oT gets the thumbs-up,
writes Alan Peat
THE DEPARTMENT of Transport (DoT) has come in for praise from the National Port Users Forum after the mid-January meeting to discuss the draft White Paper on the National Commercial Ports Policy.
Amendments
to the October draft paper
have clarified
The forum represents shipping lines, terminal operators and cargo owners and has a membership of: Asabosa (Association of Ships Agents and Brokers of SA); ASL (Association
of Shipping Lines); Container Liner Operators Forum; Breakbulk Liner Operators Forum; SA
Shippers Council; Maydon Wharf Leaseholders Association; Fapa (Ferro-Alloy Producers Association); RBCT/Coal Exporters; Island View Leaseholders; and Portnet Operations Division (POD).
"I think it went very well," said Nolene Lossau, director of Worldwide and executive director of the
SA Shippers Council, also suggesting that the department was being "co-operative, not confrontational".
A similar stance was taken by Laurie Smith, director of Rennies Ships Agency, and another member of the forum.
"The forum believes that the amendments to the October draft paper have clarified and improved the paper greatly," he said.
The amendments Smith referred to were defined in the forum's report to the DoT after this latest meeting.
They were that:
l There is now greater clarity on the responsibility for port policy between the National Ports Authority (NPA) and the Ministry and DoT. Specific concerns, such as who is responsible for port construction and closure, have been specifically dealt with;
l There is a commitment to inter and intra port competition.
l There is a commitment to Board of Trade (BoT) type concessions and to the principle of subsidiarity at both NPA and port operations division (POD) levels.
But the report also raised further comments on the amended draft White Paper.
"We make these comments," said the forum, "in the sincere belief that they are of benefit not only to our members but also to the country as a whole."
They are a complex
web of often inter-related points referring primarily to:
l The structure of the final port regulatory body, and the need for a firm commitment in the White Paper to port user representation on the control body(ies);
l The prompt excision
of the National Ports Authority (NPA) - effectively the ports" landlord - from its current home in Transnet, and lodging it under the control of the DoT;
l The end of the Department of Public Enterprises" involvement in ports - it currently supervises the function of the NPA - when this is effected;
l On the preceding two points, a commitment and time-table in the White Paper by these bodies that these moves will be effected;
l Again under "leasing/ concessioning/licensing", a call for a clear definition of these terms - particularly "concessioning" and "licensing". Also a clear definition of the NPA"s rights (if any) to exert control over the type of operations to be conducted under a particular lease/ concession/ licence;
l That the White Paper should clearly state that the primary obligation of the NPA in exercising that right is to encourage competition;
l A definition of the future of the port operations division (POD) - and, if it is to continue to exist, how the NPA, the POD and private sector operators will relate to each other;
l On port matters which the Competition Commission, Competition Tribunal and Competition Court have jurisdiction over, that those bodies will continue to exercise jurisdiction;
l That the current labour legislation should control future port employment practices;
l That timetables for all the proposed moves should be defined in the White Paper.
These submissions to the DoT, said the forum, do not reflect any vested interest of the port users but "ensure that the ports of SA are operated as efficiently, effectively and cheaply as possible.
"We assure you that you have our wholehearted support in achieving that aim, and that we do not approach this process from a negative or obstructive point of view.
"We are wholly supportive of your efforts in this process."
