SUBSCRIBE
UNSUBSCRIBERECOMMEND SHIPTALK'S NEWSLETTER TO A FRIEND
Visit Our website at WWW.SHIPTALK.COM
Read This Newsletter In Print Friendly Format
The Shiptalk Newsletter is sponsored by Seacurus Ltd - Seacurus are innovative marine insurance specialists developing insurance solutions to combat modern day industry problems.
Go To www.seacurus.com or contact enquiries@seacurus.com
Dear Shiptalk Readers,
Welcome to this the June 2006 edition of the Shiptalk newsletter.
Please take your time to read what we have to say this month about issues affecting your everyday lives at sea and do let us know if you have an opinion or comments on any of this month's articles or other issues that you would like to air via Shiptalk.com.
Why not air your news views and opinions on the Shiptalk Forum at www.shiptalkforum.com
Shiptalk.com……reading you loud and clear
SHIPTALKIMAGES.COM
This month's featured image from www.shiptalkimages.com is supplied courtesy of Mohammad Salim Sabir and reminds us all of our everyday lives at sea.
Since launching ShiptalkImages.com in January this year more than 1000 excellent images of our industry have been uploaded to the site.
ShiptalkIMAGES.com provides media companies with a helpful image resource for the design and development of online and print media projects for maritime based companies and organisations
We are sure we can provide you with the image you have been looking for so not why not drop us an image enquiry at enquiries@shiptalkimages.com and we will see what we can do for you.
HEADLINE ARTICLE
When The Good Guys Turn Bad – A Special Report
The shipping industry this month gained one of the most telling and graphic insights into the true nature of maritime security, and the fact that seafarers and their ships are perceived as needing to be guarded against rather than protected.
Last month The News of the World, a major UK Sunday newspaper, carried a spectacular article telling the “real and explosive tale” of the Special Boat Service ( SBS ) raid on a vessel suspected of carrying terrorists and threatening materials.
Under the headline “ Ship was ticking bomb aimed at London . We HAD to stop it ” the extract from the upcoming book Bloody Heroes, by Damian Lewis carried a compulsive account of the brave SBS boys taking on a huge ship crawling with terrorists and bombs.
While the headline may sound fictional this was the very real case of the bulk carrier “Nisha” and the boarding by UK Special Forces in response to intelligence that identified her as being a terrorist threat.
The story unfolds with the SBS being told that this time-bomb was steaming right into London with 16 terrorists onboard, and that the decision to “swamp the f***'s so they don't know what's hit them" was the only option.
So began “Operation Ocean Strike”, with the aim of intercepting the rogue ship in international waters, loaded with budding assassins and Lannate, a pesticide capable of creating a cloud of killer gas if detonated.
According to the book the SBS arrived on scene by helicopter and with one last yell of "Let's f***ing get in there," fast-lined onboard into the “hornets nest”.
As the first operative landed on deck he was faced with a terrorist suspect lurking inside a doorway. The SBS man dived forward at him and smashed his jaw. The blow knocked him down a flight of stairs. He apparently, “didn't get up”.
Within a minute, the rest of the SBS were onboard “battling” for control of the wheelhouse. "Get down! Get down!" they yelled as they stormed in. They wrestled one suspect to the deck, sticking a boot in his back before grabbing the captain and holding a shotgun to his head ordering him to "Keep the ship on this bearing if you want to live".
As the SBS raided the officers' mess they reported being enveloped in a cloud of gas. They assumed for a moment that the bomb had gone off—but then realised it was their own CS gas seeping through the decks. D'Oh!
Quickly the armed few suppressed the hoards of “terrorists” and managed to round them up from their hiding holes, and to get them all cuffed.
After just 15 minutes the ship was “secure”. Sea King helicopters swept in to take away the 16 prisoners and deliver bomb disposal experts, who began work examining the suspect device. Later, according to the article, word filtered back to the brave SBS lads that quantities of a deadly nerve agent had been found. This was officially denied, but the article states, “The results of the operation have always been kept secret. But the heroes knew it was mission accomplished”.
Now this is exciting stuff, like a Hollywood script unfolding before us, but lets look deeper and see what really happened, and just how terrifying the actions of the “good guys” were in all this.
While its easy to mock we must remember that the SBS were simply doing their job, and the mistakes are higher up the command chain…yes the approach of those first operatives on the scene was over-the-top, but only because they were unaware of the fact that the 16 “terrorists” were just ordinary, innocent sailors going about their business.
Understandably the SBS didn't have time to examine the ramifications of “cuffing” all the crew of the large bulk carrier as it ploughed its way onwards towards one of the busiest waterways in the world. No risk management approach on this mission, they were simply the “hammer to crack a peanut”…
That's not to say that some of the events aren't without humour, or at the very least pathos. In one piece of action, SBS hero 'Doughnut' finds an oil drum perched on a workbench, “spewing wires like tentacles. His expert eye believed it could be primed with enough poisonous gas to kill hundreds of thousands in an explosion in London ” . . .or perhaps it was just the crew's BBQ? Then there is the poor galley boy having a crafty fag watching the action on deck before getting leathered for his trouble, and those poor unfortunates on the bridge, “Keep us on course!” they demanded, how the hell can the Master do that from the deck with his hands behind his neck?
The actual story of the “Nisha” is old news, but this “sexed” up version has brought the measures taken against the vessel into stark focus.
The most pertinent fact of this sorry saga is that the result of the operation wasn't covered up at all. The mission was launched based on specific information from intelligence sources, but in a subsequent Parliamentary Select Committee on Defence report the government admitted that, “As it turned out that information was incorrect”.
Great Eastern Shipping, one of India 's most respected companies owned the vessel, a company who count Senior Members of the British Shipping Establishment as major and influential shareholders, and who were bringing a cargo of sugar to Tate & Lyle. So lets recap…a cargo of sugar to ” the ” sugar people, carried by the British establishment via a route which had anyone actually bothered to research more stringently would have plainly seen was quite legitimate.
There are innocent people in this farce, the poor crew – who despite being seafarers and foreign are not necessarily terrorists! Also the owners, people for whom their word is their bond, and to suggest that they or one of their vessels would be involved in a terrorist plot is nonsensical and plain wrong.
The message is simple, this could have been any innocent seafarer trapped into a violent struggle and could have been any ship. Just like a lottery, it could be you!
In using this approach the authorities simply highlighted their plain lack of commercial knowledge and confirmed the wavering faith that many in the industry have for maritime security and the measures forced upon the industry.
Since this raid, various initiatives have been taken by many Governments to gain greater maritime domain awareness, and let's hope the steps work because as we have seen the consequences of erroneous intelligence are plain frightening…what if the “Nisha” had been an LNG Tanker or VLCC, would the SBS still have been as gung-ho? Oh yes!
This book clearly tries to suggest that nerve gas was found on the vessel. But if so, where was the action against the owners? The vessel was freed only a couple of days later – not really the action you'd take against a vessel carrying biological agents, surely?
Plus the fact that the “Nisha” delivered its cargo to Tate & Lyle after the brouhaha – now we all now of the risks of cargo contamination, so are they really suggesting that the UK Government allowed 26,000 tons of raw sugar that had been in close proximity to nerve gas to be processed and served to an unsuspecting public…I mean I know sugar is meant to be bad for you, but that is ridiculous.
Damian Lewis' book, combined with the journalistic glamorisation, adds nothing to the debate on maritime security. This version of events is a hindrance which leaves our industry needing ever more support to guard it against both the “bad guys”, and seemingly if this account is accurate then the “good guys” too!
It is saddening that many people will no doubt sit on the beach this summer reading “Bloody Heroes”, and will no doubt fall for the hype, the bluster about boys and their toys, and the xenophobic baloney about all seafarers being potential terrorists – ridiculous and sweeping statements which serve to highlight the author's ignorance, the insensitivity of the newspaper which ran the extract, and the incapacity of the UK intelligence services which ordered the flawed raid.
WELFARE
Each year sees scores of lumbering lawyers, ponderous P&I Execs and slow surveyors all pulling on their boots and shin pads and gearing up for the Chaffe McCall Marine Challenge Cup.
Held in London on July 13 th this is the 5-a-side world cup for those with marine links…
This year a new team is riding into town with the aim of generating money for charity and also of taking the trophy home…they are “NI Seacurus”. NI Seacurus will see The Nautical Institute and Seacurus combining forces to create their very own “soccer aid”.
Yes, sponsored by the marine insurance specialists Seacurus www.seacurus.com, NI Seacurus are entering the competition and will be raising money for International Sport for Seafarers (ISS), see www.seafarerssport.org for full details of the appeal.
Amongst the motley crew are Steven Jones of The Nautical Institute, and Captain Thomas Brown and Nick Maddalena of Seacurus. They will be joined by as many salty friends as they can muster who can still jog or even touch their toes…though these prerequisites may eventually be dropped as being a little too severe.
The fundraising has been supplemented by an auction for a place on the team, or as cheerleader…you can bid on Ebay... CLICK HERE
Every penny can make a difference to the provision of sports to seafarers, so please bid and join Team NI Seacurus for a wonderful day out – even if only you want to drink and relax in the sunshine please bid to win, or support our appeal.
Team NI Seacurus – please donate to the fund by sending cheques payable to the Nautical Institute, 202 Lambeth Road, London SE1 7LQ and marked Sports Appeal, or alternatively via credit card payment over the phone to Susana Salvante on +44 (0)20 7928 1351.
SAFETY
US Coast Guard officers removed the Master, Capt. Periklis Petridis from the Celebrity cruise ship, “Mercury”, while she was in Seattle last month, after he failed a breath-alcohol test during a USCG inspection.
During the inspection, a Coast Guard inspector "noticed alcohol on the captain's breath," Petty Officer Tom Winter said. As a result a team of additional inspectors were called to the scene to administer the breath test -- and found the captain to be under the influence of alcohol, with a blood-alcohol content level above 0.040, the federal limit for operating a vessel in U.S. waters.
Seattle police determined his blood-alcohol content to be more than four times the federal maritime limit, as a portable Breathalyzer test on the ship, determined Petridis' blood-alcohol content was 0.09.
The company said the captain would be fired. The staff captain assumed command in the wake of the incident, said a spokesman for parent company Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. The “Mercury", which has a capacity to carry 1,884 passengers, was delayed in port for more than an hour before departing.
While the fact that the Master was under the influence has not been denied, Capt. Petridis' lawyer has claimed that her client wasn't on duty when the Coast Guard confronted him.
"He's not saying he didn't drink ... He's not guilty of what they said he did," attorney Anne Bremner said. "He was in his quarters, not on duty. He was to be on duty at 5 [p.m.]." She also questioned breath-test readings.
The captain was settling in for a “nightcap” and a nap before leading the voyage from Seattle to Alaska when a Coast Guard investigator entered his room, Bremner said.
The Coast Guard says the investigator boarded the ship around 12:30 p.m. to follow up on a previous safety violation involving a life-boat lift. By the time the “Mercury” departed six hours later, Petridis, 47, had failed four breath tests, was fired by Celebrity Cruises and arrested on suspicion of operating a vessel while under the influence of alcohol a misdemeanour punishable by up to a year in prison, according to the Coast Guard.
In U.S. District Court Petridis' bail was set at $100,000 and he was granted permission to leave Washington to stay with friends while the case works its way through the legal system.
A Celebrity Cruises spokesman said Petridis broke company rules because officers are forbidden from consuming alcohol eight hours before reporting for duty.
"The captain's actions are totally unacceptable. He has been stripped of his command and ordered off the ship," said Dan Hanrahan, president of Celebrity Cruises, in a statement. "Any shipboard employee, from the captain down, will be dealt with as swiftly and severely."
Lt. Cmdr. Rick Rodriguez of the Coast Guard said, "This incident should send a clear message to all mariners operating in U.S. waters that operating any vessel under the influence of drugs or alcohol is a serious threat to the safety of other mariners, the general public, and maritime commerce and transportation," Rodriguez said in a statement. "Such behaviour will not be tolerated, and violations will be enforced to the fullest extent."
A crew member on board the luxury cruise ship Queen Mary II died last month after he was allegedly attacked by a fellow member of staff.
The Filipino man, aged 40, was assaulted with a hammer during an argument with a colleague, also Filipino, while the ship was en route to Bergen , Norway .
He was airlifted to a hospital in the Netherlands with serious head injuries, but died on the way.
The two men, both electricians, got into a fight in the crew's mess area, a spokesman for Cunard, the ship's owner, said. The alleged assailant, 49, was initially detained in his cabin after the incident and was questioned by Hampshire police, who retain jurisdiction over the case as the ship is registered in Southampton . Hampshire Police sent four detectives and three crime scene investigators to Bergen to investigate the incident.
It is not thought that any of the ship's 1,750 passengers on the six-day cruise witnessed the incident, which took place below decks, and they were later told about the incident in a letter circulated by the ship's captain.
A post-mortem examination on the dead crew member was conducted in the Netherlands and the victim's family in the Philippines were informed, at the earliest opportunity. A spokesman for the owners said: "The company are very shocked by this event and Cunard is in contact with the victim's family to whom we send our deepest sympathy."
The QM2 - a 1,132ft vessel that cost an estimated £422m to build - can carry up to 2,620 passengers who are looked after by a crew of 1,253.
"From what we understand, it started to list to one side and started to break up in half before sinking," Paul Killeen, deputy sea rescue commander at nearby Port Elizabeth , reported. Killeen said there were strong winds when the ship sank.
The company had no immediate comment on the possible cause of the ship's sinking.
Mark Hellenberg, from the Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre, said the “Alexandros T” had sent a distress signal at around 9 p.m. local time (1900 GMT ). A nearby ship, the “Fortune Express”, was directed to the scene by maritime officials and found the vessel. sinking fast and managed to rescue the six crew. Another crew member was later found alive floating on a raft.
The “Alexandros T” was transporting 155,000 metric tons of iron ore loaded in Brazil and destined for China , a spokesman for its managers said. The 171,875 dead weight-tonnage vessel was built in 1989 and is registered under the management of Overseas Marine Enterprises Inc in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines .
As hopes faded of finding the remaining missing crew it emerged that the ship failed a 2003 USCG safety inspection. The inspection found a number of glaring structural and mechanical faults in the 17-year-old, 299-metre-long vessel.
The USCG report, filed on November 18, 2003 , after an inspection in Norfolk , Virginia , reported that the vessel gave an impression of a ship that had been neglected, listing a number of faults discovered, as well as recommending an external audit.
The report added that, “Objective evidence discovered in an expanded international safety management examination revealed that the vessel/company has failed to fully implement the requirements of the International Safety Management Code through the safety management system”.
An Owners spokesman claimed not to be aware of the damning USCG report and could not confirm whether the audit had been carried out. He added “We do not know why the vessel sank. The crew will be interviewed, and their statements will be studied.” The statement continued, “This is a process – a long process. We do not yet have all of the answers – and until we do, we cannot speculate”.
In an amazing piece of prescience and in the face of these continuing bulk carrier losses the Nautical Institute (NI) has taken the unprecedented step of calling for assistance across the entire industry to finally get the facts regarding bulk carrier safety across to shipboard personnel.
In the wake of the introduction of IMO MSC /Circ 1143, and in conjunction with The International Federation of Shipmasters' Associations and The International Maritime Organisation ( IMO ), a hard hitting poster has been produced to stress the facts of reacting to water ingress in bulk carriers.
These efforts have been brought into sharp focus by the tragic recent loss of the vessel “Alexandros T”. David Patraiko, NI Director of Projects, stated that, “the talking has all been done and the agreements made, but still the message has not made it onto the ships.” He added, “this frustration led the NI to act, and to use all available channels to get the poster, and the message to the seafarers who need it.”
It is a fact that many crewmembers remain unaware of the early indicators of danger associated with waster ingress, and of the steps that they can take to lessen the risk of loss of life. This poster has been made to help, but without widespread dissemination the message will be lost.
The NI is seeking assistance from P&I Clubs, Surveyors, and Mission Workers, in fact for anyone who visits bulk carriers, to distribute the posters onboard.
For more information and to download the poster visit www.nautinst.org/bulk, and anyone wishing to receive printed posters for distribution can do so by contacting the NI directly.
CHIRP Column - The Procedure was a Success, but the Patient Died!
We spent some time in the last column talking about a number of general issues related to manuals, their usefulness and whether common formats might make a seafarer's life easier, reducing the possibility of error, as s/he moves from ship to ship. Manuals contain procedures; covering items such as operation, maintenance and emergency response, amongst others. Good procedures, properly followed can be lifesavers and poor, improperly followed or absent procedures can present a significant risk.
A search of the CHIRP database for incidents involving procedures brought up a large number of incidents and it is not possible to do them all justice in a short column such as this, but I'd like to begin by considering a textbook response to an incident, where correctly followed emergency procedures resulted in a positive outcome:
“A number of hours after sailing an LP Fuel Supply Pipe failure occurred on one of the main diesel generators. During the UMS Period at 2330 hours the Duty Engineer Officer was called out by the UMS System following activation of a "Fuel Leakage" Alarm. As he arrived in to the ECR a second Alarm activated "Fuel leakage"; proceeding straight down to the Main DG Space he was met by concentrated diesel vapour within the compartment and observed diesel fuel pouring off the "free end " (for'd) of the DG, beneath the turbo blower area.
Returning immediately to the ECR, he requested Emergency Slow/Stop of the Main Propulsion from the Bridge OOW and asked him to raise the alarm. The Bridge OOW brought the Main Propulsion to an immediate stop using the Emergency Crash Stop Button on the Bridge Control Panel and raised the Alarm to the ship's company. The Duty Engineer then "Fast Stopped" the effected DG and started another. The Second Engineer and other Members of the Department, plus the emergency party arrived on the scene as the Diesel Generators were being changed over. The Fuel inlet/outlet valves to the leaking DG were tripped manually and the emergency party proceeded to discharge foam over the diesel engine and into the bilges which by this time were flooded with diesel fuel.
The ventilation was not crash stopped as the exhaust fans were actually helping to remove the copious quantities of diesel fuel fumes. The fumes had filled the Main DG Space and were also escaping up into the accommodation lower levels. The situation was very quickly brought under control and the clean down commenced. I believe that a major incident was averted by a very narrow margin. The Turbo Blower exhaust inlets at this load are 450 Degrees C and although well shrouded, it is difficult to imagine that the clouds of diesel vapour would not have been ignited soon after this time.”
A successful response like this one does not happen by accident, but is the result of good procedures which are exercised regularly. What would the outcome have been on your ship; could it have been more like this?
“The ship left port after I had seen it loaded. The crew were of mixed nationalities.
We sailed slowly for approximately 48 hrs because of strong head winds about force 8 to 9. I was aware of problems on deck. I was told that at 0900 that the bosun and a seaman had noticed that the starboard anchor was loose with 5 metres of' slack. At about 2030 on the same day, I realised that there was a serious problem and noticed that the ship was listing to starboard.
At 2345, an able seaman came to my cabin, and told me that the ship was sinking. At about that time, the captain, who did not speak English, told us to abandon ship.
Shortly afterwards, I saw the captain and the mate and some crew members already in a life raft attached by a line to the rail on the port quarter of the ship. They shouted to us to join them but we decided it was not possible. We went to the other life raft on the starboard quarter and found that it was not there. I supposed that it had already been jettisoned. We then went to launch a semi-rigid zodiac on the port quarter. There were four other crewmen with me.
Before leaving the ship, I had activated an electronic distress beacon (Sar.Sat/Epirb) and left it in a coil of rope on the stern of the ship. At that time, I gave another (Sar.Sat/Epirb) to one of the others, who gave it to someone else. It was not activated and was subsequently lost. An AB had set off three parachute flares. We noticed that the life raft with the captain and others was adrift; the painter was cut at the life raft end. This was the last time we saw them. I think that the captain had not activated the ship's automatic distress signal before leaving the ship; although the ship had a VHF radio; a short wave radio and a cell phone. I do not know why he did not.
We had great difficulty launching the zodiac with the davits, the line being fouled and the zodiac being filled with water from the ship's engine cooling system. In the zodiac there was a Mariner outboard motor, a tank of petrol and a gallon of fresh water. We couldn't use the outboard motor because it had been completely submerged. There were no paddles or food. Eventually, we managed to free the zodiac from the ship and drifted to leeward away from the lighted and still floating ship. By now it was probably 0200 hrs.
We drifted all night and all the next day. The wind had dropped to about force 3. We had only some peanuts and some multivitamins to eat. We baled out the zodiac with a hard hat because there was no baler in the boat. We approached the coast and at about 2200 hrs and were taken by the breakers. The zodiac stayed upright on the first wave;-it was overturned by the second wave and the third wave brought me, and two others onto the rocks. The remaining two were not seen again and are still missing. One managed to climb the cliff; I had more difficulty but eventually succeeded in getting on shore. The last person was stuck and I went to try and find help. I was in farmland and saw light from the road and tried in vain to stop a vehicle. I returned to help with a rope that I made from agricultural plastic that I found in nearby greenhouses; but he had gone. I feared that he was drowned.
Just before daybreak, I returned to the road and a lorry stopped for me and I was very pleased to find that one of the crew was already on board. We were taken to a town and told them about our missing colleague. They went to look for him and found him about 10 kilometres away. He had been assisted and fed by locals and was then taken to the local clinic.”
Procedures, routine and emergency are important; if you make a mess of the former, you're very likely to need the latter. Do not accept poor procedures; there could be too many, too few or they could be too long or too short, but try to make sure they're not too late!
If you have a concern you wish to discuss in confidence, please do not hesitate to get in touch.
Safe sailing,
Mike Powell
Director (Maritime) CHIRP
SECURITY
The New York Times has been running a story stating that the US Coastguard (USCG) in a number of US ports have been providing up to 24 hours notice regarding inspections. This it has been claimed is due to commercial concerns and the fact that the USCG has been placed under pressure to "keep commerce moving".
These revelations have caused great concern and have called into the question the validity of the entire US approach to maritime security. At the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach in California , the USCG gives as much notice as it can, said Lt. Tony Migliorini, a spokesman for the port. "It's kind of a balancing act," he told CNN.
Commanders especially give notice of dockside safety inspections, so that shipping companies don't have their longshoremen on the dock with nothing to do until the inspection is complete, Migliorini said.
Even during boardings at sea, the port typically notifies ship management in advance that the USCG is coming aboard, Migliorini said. He added that the USCG boards vessels for a variety of security and safety reasons, including cross-checking crew and cargo lists with those with the port, as well as allowing dogs to sniff for bombs and to check for radiation, The searches can last between 30 minutes and 12 hours.
Former USCG Cmdr. Stephen Flynn, a critic of tipping off ships, told The New York Times it was counterproductive to give notice. "If you say, 'heads up, when you get close to port in two days we're going to board you,' that sort of defeats the purpose of boarding," he told the paper.
The USCG gives little specific information about its homeland security mission, other than that it "is at a heightened state of alert protecting more than 361 ports and 95,000 miles of coastline," according to the USCG Web site.
It states that in addition to protecting against the infiltration of illegal drugs, aliens, firearms and weapons of mass destruction, the USCG also protects "ports, the flow of commerce, and the marine transportation system from terrorism."
According to the reports emerging, notice to vessels varies from port to port, and the decision on whether to notify a vessel and under what circumstances is left up to the port captain Thorne said.
A USCG spokesman in New York said all vessels boarded for security reasons there undergo surprise inspections, f they're from a foreign port and trying to get into the United States , they should know they might get boarded -- without warning,"
This furore over the US Coastguard tipping off some companies may not be, however, quite as damaging to security as it first appears.
Dennis Bryant, who produces the excellent Holland & Knight newsletter has commented on these revelations, he remarks that in his opinion, "there well may be circumstances where advance notice to a master that the Coast Guard will conduct a security check has no adverse impact on the maritime security of the United States" such circumstances would be, "when the agency wants to closely examine a particular container on a large container ship before it gets into the port area. That container is not going anywhere while the ship is at sea. Therefore, the concept of selected notices being provided in advance does not particularly bother me".
He is a little more cautious with one aspect of the revelations, which indicates that the policy of when and why the advance notice is provided is not relatively uniform throughout the agency. "An ad hoc security policy is not secure and is not policy,” he adds, and calls for the USCG to review this issue and establish uniformity (even if they don't tell the public what that policy is).
Shiptalk agrees with Mr Bryant's assertions, as this is really just a continuation of the USCG approach of "Trust, but Verify" - they are providing some commercial companies with a degree of trust and are simply visiting the vessels to verify that they deserve this trust.
Dennis Bryant's maritime newsletter is available through http://www.hklaw.com
According to stories emerging last month it seems that The European Commission has quietly been drawing up plans for a European coastguard, which critics fear is an underhand attempt by Brussels to create an EU navy with its own powers to stop and search shipping.
Plans to upgrade the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) into a fully-fledged coastguard are buried in a document revising European Union (EU) transport policy that is due to be published next month.
These revelations come on the back of other "empire building" moves by Brussels , including a planned EU army, a common foreign policy and diplomatic service, and a European-wide policy on energy. Moves that have been derided as unworkable by many member states and observers.
Lloyd's List actually accused the commission of attempting to build up a navy by stealth in a leading article last month. "The concept of a European coastguard has a federalist charm about it that causes eyes to brighten instantly among gatherings of Europhiles, tired of endless discussions about fish or agriculture," the newspaper said. "In a way, it is a European navy, by the back door."
The commission says a European coastguard would help to enforce maritime legislation. It would have the authority to intercept shipping across all of Europe 's traditional maritime borders and raises questions of national sovereignty over coastal waters.
Julian Brazier, the shadow UK shipping minister, said: "This is very worrying news. It seems the empire building ambitions of Brussels know no bounds. The drift towards an EU navy must be stopped." Mr Brazier has tabled a parliamentary question demanding to know the Government's position on the EU coastguard plans.
"The plan would be a betrayal of the maritime history of our country and the tens of thousands of men and women currently involved in our maritime sector," he said.
The commission document is written in French and entitled “Préparer la Mobilité de Demain” (Preparing Tomorrow's Mobility). In it, the commission says it believes the time has come to consider the "concept of a European coastguard". Such a body would improve passenger safety at sea and environmental protection legislation, it says.
Its main role initially would be to avert maritime pollution disasters, such as the oil slick that devastated French and Spanish Atlantic coasts in 2002, when the Prestige tanker snapped in half. The coastguard would be easy to implement, the commission notes, because the EU can "from today call on the support of the safety agencies", including EMSA.
The Lisbon-based agency came to life two years ago as a technical body to help the commission to draw up maritime legislation. But its remit and staffing levels have increased rapidly since then. It controls a small fleet of ships and has a staff of around 120 - more than twice the number originally envisaged, but still minuscule compared to equivalent bodies in member states.
The European parliament has long supported forming a European Union Coastguard, claiming that all EU governments already accept the principle of the coastguard, including Britain . The Council of Ministers, the institution that represents governments in Brussels , last year agreed to a feasibility study on its creation. Until now, however, it has not been official EU policy.
Critics say a European coastguard would be more complicated to set up than a European army because national coastguards today have varying functions, both military and civil.
Willem de Ruiter, the executive director of EMSA, says talk of the agency becoming a fully-fledged coastguard was "far-fetched and unrealistic". He said: "Many people don't understand what they mean when they say 'coastguard'. Are they talking about military operations or civil operations, or both?"
Such moves are a far cry from the systematic stripping that has occurred with the UK Coastguard, which has seen stations closed, and those that remain are often manned by virtual volunteers earning an absolute pittance in return for the vital service that they provide.
In retaliation, the navy sank five rebel vessels and the air force launched air strikes on guerrilla-held territory. Some 50 Tamils were believed dead.
Fifteen Tamil Tiger vessels, including suicide boats, attacked the convoy and a naval ship with 710 soldiers on board.
The violence may mark a return to civil war, as a 2002 ceasefire, which brought an end to almost two decades of fighting, appears unlikely to last. Keheliya Rambukwella, a government spokesman, said: "This is a very serious attack, a blatant violation of the cease-fire agreement."
LTTE are considered the leading maritime terrorism protagonists and are the main Tamil anti-government organisation operating in Sri Lanka .
In addition to a 2000 strong “Sea Tigers” division, they allegedly possess equipment and capabilities that would put many legitimate navies to shame, in addition to a fleet of fighting vessels the organisation is understood to run a flotilla of smuggling ships that play a significant role in the illegal arms trade.
A report last year from the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London said LTTE had "possible" links with al-Qaeda. The Tigers deny any such connection, and no security agency has produced proof.
Yasushi Akashi, the Japanese peace envoy to Sri Lanka since 2002, said relations between the government and rebels are at their worst since their 2002 ceasefire.
The U.N. International Maritime Organisation ( IMO ) Maritime Safety Committee ( MSC ) discussed the proposed adoption of new regulations on Long-Range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) of ships, when it met at the Organization's London Headquarters for its 81st session from 10 to 19 May 2006 .
The result of the discussions saw the major shipping nations agree new rules to track ships by satellite to fight terrorism and prevent the transport of materials used in weapons of mass destruction.
The IMO said governments party to the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) convention had given initial acceptance to the new measures at a 10-day meeting at its headquarters in London .
According to IMO spokesperson, Natasha Brown, all the world's merchant fleet trading in international waters would have to comply with the new regulations that come into force under the SOLAS convention on January 1, 2008.
"It will mean that ships will have to fit systems and contracting governments to SOLAS will need to do the same shore side if they want to receive information," she said.
Under the new proposals, merchant ships would be required to transmit through satellite-based technology their identity, location, date and time of their position.
The Long-Range Identification and Tracking of ships is the latest in a series of security measures adopted since the September 11 attacks on the United States . Amid claims that numerous sea based terrorist attacks have been thwarted due to the intelligence on likely targets that has been collected since Sept. 11.
It is such claims that have seen the rise of LRIT as more States have sought to protect their maritime borders, though as the next story shows the intelligence sources don't always get it right….
GENERAL
There can be few disasters that compare with the destruction of the World Trade Centre Towers , or of the battering and subsequent losses suffered by New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina's rampage across the Southern States.
So it is heart warming to see that in a city still emerging from the floods, a ship has begun to rise from the ashes of the September 11 terrorist attacks.
Bringing together America 's two great calamities of the 21st century, the “USS New York” is being built in New Orleans using 24 tonnes of steel taken from the collapsed World Trade Centre.
The girders taken from Ground Zero have been treated with a reverence usually accorded to religious relics. After a brief ceremony in 2003, about seven tonnes of steel were melted down and poured into a cast to make the bow section of the ship's hull.
Some shipworkers say the hairs stood up on the backs of their necks the first time they touched it. Others have postponed their retirement so they can be part of the project.
One worker, Tony Quaglino, said: “I was going to go in October 2004 after 40 years here, but I put it off when I found out I could be working on New York . This is sacred and it makes me very proud.” Glen Clement, a paint superintendent, said: “Nobody passes by that bow section without knocking on it. Everybody knows what it is made from and what it's about.”
The ship is being built by Northrop Grumman on the banks of the Mississippi , and is due for completion and delivery to the US Navy in 2007.
Later vessels in its class will include USS Arlington — named after the section of the Pentagon that was also hit by an airliner on September 11 — and USS Somerset, in memory of United Flight 93, which crashed in a field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, on the same day as passengers struggled with al-Qaeda hijackers.
Mr Clement said it would be fitting if USS New York's first mission were to capture Osama bin Laden. He said: “They hit us first, but out of a tragedy a good thing has come, in that we're building a ship which can help take those people out.”
The $1 billion vessel is one of a new generation of amphibious assault ships capable of landing a 700-strong Marines assault force on a coastline almost anywhere without the need for a port. Though the builders, Northrop Grumman's have been keen to play down suggestions that the ship might be used to spearhead future US invasion plans… Iran anyone?
For the first time this historic meeting was held outside the UK, in Dubai, the UAE branch having been the first to be formed outside the UK in 1983.
Captain Cooper, who succeeds ISM Code expert Dr Phil Anderson of ConsultISM Ltd, as president of the international organisation, will serve for two years.
In his inaugural address the President spoke of his particular interest in safety of navigation and the development of core skills and competence in seamanship, particularly among junior officers. He said the NI would also be developing its work on manning, stress and fatigue issues, and working closely with other organisations to promote fair treatment for seafarers.
Currently master of the Maersk containership “Maersk Arun”, operating in the Mediterranean and Black Sea , Capt Cooper has spent more than 30 years at sea, some 20 in command.
Capt Cooper is the second Maersk shipmaster to be a seagoing president of the institute, which is continuing its policy of international growth, with new branches established recently in Ghana , Poland , Southern California and Sweden.
The next Cunard Line ship, Queen Victoria , ceremonially entered the first phase of actual construction on May 19th with a keel laying at the Marghera shipyard of Fincantieri near Venice, Italy .
Queen Victoria , when she enters service, will become the third in Cunard's fleet of Queens and the middle of the three in size, considerably smaller than Queen Mary 2 but larger than Queen Elizabeth 2.
The keel laying involved the placement in the dry dock of one section of the ship's hull made up of six pre-manufactured blocks, which weigh 325 tons and are fitted with 50 tons of pipes, cables, insulation and other equipment. Eighty sections ultimately will be used in the construction of the Queen Victoria.
The 90,000-ton ship will take to the water for the first time at her float out in January 2007 and is scheduled for delivery to Cunard in December 2007.
“Queen Victoria is a very significant ship for Cunard," Carol Marlow, Cunard's president and managing director, said prior to the ceremony. "Not only is she the second largest ship we have ever built but she further reinforces Cunard's commitment to our British heritage."
Queen Victoria will feature a Royal Court Theatre with the first private boxes at sea; a “Cunardia” museum, housing Cunard artefacts and memorabilia; the first two-story library at sea, with 6,000 books and a splendid spiral staircase; and a grand, British colonial-style conservatory.
Queen Victoria will depart on her Maiden Voyage on Tuesday December 11, 2007 . The ship will subsequently sail from New York on January 13, 2008 on a 105-day maiden world cruise which will call at 36 cities in 23 countries.
WHAT'S ON WHERE?
ISF Manning and Training Conference 2006
The International Shipping Federation is holding its an annual one-day Manning and Training Conference in London on Wednesday 6 th September 2006 at the Royal Society of Medicine.
This event has become well-established and popular in the maritime industry and is aimed at personnel directors and senior managers from international ship operating companies, or anyone interested in maritime manpower issues. It is attended by about 240 people and viewed as a principal event for those involved in employing seafarers.
The keynote speaker this year is Mr Kari Tapiola, Executive Director at ILO. Other topics include the fatigue and safe manning, reviewing STCW 95, seafarer health checks, dealing with a blame culture and more…
Full details can be found at:
or by contacting:
Mrs Shantel Ryan
ISF
12 Carthusian Street
London
EC1M 6EZ
Tel: +44 20 7417 2855
Fax: +44 20 7417 8877
Email: shantel.ryan@marisec.org
SUBSCRIBEUNSUBSCRIBERECOMMEND SHIPTALK'S NEWSLETTER TO A FRIEND
VISIT OUR WEBSITE WWW.SHIPTALK.COM