PORT STATE CONTROL Conference 2005, London Increased Information Sharing The Issue of Transparency Peter M Swift

1. PORT STATE CONTROL Conference 2005, London Increased Information Sharing The Issue of Transparency Peter M Swift

2. PARTNERSHIP: Working closely with regulators and legislators to ensure EFFECTIVE REGULATIONS Responsible parties working together...... SHIPOWNER CLASS SOCIETIES CHARTERER SHIPYARDS CARGO OWNER INSURERS PORTS & TERMINALS BANKS & INVESTORS FLAG STATES

3. Industry participation in EQUASIS and with MoUs Coastal States – Part of the safety chain SHIPOWNER CLASS SOCIETIES CHARTERER SHIPYARDS CARGO OWNER PORTS & TERMINALS INSURERS BANKS & INVESTORS FLAG STATES

4. Feedback Mechanisms and Information Sharing often weak Openness and transparency questioned But .... The reality ? SHIPOWNER CLASS SOCIETIES CHARTERER SHIPYARDS CARGO OWNER INSURERS PORTS & TERMINALS BANKS & INVESTORS FLAG STATES

5. The vision…….. • Greater Openness and Trust • Free flow of relevant information without the fear of recrimination or commercial loss

6. Information Sharing Many examples of good practice: • Inter- and Intra- Association dialogues • Industry User Groups • Class societies’ committees • Industry databases – EQUASIS, CDI, VPQ/Q88, etc. but always subject to further improvement

7. Information Sharing Examples of where we could do better: • OCIMF-SIRE Data • Tanker Structure Cooperative Forum • Industry guidelines and standards • IACS development of Requirements and Procedures • Incident statistics

8. Information Sharing Examples of where we are failing: • Accident investigations • Design and in-service fault reporting and early warning systems • Waterways information exchange • Proliferation of ship inspections • Marine Safety Data Sheets • Abuse of information in internal audits and quality control systems

9. Information Sharing Impediments to information sharing: • commercial competitiveness • legal liability • professional jealousy • lack of incentives

10. Shipowners and Port State Control

11. Why PSC is important……. Licences to trade provided by: • Flag state • Classification society • P&I insurance • Charterer (through vetting) • Coastal state (through PSC) Port State Control Is The Industry Policeman

12. Why PSC is important……. PSC RECORDS: • Used by charterers (brokers and agents) • Used by media • Used in assessments by flags, insurers and others • Used as membership criteria by associations

13. Why PSC is supported ……. • PSC is vital complement to flag state enforcement of global rules • Effective PSC should prevent genuinely sub-standard ships from trading But: • Sub-standard ships continue to operate (albeit in declining numbers) • Well run ships sometimes feel they are unnecessarily subjected to PSC inspection

14. PSC: Room for improvement……… Need: • More to be done to ensure harmonised standards and training of inspectors • Global approach to inspection and Targeting criteria • Mutual sharing and recognition of inspection information across different MoUs (and thus reduction in the number of inspections) • To extend the number of MoUs covered by EQUASIS (subject their meeting appropriate standard) • Consistency regarding Clear Grounds for Detention • Standardised procedures for independent Detention Appeals • To guarantee accuracy and topicality of information in PSC databases • To make more/better use of information obtained from PSC inspections • Development of more rewards/incentives for good owners • To ensure that the integrity of PSC is maintained

15. PSC: Room for improvement……… • and some possible solutions …….. • Consistency of standards built around ”beacon” MoUs – encouragement to other MoUs to be recorded in EQUASIS • Targeting criteria built around ”fact” – harmonised between MoUs, and not too complicated • Abolition of targeting based on quota systems • Greater involvement of Industry representatives on MoU committees • Expanded IMO workshops on PSC practices and issues • Adoption of universal appeal procedures against unwarranted detentions • Implementatin of procedures to record deficiencies closed out • Government-industry partnership on analysis of PSC performance data • Extension of ”Qualship21” / ”reduced frequency of inspections” to compliant/good owners • Open discussion of ”integrity” in the system

16. Making the most of PSC inspection information: • Port State Control – detentions by ship size

17. Making the most of PSC inspection information: • Port State Control – detentions by year of build

18. Making the most of PSC inspection information: • Port State Control – detentions by year of build

19. PSC: Room for improvement……… • Need to ensure Integrity of PSC ........ • ”Overly enthusiastic” inspectors • ”Selective” targeting • ”Soft option or easy” targeting • ”Malpractice” - self interest or third party interest • BUT Not all owners are ”guilt free”

20. Ideas to ensure Integrity of PSC ........ • Regular and open dialogue between responsible owners Industry associations and PSC officials • Development of ”best practices” within PSC regimes • Appropriate mechansims for confidential feedback • Reports back to IMO of PSC performance

21. Industry and PSC Summary: • PSC is actively supported by industry – but MoUs should encourage greater discussion with industry partners, e.g. with permanent presence on appropriate committees • More to be done to ensure harmonised standards and training • Greater sharing of inspection records would be beneficial with mutual recognition of inspections in different regions • Consistency in targeting criteria necessary – and could benefit from additional analysis of PSC records • Further rewards/incentives should be developed for good owners • It is an imperative that the integrity of PSC is maintained

22. Thank you www.intertanko.com www.shippingfacts.com