To Advance and Promote the Science and Art of Logistics and Transport TO THE REGARDING THEIR

Transcription

1 To Advance and Promote the Science and Art of Logistics and Transport SUBMISSION FROM THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORT IN IRELAND TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT REGARDING THEIR PORTS POLICY REVIEW CONSULTATION DOCUMENT INTRODUCTION The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (the CILT ) welcomes the publication of the Department of Transport s (the DoT ) Ports Policy Review Consultation Document (the Review ). The CILT recognise the important role that Irish ports play not only in the transport industry but also in the Irish economy as a whole and looks forward to the further development of the port sector as a means to enhance economic growth. RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS POSED 1.1 The Development of the Irish Ports Sector The CILT are of the view that the Irish ports sector is in a position which allows it to address the challenges faced by the rapidly changing ports sector and that with further infrastructural investment, appropriate legislative enactments, increased private sector involvement and increased North/South cooperation the ports sector will play a key role in leading the Irish economy out of the current economic recession. One area in which the CILT would welcome legislative change for the ports sector is in relation to planning. We recognise that planning needs must be considered from the perspectives of proper planning and sustainable development, taking account of the view not only of users but also local communities and various competing interest groups. However, the sums spent on planning applications and appeals would, in our view, be better spent on investment in the ports sector. Noting this we are of the view that planning with regard to the ports sector should be centralised and streamlined so that some degree of specialist knowledge as to the various needs of the competing interest groups can be developed and further that conflicting signals are not provided to ports in relation to their planning proposals. The planning situation in relation to the ports at Dublin and Cork illustrate this issue. The CILT welcomes the acceptance of An Bord Pleanála in the Dublin Port planning decision that surplus capacity is not a reason for refusal of permission. An Bord Pleanála noted that the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources Ports PolicyStatement, 2005, advocates competition between ports and, in this context, accepts that the provision of surplus capacity is a concomitant of such policy.

2 The CILT would welcome clarity on the approach by planning authorities to the protection of habitats and birds, and on the evidential requirements that must be met to demonstrate the absence of a significant impact. The CILT are aware that this matter is before the Courts, but nonetheless believes that guidelines are essential. The CILT are also aware of draft European Communities (Birds and Habitats) Regulations in preparation by the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which would allow planning permissions, foreshore leases/licences and other consents to be re-opened after grant on the basis on non-compliance by the granting authority with habitats regulations. This could lead to amendment or revocation of the particular consent. This provision introduces a level of legal uncertainty regarding the finality of the consent process that cannot be countenanced by developers. The CILT requests that this provision is removed from the draft Regulations. The CILT would welcome the increased involvement of the private sector in the ports sector, particularly through the use of concession contracts. We are of the view that increased private sector involvement will increase competition, efficiency and will ultimately benefit the Irish economy and the Irish consumer. That said, we are of the view that the selling of ports, particularly in the present market of depressed asset prices, is unattractive. We believe that private sector involvement could be increased through medium to long term concession contracts and that same would likely result in a benefit for port users, the consumer and the economy all whilst not resulting in the divestiture of valuable assets in an unfavourable market. Joint ventures could also be considered for the smaller or regional ports on the basis that the private sector investors, from within Ireland or overseas, would receive minority shareholding following the provision of capital investment for infrastructural development. Dublin Port is a good example of a port where there is widespread private sector involvement. All the terminals and their associated services are run by the private sector. The duration of the concession contract and the degree of exclusivity could be utilised as a marker to reflect the level of investment and/or commitment required from the private sector for the development of shipping / logistics services in Ireland. Past experiences with regard to the wholesale privatisation of transport infrastructure in countries such as the UK have resulted in the unintended creation of monopolies, allowed the practice of asset stripping and/or the degradation of essential transport infrastructure. It is not in the interest of the Irish economy that such consequences be permitted to occur in Ireland, and as such we favour the award of concession contracts over the sale of ports. Should privatisation prove necessary we are of the view that same should occur in a manner that does not create monopolies, and any facilities sold should remain open for the use of all operators / port users on an equal basis. We are of the view that core transport infrastructure assets such as Dublin Port or the Port of Cork should not be sold. With regard to North/South cooperation in the ports sector the CILT welcome same and recognise that closer cooperation and planning could prevent capacity shortfall in the short to medium term at the very least. Carlingford Lough offers an ideal opportunity with Warrenpoint on the North bank and Greenore on the South bank. Whilst we recognise that the various ports are in competition with each other, and we welcome same, we also acknowledge that infrastructural development in the ports sector requires long lead times and we do not wish to see the flow of goods hindered due to short term capacity issues. Further cooperation could be achieved through the offices of the DoT and the Ports and Public Transport Division of the Department for Regional Development in Northern Ireland establishing a working group / forum for port operators to discuss current needs and/or future plans. Alternatively, the Irish Ports Association could establish / support such a working group / forum. Such further North / South cooperation could alleviate the noted potential short to medium term Ro-Ro capacity restraints. 1.2 Planning Seaport Capacity As noted previously, the CILT would welcome amendments to the planning process in Ireland. We note in particular the position adopted in the UK and the publishing of non-binding guidance documents on the development of port master plans. We are of the view that amending current legislation would complement the recent legislative amendment which designated harbour / port related facilities as projects for which strategic consent procedures apply (Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010). A ports master planning process could be adopted following discussions and consultations with port users, port operators and interested parties and potentially overseen by the Irish Maritime Development Office (the IMDO ) or the DoT. Such a planning overhaul should also acknowledge the multi-modal nature of the transport industry and seek to improve links between the various modes of transportation and in particular rail freight transportation.

3 Only with increased usage of rail freight transportation and the development of a market for same will rail freight become a viable alternative to road haulage. A review of the planning process and the discussions and submissions generated there from could provide valuable insight into current market needs and evolving niche markets such as offshore wind. CILT are of the view that any such changes to the planning laws should include provisions for the modernisation of the foreshore consent process, so that it is combined with the planning process. We support the conducting of regular capacity requirement studies at an all-island level and recognise that infrastructural investment in the ports sector requires detailed planning and analysis as well as long lead times in certain circumstances. Such studies could also allow the DoT to overtly encourage the development of capacity projects by publishing their findings and highlighting any gaps in the market that the various port authorities could compete to fill. We also support the development of Origin and Destination studies and are of the view that same could be developed under the auspices of the DoT or the IMDO through shippers / consignees filing anonymous online returns. Such returns could be filed on a quarterly basis with the information made available publicly to allow for analysis to be undertaken of market trends and geographical locations that are oversubscribed and/or undersubscribed. Needless to say that same would stimulate competition and benefit the consumer ultimately. 1.3 Ports and Smarter Travel The CILT welcome the establishment of an all-island freight forum and view same as a positive acknowledgement of the need to consider the possibility of developing a rail freight market. We are of the view that ports need to be developed in a manner that recognises the multi-modal nature of the transport industry and the pivotal role Irish ports play within the industry. That said, large scale infrastructural investments in developing the rail freight network should and can only occur where demand and funding for same exists and it must be acknowledged that the creation of such demand will take time. Within Ireland, rail freight could be encouraged through the liberalisation of access to the existing rail infrastructure, for example this could be achieved through allowing night time access to the rail network for freight trains. Through such an initiative there would be potential to further increase the usage of existing rail connectivity to Irish Ports, such as Dublin Port. This could aid the creation of a viable rail freight market within Ireland and thus create a commercial viability for the expansion of rail connectivity at Irish Ports. It is worth noting that the Irish Government has not yet been involved in a TEN-T Marco Polo project in relation to shipping services. The use of Smarter travel, rail freight and short-sea services could all be encouraged at EU and national level through the introduction of carbon credits for such usage which can be offset against fuel taxes on traditional hydrocarbon fuels. In addition, the Marco Polo and TENs programmes could be further marketed to industry users and such programmes could be used to provide information to consumers and commercial users about the range of multi-modal transport interfaces that exist at various European ports. With regard to domestic sea transportation it would be necessary to have a feasibility study conducted in relation to same. Whilst we would welcome any initiatives that benefit the environment we are also mindful that given Ireland s small population and urbanisation there may be little demand for inland waterway services. Perhaps however there would be demand for the delivery of loads between the various Irish cities of certain heavy goods. Turning to passenger transport ferries as an alternative to air travel we are of the view that the exceptional services provided by Irish ferry operators in the difficult circumstances of the recent volcanic ash disruption highlighted that ferry transportation for passengers is a viable alternative to air travel and look forward to further developments and investment in this market in the coming years. We would welcome the inclusion of details of ferry services to Ireland being included in any visit Ireland initiatives. We also suggest consideration of improved access to the Dublin Port passenger terminal for foot passengers, as well as reduced check-in times and better embarkation and disembarkation arrangements; with walk-on and walk-off facilities rather than short-distance bus

4 transfers. These considerations should be taken into account within any future expansion plans for the provision of ferry facilities at Irish ports. Further measures that could be taken to improve connectivity for both passengers and freight with mainland Europe include, the provision of infrastructure at key Irish Ports which have established continental European connections, to facilitate the growing trends for the use of larger ships should be developed. These issues have already been highlighted through reports such as the Fisher Report, commissioned by the DoT, and need to be considered when deciding on future policy implications for these ports. Further to this we believe that there is the need to improve the connectivity of these ports, mainly Rosslare Europort and the Port of Corks Ringaskiddy Terminal, to the established motorway network. 1.4 Funding Seaport Capacity Funding for profitable ports, such as Dublin port, could likely occur through the raising of finances on the capital markets notwithstanding the global economic downturn. We view such a mechanism for ports such as Dublin port to be adequate. Dublin Port is probably the only one that is in a position to fund its own investment. However, for smaller and/or less profitable or loss making ports, as the case may be, it would not likely be possible for such ports to turn to the capital markets for funding meaning that, in the alternative, such ports would have to focus on disposing of non-core assets in a depressed market for any and all funding needs in the absence of national or EU assistance. Such disposals, in the current market, may not be in the long-term interest of the Exchequer. 1.5 Competition & Cooperation The CILT are of the view that given the level of surplus capacity at present and the desire of each of the respective port companies to increase their throughput there does exist real competition in the port sector. In the current market conditions it may be advisable for ports to consider the utilisation of shared services and/or amalgamation. Amalgamation should not however result in a distortion of the market and/or the creating of monopolies. Rather, amalgamation could result in increased competition by freeing up funds from complementary services for investment in medium to long term infrastructural investments. We are of the view that amalgamation is more desirable than the closure of ports and that closure should only occur as a last resort. The enhancement of the road network over the last decades has reduced the drive time required to transport goods by road within Ireland. As a result amalgamated ports would not necessarily have to be within the same estuary, as was the case with Shannon Foynes. Such ports could be in the same general geographic region. We support the concept of benchmarking. Given the public nature of the majority of ports in Ireland it would be difficult otherwise to assess the actual performance of particular ports and benchmarking at EU level recognises that port performance should not solely be measured by the profit generated but rather should also analysis socio-economic indicators. 1.6 Port Company Corporate Governance We welcome the legislative reforms contained within the Harbours (Amendment) Act The CILT are of the view that, with regard to the Department of Finance s Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies (the Code ), comfort could be provided to the smaller port companies and allow them to focus all appropriate resources on matters requiring urgent attention if the DoT was to publish internal guidelines on what aspects of the Code they would not seek compliance with in certain circumstances. This would allow for adequate planning and increase to the greatest extent possible timely compliance by the port companies. The publishing of guidelines would also provide legal certainty to third parties engaging with the respective ports as to the legitimacy of proposed transactions. The CILT hold the view that the DoT should ensure that only competent directors are appointed to the port boards. It might be worthwhile following the practice elsewhere where vacancies on the boards of ports are advertised.

5 1.7 Rosslare Harbour The CILT would support the introduction of modernising legislation that would facilitate future private investment in Rosslare Harbour. At present Iarnród Éireann operate the harbour and provide the necessary investment in relation thereto, notwithstanding that Iarnród Éireann are not the owners of Rosslare harbour. Clarifying the legal position of Rosslare Harbour through the establishment of a port company is in our view the first step toward the future strategic development of Rosslare Harbour. It could be the case that thereafter the State may wish to divest itself of Rosslare Harbour or alternatively enter into a long term concession contract with an outside body for the management and operation of the harbour, be it Iarnród Éireann or otherwise. We favour the concession contract approach (as noted above). CILT are of the view that future plans for Rosslare Harbour must take into consideration the strategic need to develop the rail freight market and prevent the creation of any monopolies in that regard. 1.8 Regional Harbours The CILT fully support the commitment contained to public consultation within recent harbours legislation (The Harbours (Amendment) Act 2009). We are of the view that such consultation provides greater transparency to the ports sector and allows interest groups and stake holders alike to have their views aired. We would welcome the timetabling of an end to the consultation process as a means to expedite a decision being made in relation to the remaining harbours. 2 CONCLUSION The Review has been published at a time in which the ports sector in Ireland appears to be at a crossroad and the above response represents a collective view of the CILT. The ports sector plays a pivotal role in the Irish economy and we look forward to further development and investment in this area as a means of enhancing and stimulating economic growth and adding value to services. It needs to be recognised by all that whilst values have declined there is a need for investment in the short to medium term future in the ports sector. 28 th October 2010 The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT), established in 1919, is a membership based organisation with over 30,000 members in more than 30 countries. CILT is the independent professional body for those engaged in logistics and all modes of transport, enhancing the professional knowledge and competence of its members through comprehensive training, continuing professional development and certified educational programmes.