping, with built-in protections to maintain Australian skills and to ensure the payment of appropriate wages and conditions for seafarers on foreign ships operating primarily in the Australian coasting trade. Importantly, all ships will still have to meet Australia's strict maritime safety and environmental provisions, which are rigorously enforced by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority.

It goes without saying that maintaining our high standards of safety at sea and the protection of our sea environment, particularly the Great Barrier Reef in my home state of Queensland, are essential. It is time to recognise that shipping operates as part of a global network with global connections, and it is time to embrace the opportunities that these global connections make possible. Labor's tinkering has failed.

The unions have had their try. The previous Government gave the unions what they asked for and it has predictably failed. It has cost Australian jobs on the water and on land -- and if we continue down the current path, it is likely to put a lot more jobs at risk. Jobs in our manufacturing industries, jobs in aluminium and mineral processing, gypsum, cement and sugar... to name just a few. Australia's economic health depends on its competitive efficiency in a tough global marketplace, which is only getting tougher.

It does not help our national cause or our national interests when coastal shipping is bound by regulations that are designed to fail, like having a minimum waiting period before an application can be approved of up to two business days - even when there are no Australian licensed ships that are suitable to carry the cargo. Nor does it help anyone when a piece of oversized, heavy machinery cannot be moved by ship and must go by road --all because this would constitute a single voyage, and you cannot get a Temporary Licence for a single voyage.

Shipping is, unashamedly, a priority area for this Government's broader reform agenda. Without reforms to our economic and regulatory settings, Australia risks falling behind in the world market.  We must look more closely at the micro economic reforms and deregulation, which are needed to underpin productivity growth.  However, changes have to be well thought through, balanced and capable of being sustainable over the long-term if we are going to encourage a buoyant coastal shipping industry.

As I told a recent ALC conference, the national story is not all about road and rail... in a vast country, girt by sea and at such great distances from major global hubs, sea freight movements are a critical part of the national and international supply chain. As you are more than well aware, our major sea ports are also our international trade gateways and we rely on maritime transport for 99 per cent of our exports. I put it to you that, the ships are here... so why don't we make better use of the shipping routes lapping our coast?

A substantial proportion of our domestic freight also depends on coastal shipping but as things currently stand, the coastal trading sector is at a crucial way-point.  In 2012-13, Australian ports managed more than $400 billion worth of international cargo and saw over 4,900 overseas cargo ships make around 14,000 port calls.   Clearly, coastal voyages by international and domestic ships should be growing and to do that we need to overhaul the current arrangements.  

Our policy is all about utilisation of resources in the most efficient way possible. Although some specialised ships have joined the fleet to service niche markets, the heavy carriage side of the industry has seen nothing but ship retirements. The fleet of major Australian registered ships with coastal licences has been declining over decades and in the past decade alone, from 30 in 2006-07 to just 15 in 2013-14.  

And what that means is that there aren't enough ships to move our cargo and for some cargoes there aren't any Australian ships at all.   You have told the Government that you prefer ships under 15-years-old because they are more fuel efficient, break down less and cost less to insure.  In 2013, 49 per cent of the ships in the world fleet were under 15-years-old and 79 per cent of the world's gross tonnage was under 15-years-old.   In contrast, the average age of an Australian ship in the major trading fleet and operating under a general licence is 23 years.  

The introduction of the Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Act 2012 (Coastal Trading Act) has not revitalised Australian shipping. In fact, it has gone a long way to sinking the industry. Indeed, over the first two years of the Coastal Trading Act the total deadweight tonnage of major Australian flagged vessels with a coastal trading licence sunk by 63 per cent. As a government, we see great opportunities for growth and expansion and the opportunity to take a good proportion of long-distance cargo off the rail networks and the highways and onto coastal shipping once we get the regulatory monkey off the industry's back.

Work has progressed on a raft of issues to allow this to happen, including returning the Protection of the Sea Levy back to its original level of 11.25 cents per net registered tonne. And we have saved the industry millions more each year with the abolition of the carbon tax on the fuel used in domestic shipping. Today, I am pleased to announce that we have taken a further, and very important, step towards putting in place a regulatory framework which strips back the red tape.  

The new framework is outlined in the paper that will be circulated to you. This is a framework that fosters an environment where industry that can make the most of domestic and international opportunities, and be responsive to changing patterns of demand. We will introduce a single, streamlined permit for all ships -- Australian and foreign -- operating along our coast.

The new permit will replace the complicated licensing system we have at the moment.  This permit will allow Australian and foreign ships to carry goods and passengers on unlimited domestic voyages during the 12 months of the permit. There will be no requirement to nominate voyages upfront for approval and, as a result, there will be no need to seek variations to cargo type or volumes carried or the dates voyages are undertaken.  

Reporting on activities will instead be done twice a year, halfway in, and then at the end of the permit period.   This is much simpler than applying for a voyage that is likely to happen, reporting on what you think you'll do beforehand, and then reporting again on what you've actually done after the voyage is over. Vessels operating under a permit will be protected from importation requirements by Customs, including when carrying out scheduled maintenance.  

This will mean more business for Australian dry-docks and repair facilities. The large cruise industry, whom are currently exempted from the operation of the Coastal Trading Act, will also be included within the operation of the permit system. This means that cruise ships can stay for repairs rather than going to Singapore or elsewhere, and it will help keep cruise ship visitation figures up. The Government is also fixing some of the issues with the coverage of the existing framework.  

The new permit system will allow the carriage of petroleum products from our offshore facilities to the mainland for processing. Currently the processing is happening overseas and the fuel is being shipped back because offshore facilities are outside the confines of the current legislation. Because the Government genuinely cares about seafarer welfare, ships trading here for more than 183 days in a permit period will be required to pay all their crew an Australian wage set out in law.

Labor's Fair Work Act and Part B safety net will apply if a vessel engages in more than 183 days of coastal trading in a permit year. If a vessel spends most of its time trading in Australian waters, you will have to pay Australian wages and meet Australian conditions. Additionally, ships trading for more than 183 days will be required to employ a Master or Chief Mate and a Chief Engineer or First Engineer who is an Australian or who has Australian work rights.

We recognise that Australian skilled seafarers are renowned for their expertise throughout the world. We need to maintain these key maritime skills in Australia and ensure we are training the engineers, masters and pilots of tomorrow. Australia's strong environmental and safety laws will continue to apply to all ships operating in Australian waters. As you are aware, foreign ships operating in Australian waters are subject to Australia's port state control regime, administered by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority.  

Our port state control regime is second to none in world terms.   And if you do the wrong thing, regardless of the flag your ship carries, AMSA will detain your ship until it is fixed, and if you still don't get the message they can direct you out of Australian ports and not to come back. The Government also plans to amend the Australian International Shipping Register to remove the requirement for a collective agreement between the owner of a vessel and the Seafarers' Bargaining Unit and the requirement for a vessel to be predominantly engaged in international trading. Similarly to vessels predominantly engaged in domestic trading, vessels wishing to be on Australia' second register will have to have two senior Australian crew on board.

Shipping in Australia has been in a long-term downward spiral.  We need to turn that around. The common sense reforms we are implementing will do just that. Cheaper freight costs will help the viability of manufacturers and primary producers and, as these industries grow, so will their demand for shipping services. Greater choice between shipping companies will lead to better services being provided to customers. Easy access with simplified rules for moving cargo will show the global marketplace that Australian waters are once again "open for business".

More services for shippers and less regulation means it will be easier for businesses to arrange spot transport of cargoes and for more ships to service Australia. Moving containers from road or rail to the sea will free up road infrastructure for the transport of more valuable or time-critical cargo and that means less congestion on roads and rail. Cheaper freight rates and more efficient services will make Australian products more competitive in both international and domestic markets, saving current jobs in industries that use shipping and creating new ones.  

Increased shipping volumes means more landside maritime jobs.   And, importantly, critical maritime skills will be preserved, with key positions on ships working predominantly in Australia reserved for people with Australian work rights. The reforms I have outlined today have been undertaken after comprehensive consultation with all parties concerned with the Australian shipping industry and I thank everyone, including Shipping Australia, for their participation and frankness.

Legislation is currently being drafted with a view to its introduction before the end of the current Winter sittings.   Once the drafting process has concluded, the Bill will be the subject of full public scrutiny through Parliamentary committee processes. This will allow all stakeholders to comment on the detail of the measures I have outlined today. However, I firmly believe that if we could better utilise just a fraction of the capacity on the foreign ships that visit our shores, it could make a major difference to the efficiency of Australia's sea freight movements.

That's what this policy is about.   It's simple economics - if you have an underutilised resource, you should maximise its utility.   This government recognises it, shippers recognise it and it's a change the industry needs to accommodate. The measures I've announced today are a substantial change to the existing framework and will deliver advantages across the economy.   Without change, we will just have more of the same.   More delays, more inflexibility and more uncertainty about how ships can be used to meet Australia's freight transport needs.  

This framework will repair the existing mess and will set Australia on the right path to meet its future transport needs. I'm sure that you will have a number of questions and I am happy to answer them.

Thank you

Budget papers confirm Abbott Government will attempt to throw another Australian industry on the scrap heap with announcement it intends to radically alter or remove the Coastal Trading Act.

MUA National Secretary Paddy Crumlin said that if implemented, this represents a radical policy change that is ignorant or negligent to the critical importance of a domestic shipping industry.

“The MUA strongly urges that the Coastal Trading Act is not unwound as it is demonstrably in the national interest to retain and grow the coastal shipping industry,” Mr Crumlin said.

“These changes could spell disaster on a number of fronts – maritime jobs, skills, fuel security, maritime security and pose a threat to the environment.

“Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss has finally shown his hand in his ongoing efforts to unwind the Coastal Trading Act and open up Australia’s coast to foreign shipping.

“The Abbott Government’s changes could directly impact around 2,000 direct jobs and up to 8,000 associated jobs so 10,000 Aussie jobs could be on the chopping block.

“But rather than protect local jobs, the Abbott Government wants to open up our coast to all comers – carrying such substances as car and jet fuel, diesel and ammonium nitrate.

“There could also be a significant impact on the offshore oil and gas sector - with limited visa regulations and oversight. “It simply doesn’t make sense and indicates the Abbott Government is on yet another ideological crusade against unions, pushing blindly forward without thinking of the consequences.” 

Mr Crumlin said the 2012 changes to the Navigation Act and introduction of the Coastal Trading Act were the biggest maritime reform since the passing of the Navigation Act 100 years ago. “The reforms have the potential to create employment, sustain business opportunities and productivity and build the national interest through an industry that is critical to the quality of Australia’s economy, environment and way of life,” Mr Crumlin said. “We need to maintain a regulatory framework that provides an access regime built on the principle of fair competition that provides for both Australian ships and foreign ships to meet the coastal freight needs of shippers.

“What we don’t want to see is more Flag of Convenience (FOC) ships, with their poor standards and exploited crews, take over our ports and displace Australian vessels.” “Australia is one of the world’s great shipping nations – in both wartime and in peace.

“One in eight merchant seafarers were killed in the Second World War in our territorial waters and we shouldn’t be making changes which could impact our front line of maritime security. “All of that history and skills base could be sunk by cheap political ideology and policy negligence which would see widespread tax avoidance, third world safety standards and non security-profiled international seafarers servicing a domestic industry on a full time basis.

“It is a policy decision designed to replace Australian workers in an Australian industry with workers more exploited then those agricultural workers recently exposed by the Four Corners program.”

See more on the Maritime Union of Australia website. 

Do you know of an outstanding person, product, technological innovation or business service in the Marine Survey Industry that deserves national recognition?

Nominations for the inaugural AIMS Awards for Excellence open today Friday 8 May. Nominations will remain open until close of business Friday July 3 2015.

These national Awards recognise organisations and individuals who are our industry leaders in marine survey operations, business and technology services to the industry, innovation, training and workforce development.

Winners will be announced at the AIMS Awards for Excellence Gala Dinner to be held at the Grand Chancellor Hotel Hobart on Thursday 13 August 2015. 

For more information on the Gala Dinner and AIMS Conference, please click here.

Your application must be made on the Nomination Form available here

AMSA and the University of Tasmania’s Australian Maritime College have launched a resource kit to help industry and commercial vessel operators comply with new operational safety requirements.

From July 1, 2015 operators of all passenger and hire and drive vessels will be required to have a safety management system (SMS) and comply with the revised standard under the National System for Domestic Commercial Vessels.

The requirement will also apply from July 1, 2016 for all operators of non-passenger and fishing vessels.

AMSA and AMC have worked together to develop a hands-on training workshop to help commercial vessel operators understand how to develop and implement a simple but effective SMS.

The Commercial Vessels Risk and Safety Management workshop resource kit has been designed to assist trainers to train domestic commercial vessel operators how to develop an SMS tailored to their operation.

AMSA has been working with industry and state-based maritime safety authorities to build awareness of their obligations and to assist commercial operators meet their requirements.

AMC is delivering the workshop through relevant courses at its Launceston campus.

AMSA Deputy CEO Gary Prosser said from July 1 next year safety requirements would be the same across the commercial vessel industry in every state, following the 2013 introduction of the National System for Domestic Commercial Vessels.

“Developing an SMS is about identifying and controlling risks, and providing assurance the risk controls are effective,” Mr Prosser said.

“No-one knows the risks their operations present better than the vessel’s operator and crew.

“The workshops provide vessel operators and their crews the information they need to create an SMS that works for their vessel and their business.

While some states already have a requirement for vessels to have an SMS in place, including Tasmania, Queensland, Victoria and NSW, other states have not.

“From July 1, 2016 the rules will be the same across Australia,” Mr Prosser said.

AMC Safety and Survival Instructor Phillip Lenthall said the collaboration in developing the training resource kit would be particularly beneficial for smaller operators.

“For some vessels, with company support and infrastructure behind them there are resources to create a safety plan but for smaller operators it can be a more difficult task,” Mr Lenthall said.

“The feedback from vessel owners has guided the development of this resource kit to give them and their crews a practical, hands-on workshop to give them all the information they need to develop an SMS, to comply with national requirements.

“Including SMS requirements in our course materials helps to build a safety culture in the domestic commercial vessel industry, giving our students the skills to assess risks and develop systems to reduce risks.”

Industry bodies can nominate people interested in delivering the workshop, who then observe the workshop delivered by an AMSA or AMC staff member and participate in a train-the-trainer development session before they conduct the workshop under the supervision of AMSA or AMC.

The trainers are then able to organise and conduct workshops.

Mr Prosser said AMSA had been working with industry associations, including Southern Rocklobster Limited and Wildcatch Fisheries SA, to ensure their members are compliant with SMS requirements.

AMSA has recognised Southern Rocklobster Limited’s Clean Green program as an equivalent solution to meet requirements under the National System for Domestic Commercial Vessels.

Wildcatch will roll out workshops, using the resource kit, to its members who operate vessels in the abalone, prawn, charter boat, scale and Lakes and Coorong fishing industries in South Australia. 

On the 23^rd April AMSA General Manager for Ship Safety Al Schwartz sent an open letter to the maritime industry reinforcing the requirements for port and ship access by AMSA inspectors.

Mr Schwartz quoted sections of the Navigation Act 2012 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Regulations 2003 which outline the powers held by AMSA inspectors to carry out inspections of vessels and gain access to other premises and structures for the purpose of carrying out their duties.

He also noted that AMSA inspectors are Commonwealth Public Officials and that it is an offence to obstruct, hinder, intimidate or resist an Inspector in the performance of their official duties.

The AIMS urges all members to read the letter and to ensure that they conduct themselves appropriately.

Download a copy of the letter here

On 16 April 1947, in the port of Texas City, Texas, the freighter GRANDCAMP, with a cargo of ammonium nitrate, small arms ammunition, machinery, and sisal twine, caught fire.

The fire quickly spread to the nearby freighter HIGH FLYER, loaded with ammonium nitrate and sulfur. When the two ships exploded, it largely flattened the harbor area.

It is estimated that over 600 people died in the explosion and fires (exact numbers were unattainable due to the extent of damage).

The US Coast Guard investigation of the casualty determined that the fire was initiated by unauthorized smoking in the cargo hold of the GRANDCAMP. It recommended, among other things, that regulations for carriage of dangerous goods be revised. Litigation ensuing from this tragedy ultimately resulted in enactment of the US Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA).

The First Explosion:

The fire on the S.S. Grandcamp produced a dense, brilliantly colored smoke that could be seen all over town. Fires around the docks were a fairly common occurrence in Texas City; it was not unusual for residents to travel down to the docks to watch the fires and the firemen working, which may explain why there were so many bystanders present — and subsequently so many casualties — at explosion of the S.S. Grandcamp.

The ammonium nitrate onboard the Grandcamp detonated at 9:12 a.m., rupturing the ship and sending the cargo of peanuts, tobacco, twine, bunker oil and the remaining bags of ammonium nitrate 2,000 to 3,000 feet into the air. Fireballs streaked across the sky and could be seen for miles across Galveston Bay as molten ship fragments erupted out of the pier. The blast caused a fifteen-foot tidal wave that crashed onto the dock and flooded the surrounding area. Windows were shattered in Houston, 40 miles to the north, and people in Louisiana felt the shock 250 miles away. Most of the buildings closest to the blast were flattened, and there were many more that had doors and roofs blown off. The Monsanto plant, only three hundred feet away, was destroyed by the blast.

Most of the Texas City Terminal Railways’ warehouses along the docks were a complete loss. Hundreds of employees, pedestrians and bystanders were killed. At the time of the Grandcamp’s explosion, only two additional vessels were docked in port: the S.S. High Flyer and the Wilson B. Keene, both American C-2 cargo ships similar to the Grandcamp.

The intensity of the blast sent shrapnel tearing into the surrounding area. Flaming debris ignited giant tanks full of oil and chemicals stored at the refineries, causing a set of secondary fires and smaller explosions. The Longhorn II, a barge anchored in port, was lifted out of the water by the sheer force of the explosion and landed 100 feet away on the shore. Buildings blazed long after the initial explosion, provoking large-scale emergency relief efforts throughout the day, that night, and into the following day.

The blast registered on a seismograph as far away as Denver, Colorado. Dockworker Pete Suderman remembers flying thirty feet as the blast carried him and several of the dock’s three-inch wooden planks across the pier.11 Nattie Morrow was in her home with her two children and sister-in-law Sadie. She watched the billowing smoke near the Monsanto plant from her back porch just prior to the blast. “Suddenly a thundering boom sounded, and seconds later the door ripped off its facing, skidded across the kitchen floor, and slammed down onto the table where I sat with the baby. The house toppled to one side and sat off its piers at a crazy angle. Broken glass filled the air, and we didn’t know what was happening.”

The chief and 27 firefighters from the Texas City Fire Department were killed in the initial blast. At the time of the explosion, phone services in Texas City were not working because of a telephone operators’ strike. When the operators learned of the accident, they quickly went back to work, but the strike caused an initial delay in coordinating rescue efforts.

Once operators began calling for help, rescue workers from all over the area began responding immediately. The U.S. Army, Navy, Coast Guard, Marine Reserve and the Texas National Guard all sent personnel, including doctors, nurses and ambulances. The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston sent doctors, nurses, and medical students. Firefighters from Galveston, Houston, Fort Crockett, Ellington Field, and surrounding towns arrived to help.

The cities of Galveston, Houston and San Antonio sent policemen to assist the Texas City Police Department in maintaining order after the explosion. The U.S. Army flew in blood plasma, gas masks, food, and other supplies, provided bull-dozers to begin clearing the wreckage, and set up temporary housing for the survivors at Camp Wallace in Hitchcock.5 The Red Cross, Salvation Army and the Boy and Girl Scouts of America sent a flood of volunteers who provided first aid, food, water and comfort to city residents. Volunteers from other local organizations — and others who were not part of any organization — felt compelled to offer what help they could.

There was no operational hospital in Texas City at the time of the disaster, so volunteers converted city hall and the chamber of commerce buildings into makeshift infirmaries. Many wounded were evacuated to John Sealy Hospital in Galveston, the hospital at Fort Crockett, and hospitals in Houston.

This blog first appeared on the Maritime Cyprus website and is published with the kind permission of the author.

The IMO has agreed to use the International Marine Contractors Association's proposals as the basis for review of IMO Guidelines for vessels with dynamic positioning systems (MSC/Circ.645).

The review will be taken forward by an IMO intersessional correspondence group that will further develop the draft, with a view to finalising it at the next meeting of the IMO Ship Systems and Equipment (SSE) sub-committee, in 2016.

“IMO’s circular 645 is the established international standard for DP systems. The guidelines have successfully provided the framework on which national regulations and classification society rules are based, and which are supplemented by a growing body of more detailed industry guidance,” explains IMCA’s Technical Director, Jane Bugler.

“Over the decades since MSC/circ.645 was first published in 1994, DP has evolved from being a tool primarily for mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs) maintaining position over offshore wells, to being employed for a wide range of position keeping operations, with systems being fitted on much larger numbers of new vessels and on an increasingly diverse set of vessels, from offshore units to shuttle tankers and passenger vessels.

“645 has been working well but needs amending slightly to reflect changes in both technology and industry practice, including performing Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEAs) on the DP system by identifying and analysing the consequences of any single point failure to ensure that, if a failure were to occur, it would not exceed the worst case failure design intent (WCFDI) or cause the vessel a significant loss of position by ‘drift off’ or ‘drive off’. The IMO review will also consider the inclusion of DP equipment class 0, to reflect the four equipment classes that are now recognised, and the flag state certification provisions.

 “The IMCA proposals were developed by an internal workgroup, with input from co-sponsors that include a number of governments and other industry organisations. We look forward to a highly constructive time working on MSC/circ. 645 with the correspondence group.”

 IMCA’s DP role

IMCA publishes a variety of guidance documents on DP, setting out industry good practice based on the cumulative experience of its members to help ensure safe and efficient DP operations.‘Guidelines for the design and operation of dynamically positioned vessels’ is the association’s key document. It is regularly reviewed and updated with a new version due for publication during 2015. The document contains generic guidelines for the design and operation of DP vessels, and the guidance has now been increased to include 17 differing vessel types.

Other documents address annual DP trials programmes (IMCA M 190 and IMCA M 191) for DP vessels, based on comprehensive and standard report formats for ease of use by vessel operators and their clients. IMCA also produces technical reports, aimed at helping vessel operators review, specify, maintain and use a variety of positioning systems, thrusters, power and vessel management systems and other equipment.

The IMCA database of incidents on DP vessels extends back over more than 30 years and all DP vessel operating companies are encouraged to participate in reporting incidents for mutual benefit. Each year reports received are collated and an anonymised analysis of the incidents is published. IMCA also publishes and circulates DP safety flashes.

Getting a contract right can sometimes seem like an unnecessary complicated and fruitless exercise. The reality is that most activities do not result in problems, mistakes or claims.

But some do, and it is then that the value of a rigorous approach becomes clear. Like your insurance, getting your terms right should be a key part of any risk management strategy.

A good quality control system demands nothing less. Problems typically arise in one of three ways (1) a mistake (2) a failure to marry expectations (i.e. to clearly record and agree what both parties expect of each other) and (3) unforeseen circumstances the consequences of which have not been agreed. The risk of any of these things happening, and the consequences of them happening if they do, can be minimised; any business with an eye on the future would do well to act accordingly.

This article is the first in a series of three or four. It discusses some aspects of the law relating to the appointment of marine surveyors, particularly where that appointment is subject to the Australian Consumer Law. The intention is to give particular focus to important but sometimes complex issues; the standard of performance required, the actual performance required, the use (and abuse) of indemnities and limitations of liability. The other articles in the series will have a look at:

• additional aspects of contracting for marine surveyors (e.g. force majeure, intellectual property, insurance)
  
• liabilities to third parties
  
• how professions sometimes control (as professions) liabilities for members of the profession
  
• the legislation now applying to marine surveyors and some of the issues arising in relation to that.
  

Generally the appointment or engagement of a marine surveyor is a form of consultancy agreement. By consultancy agreement is meant a contract pursuant to which a person agrees to apply a special skill to address a requirement of the other party to the contract. The key terms found in any consultancy agreement will usually include:

• the standard of performance required 
  
• the actual performance required (i.e. what is to be done for the money)
  
• payment and the terms of payment
  
• warranties
  
• indemnities
  
• limitations of liability
  
• force majeure
  
• requirements for insurance
  
• confidentiality
  
• boilerplate (a term used to describe general clauses found in most agreements, e.g. no waiver and jurisdiction clauses)
  

All and any of these require attention. Not only must the terms of the agreement be read and understood, but anyone making a serious attempt to understand where the risks really are should have an understanding of the laws that apply. The discussion that follows attempts to summarise key issues arising in relation to the standard of performance required, the actual performance required (i.e. what is to be done), indemnities and exclusion clauses. Some of these issues are practical, some are legal.

To read more click here

The Nairobi International Convention on the Removal Wrecks entered into force on 14 April 2015 following the deposit, on 14 April 2014, of an instrument of ratification by Denmark with the IMO.

Among several provisions, the Convention will place financial responsibility for the removal of certain hazardous wrecks on shipowners, making insurance, or some other form of financial security, compulsory.

Denmark became the 10th country to ratify the convention, thereby triggering its entry into force exactly 12 months later.

The Convention will fill a gap in the existing international legal framework by providing the first set of uniform international rules aimed at ensuring the prompt and effective removal of wrecks located beyond a country’s territorial sea. The Convention also contains a clause that enables States Parties to ‘opt in’ to apply certain provisions to their territory, including their territorial sea.

The Convention will provide a sound legal basis for States to remove, or have removed, shipwrecks that may have the potential to affect adversely the safety of lives, goods and property at sea, as well as the marine and coastal environment. It will make shipowners financially liable and require them to take out insurance or provide other financial security to cover the costs of wreck removal. It will also provide States with a right of direct action against insurers.

 Articles in the Convention cover:

• reporting and locating ships and wrecks - covering the reporting of casualties to the nearest coastal State; warnings to mariners and coastal States about the wreck; and action by the coastal State to locate the ship or wreck;
  
• criteria for determining the hazard posed by wrecks, including depth of water above the wreck, proximity of shipping routes, traffic density and frequency, type of traffic and vulnerability of port facilities. 
  

Environmental criteria such as damage likely to result from the release into the marine environment of cargo or oil are also included;

• measures to facilitate the removal of wrecks, including rights and obligations to remove hazardous ships and wrecks - which sets out when the shipowner is responsible for removing the wreck and when a State may intervene;
  
• liability of the owner for the costs of locating, marking and removing ships and wrecks - the registered shipowner is required to maintain compulsory insurance or other financial security to cover liability under the convention; and settlement of disputes.
  

 Although the incidence of marine casualties has decreased in recent years, mainly thanks to the work of IMO and the persistent efforts of Governments and industry to enhance safety in shipping operations, the number of abandoned wrecks has reportedly increased and, as a result, the problems they cause to coastal States and shipping in general have become more acute.

 There are a number of problems: first, and depending on its location, a wreck may constitute a hazard to navigation, potentially endangering other vessels and their crews; second, and of equal concern, depending on the nature of the cargo, is the potential for a wreck to cause substantial damage to the marine and coastal environments; third, in an age where goods and services are becoming increasingly expensive, is the issue of the costs involved in the marking and removal of hazardous wrecks; and fourth, most of the dangerous wrecks lie in shallow coastal waters, within the territorial sea, where coastal States have unrestricted rights to remove them, without engagement of the shipowner. The convention attempts to resolve all of these and other, related, issues.

 The Convention was adopted by a five-day International Conference at the United Nations Office at Nairobi (UNON), Kenya, in 2007.

The Senate Inquiry into Australia’s fuel security has heard of BP’s plans to remove the tanker British Loyalty from the Australian coastal trade to be replaced with cheap foreign shipping. 

This is despite a strong business case that the British Loyalty remains viable. Maritime Union of Australia Assistant National Secretary Ian Bray said the British Loyalty is one of the last three Australian-crewed tankers on the coast. There were six in 2011.

“BP put over 900,000 tonnes on ships, over 700,000 tonnes of which is on big east cost cargoes that could be a viable trade for the British Loyalty or another similar sized vessel,” Mr Bray said.

“There is more than enough cargo BP just want to take environmental and safety shortcuts and have the lowest paid crew they can find from anywhere in the world.

“BP has the ability to retain the British Loyalty trading on the Australian coast or replace the ship, saving Australian jobs, protecting the environment and our fuel security.

“A cost analysis shows that the cost of employing an Australian crew on a product tanker equates to around one cent per litre at the petrol pump.

“BP are slashing Australian jobs, jeopardising our environmental safety with Flag of Convenience ships of shame and showing total disregard for Australia’s fuel security to squeeze every last cent of profit out of the community.

”We’ll be meeting with BP in Melbourne next Monday to see what they’ve got to say for themselves."

Mr Bray said that the Abbott Government’s Energy White paper, released yesterday, admits that Australia’s current oil stockholdings do not meet International Energy Agency obligations.

The white paper said compliance would require “an investment of several billion dollars in stocks and storage infrastructure over a decade. A decision on how to address this compliance issue will be made by the government in 2015”.

“In the medium term, we believe there is a good case to be made for using Australian ships to carry some portion of refined petroleum international imports,” Mr Bray told the Senate Inquiry in Melbourne.

“If the government is going to allow refineries to be closed and not mandate the retention of any fuel reserves, this is the very least we can do. It is also a cost-effective solution.

“The ongoing closure of refineries around Australia means we now import 91 per cent of our petrol and diesel – up from 60 per cent in 2000 – and this number will continue to rise with two more refineries in Queensland soon to be on the chopping block.”

The MUA commissioned John Francis from Ocean Freight Management to conduct an independent evaluation of the cents per litre for employing Australian crew on fuel import tankers as promised at the previous hearing.

MUA Assistant National Secretary Warren Smith said: “The research finds that for most petrol imports, employing Australian crew would cost about 1 cent per litre per ship. If Australia decided that a portion of its import fleet should be flagged and crewed in Australia, the cost could be spread across the entire fleet of import ships.

“Former refineries are already converting berths to handle larger 80,000 tonne import tankers. On these ships, the cost of employing Australians is closer to half a cent per litre per ship.

“It is also true that the most expensive place to ship petrol in Australia is Adelaide, yet Darwin and other less populated centres continually have the highest retail price at the bowser. 

“In addition, the research finds that there were over 600 individual tankers in Australian waters in 2013 and that number will increase with any reduction in Australian-crewed vessels and increasing imports out of Asia.”

Australians are worried about our national security at a time when terrorist group Al-Qaeda has openly declared their intention is to target international fuel ships.

More than half of Australia's fuel comes through the Straits of Hormuz to Singapore and then through the narrow Straits of Malacca, an area already notorious for its piracy.

The MUA believes that a serious environmental disaster in Australian waters is inevitable - whether it is by storing large volumes of petrol in large tankers in Port Phillip Bay, Moreton Bay or Botany Bay or by moving tankers around the Great Barrier Reef - when run by those unfamiliar with Australian waters and conditions.

A stable fleet of Australian ships on long-term contract is the only way to ensure our future fuel security and proper environmental protection.

These ships could be partly on the Australian International Shipping Register and partly on the Australian General Register to provide companies with additional flexibility.