“In a word, no.” This is the response from Robert Windsor, manager for trade services at the British International Freight Association when FPJ posed the question: “Do you think the government does enough to support the maritime industry?”
It is a view echoed by many in the trade who believe the authorities are holding back the produce offer or making the process of importing fresh produce into the UK unnecessarily difficult.
“On the continent, infrastructure projects are often government-funded, but in the UK this does not happen and the trade has to fund the changes and other rail or road users derive the benefit,” Windsor explains. “Also, our port members often complain that the UK’s environmental policies make it more difficult to expand a port than it would be on the continent.”
The view that continental ports have advantages over UK harbours because they have clearer, more strategic planning regulations, allowing them to develop more easily than UK ports, is a commonly held one. Christopher Snelling, head of global supply chain policy at the Freight Transport Association (FTA), which has recently merged with water freight promotional body Freight by Water, says:“In Europe, they receive substantial funding from government and local authorities who recognise the benefits they bring. For these reasons, some port facilities on the continent have been able to expand more easily than British ports - but new facilities are coming for the UK so we hope that port provision in the UK will not constrain service to importers and exporters in the future.” Snelling believes that the government merely needs to avoid adverse regulation and taxation on a trade largely run by private businesses.
Several rulings have hit produce specifically in the last year. First, the lifting of “unnecessary” controls for bananas from the Dominican Republic in July caused widespread relief as it saved importers tens of thousands of pounds and lengthy delays after months of concern over EC Regulation 669/2009. More crucially though, HMRC’s confirmation last month that the new Import Control System coming into the EU will affect fresh produce came as a hammer blow. The entry summary declaration (ENS) will be brought in across the EU and has raised fears it will duplicate information submitted to the Customs Handling of Import and Export Freight (CHIEF) system.
European legislation requires that an electronic ENS must be lodged before arrival - before loading in the case of maritime deep sea containerised shipments - at the first point of entry into the customs territory of the EC. “The relevant member state will carry out a risk assessment and after successful validation issue a Movement Reference Number,” the regulation states.
Depending on the mode of transport, there are different time limits for the submission of the ENS, but the fact that maritime containerised cargo is required to notify at least 24 hours before loading at port of departure, and maritime bulk and break-bulk cargo will have to give notification at least four hours before arrival, is likely to cause a tougher workload for those importing perishable cargo into the UK. “The ports are aware of the requirement from 1 January 2011 for carriers to pre-notify goods prior to their arrival into the EU and we have advised members of the implications for imports of fresh produce into UK ports,” says Fresh Produce Consortium (FPC) ceo Nigel Jenney. “While the FPC continues to fight unnecessary bureaucracy, we need the ports to play their part in focusing on their customers and their products and be more proactive in finding solutions for the fresh produce industry and food security.”
Training is a case in point. In the department for transport’s latest Transport Statistics Bulletin on Port Employment and Accident Rates for 2009-10, there were four on-port deaths during the period with an additional 46 major accidents and 371 incidents leading to an absence of more than three days. Interestingly, of the 509 staff injured in port accidents during the period, the highest rate was among agency staff supplied to the port. The department reports that there is “generally little to no education requirements to work on a port” and “agencies rarely carry out training themselves”. Just 29 per cent of the agencies surveyed that provide staff to UK ports with basic inductions expect to cover most of the skills needed.
Manning the docks
For UK produce players, British ports offer a multitude of options and offers. Tilbury has proved a strong focus for many companies in the last 10 years and a new shipping route from the east coast of South America that got underway last month is likely to have strengthened its offer.
The new Maersk Line service calls at the ports of Paranagua in Brazil, Buenos Aires (Argentina), Montevideo (Uruguay), Santos and Pecem (Brazil) and then on to Tilbury. Around 50 per cent of Tilbury’s business comes from Latin America and the port already receives two services a week via MSC and Hamburg Süd. Business development manager James Leeson believes it may attract more business to the port. “For us, it reinforces our position as the main port in the UK for Latin America and the southern hemisphere,” he says. “It reinforces our links with Brazil in particular, which obviously has huge growth potential. There has been quite a lot of turbulence in the market since the recession hit. We have seen a number of co-operative agreements between competition but it is now moving back to where we were two years ago.”
Over at Sheerness, natural deep water allows the Isle of Sheppey port in north Kent to accommodate the world’s largest vessels. The port receives average annual fresh produce volumes of 887,000 tonnes per year. Facilities have been boosted by recent investments at Sheerness, including a refurbished rail terminal, a new fresh produce container park with two rail-mounted gantry cranes and a mobile crane. Back in 1997, importer Capespan made the bold decision to move from its Berkshire base to the £35 million depot that it rents from the port and has benefited from its links to Le Havre and the port of Zeebrugge as well as the move towards containerised shipping. Trading director Martin Dunnett explains: “The move to containerised shipping has made the process a lot more efficient and convenient for importers and exporters. When containers came in, the lines basically bought market share by offering ridiculously low rates and, as the industry has moved towards containers, conventional vessels have become less efficient due to oil prices being so volatile.”
Progress has also been made at the port of Portsmouth, where earlier this year Portsmouth Commercial Port’s fruit importing business, MMD Shipping Services, invested £2.2m in a mobile harbour crane and an IT upgrade to improve the service it offers clients. Following a £2m buy-out in February 2008, the council now has a business interest in the port to stay afloat and make money. Signs are promising with the poaching of a deal for Del Monte’s fruit cargo from Dover last month, according to local reports, while MMD director Martin Putman aims to have the facility making strong profits by 2013-14.
In Dover, the port is dominated by the 13.9m passengers it sees pass through it each year, but still handles large volumes of fresh produce and supports combined import and exports with an estimated value of up to £55 billion a year across all freight. Purpose-built deep sea container port London Thamesport, part of the huge Hutchinson Port Holdings Group which also has interests at Felixstowe, is proving a popular produce destination, serving the London wholesale markets in particular. Its automated storage area, where driverless stacking cranes move containers to and from road vehicles 24 hours a day, has proved a distinctive feature. The two deep-water berths (15.5 metres depth at low water) allow London Thamesport the ability to berth container vessels that are among the largest afloat.
Perhaps the most interesting move for UK ports in terms of produce in the last five years has been the development of Liverpool Produce Terminal (LPT). Despite a real struggle to get the project off the ground and cynicism over the location of the terminal due to poor access for ships heading to and from Europe, the acquisition of the north-west hub by the Fresca Group has breathed new life into the project. Fresca has already developed some good links for citrus and top fruit into the port from Spain and elsewhere and the facility gives the group some 90,000 sq ft of land, a quayside terminal, four storage chambers, five receiving bays and nine loading bays. Mike Musk, group finance director at Fresca, says: “LPT offers us a modern facility in a key port. In addition to our existing operations, this acquisition gives us the opportunity to provide an improved, more efficient service to our customers and, in particular, to their northern estates.”
It seems clear that, if UK ports are to progress out of the damage caused by the rigours of recession then they need to be embraced by positive policy from the UK government and Europe. Plans to extend operations at Southampton and Felixstowe - which is to host an FPC visit in February - are currently hampered by a lack of space and there is a prevailing feeling that if both can be achieved then the British port industry can take another step towards widespread prosperity.
SEAFAST CELCIUS CREATES PORT-CENTRIC SERVICES
Seafast Celcius operates a temperature-controlled facility at the port of Felixstowe and is one of the newest businesses on the dock, having opened in July 2009 with a 10-year agreement at the port following its director’s 20-year association with the site.
Director David Baker (pictured) explains Seafast Celsius was set up after he recognised a lack of additional services within the port’s grounds for customers importing and exporting temperature-controlled products through the port.
“Our key target is to remove the product from the container here at Seafast and load out onto temperature-controlled trailers for direct deliveries, removing the road journey (and the empty return journey) for the container completely andreducing road miles, cost and carbon footprint for the end customer,” he says.
“If a customer has to do a job such as labelling or packing, they would have to drive inland with the container for at least 60 miles and then drive the empty container back to the port, wasting further road miles and paying for additional container time. With us, that isn’t necessary as we’re based at the port.”
The firm also champions the additional bonus for the customer as the ability to restitute the container earlier and reduce annual demurrage - the charges that the charterer pays to the ship’s owner for its extra use of the vessel - and during peak seasons this is also seen as a valuable advantage to the shipping lines as it frees up the empty containers earlier, allowing re-allocation at times when the equipment availability is at a premium.
VITAL STATISTICS
• UK ports handled 501 million tonnes of freight traffic in 2009, 61mt (11 per cent) less than in 2008 and 65mt (11 per cent) less than in 1999. Compared with 2008, inward traffic in 2009 fell by 43mt (12 per cent) to 304mt and outward traffic fell by 19mt (nine per cent) to 197mt. Inward traffic was one per cent lower than 10 years ago and outward traffic 24 per cent lower.
• Total port traffic in tonnage for the year to the second quarter (Q2) of 2010 was five per cent down on the four quarters ending Q2 2009. Inward traffic was down six per cent and outward traffic down three per cent.
• The number of units handled was up one per cent. Inward traffic was up three per cent and outward traffic down one per cent.
• Tonnage in Q2 was up one per cent compared to the same quarter in the previous year. Inward and outward traffic both also rose by one per cent compared with Q2 of 2009.
• The number of units handled increased by six per cent compared with the same quarter in 2009. Inward traffic was up seven per cent and outward traffic was up five per cent compared to Q2 of 2009.
• The UK-registered trading fleet included 134 tankers, 143 ro-ro vessels, 208 container vessels and 32 passenger vessels.
Source: Department for transport
No comments yet