|
 Safety, Environment
& Security |
 |
 |
 |
| WEBSITES |
|
|
| |
Editorial:
Towards common European guidelines
for shipping
Europe’s future is dependent on shipping – for
its inter-action in the global economy, for internal transportation and
for the solution of some of its environmental challenges. It is gratifying
to see that the European Union has emerged as a leading player in the
drive for better safety and standards at sea, and that the Commission
also sees a larger role for shipping in intra-European transportation
in the future.
 As
shown by our theme articles on the North European shipping industry, the
operating conditions are still lingering in a sort of transition between
old national schemes and a new set of EU guidelines. Much is to be won
– and this is indeed in the spirit of the Union – when a common
basis for the maritime policy is established. The main rationale is the
idea of fair and equal competition between suppliers of maritime services,
based on a framework of defined safety, technical, social and economic
standards. It is all about safe and efficient sea transportation in Europe.
Rules
on safety and technical aspects should follow the international conventions
by IMO, whereas social regulations should be used as an instrument to
ensure the survival of maritime competence in Western Europe. And there
should be clear guidelines on registry legislation and fiscal issues,
such as tonnage tax and investment incentives.
Even
the aspect of capital tax needs to be taken into account in the struggle
to shape a level field of competition in the European shipping market.
One does not have to look twice to see how the traditional national policies
have affected the shipping communities in our region, from British stagnation
to German expansion. The sad thing is that this is directly related to
the industry’s ability to raise political goodwill, and this accounts
for much of the growing disparity between the various countries.
Germany’s
success as a shipping nation is partly the result of a tax-incentive scheme
which has been cleverly used commercially to gain a world-leading position
in container shipping.
The
bad thing is that such schemes tend to become supply-driving, and in the
containership case a whole market segment that is not really economically
functioning, as long as ship values are artificially maintained by the
banks and practically insulated from the demand/supply factor.
Another political factor like Norway’s capital tax system has made
a great number of shipping heirs relocate, mostly to London; sufficient
to name Höegh, Jebsen, Smedvig, Ugland and Odfjell.
Even
though a common foundation for a maritime policy would help to create
more equal opportunities, shipping will continue to operate out of its
communities and clusters.
But
common guidelines would help to create a level field for European shipping,
from which the industry would be able to met the challenges and shape
its services to the needs of their customers.
//Dag Bakka Jr, Manager, Norway
Back to SSG 5
Latest update 18-10-2006 8:49
|
|
 CURRENT SSG |
|
No 12/2008
Order a copy
|
 |
| CURRENT SST |
|
No 15/2008
Köp numret
|
|
|
2002