1 / 23

ITOPF INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR SPILL PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND COMPENSATION Madrid, 2 December 2004 Peter M. Swift

ITOPF INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR SPILL PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND COMPENSATION Madrid, 2 December 2004 Peter M. Swift. Have we learnt the lessons from PRESTIGE ?. Should this ship have been allowed to break up ?. Was this well coordinated and the best course of action ?

sheldon
Télécharger la présentation

ITOPF INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR SPILL PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND COMPENSATION Madrid, 2 December 2004 Peter M. Swift

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ITOPF INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR SPILL PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND COMPENSATION Madrid, 2 December 2004 Peter M. Swift

  2. Have we learnt the lessons from PRESTIGE ?

  3. Should this ship have been allowed to break up ?

  4. Was this well coordinated and the best course of action ? • Towing route of ”the Prestige”

  5. Should this man have been detained for more than two years without trial ?

  6. The principal lessons • Industry’s performance is falling short of Society’s expectations • Society’s tolerance for such accidents is effectively zero

  7. Other lessons • Preparedness • Response • Lack of understanding and trust - inadequate dialogue

  8. The immediate aftermath • Newsworthy accident invites comments from ALL interested parties • Respondents and commentators have their own agendas

  9. Understanding the agenda • Significance of event to local interests routinely underestimated • Industry facts are of limited interest to most • Public and politicians expect ”action” quickly • Scapegoats may be necessary to deflect culpability from others • Media need a good story • Many parties hope to capitalise on the opportunies • Industry is often overcautious – public may doubt the value of investigations, etc.

  10. Seeking solutions • - Everyone has the answer ! • Politicians and legislators propose political and legislative solutions • Industry offers technical, operational and procedural solutions • Politicians and public want quick fixes • Industry takes longer term view and cautions against hasty, ill-considered solutions

  11. Seeking solutions • Technical versus Political • Industry advocates heavy fuel oil in only double hulls • Politicians demand accelerated single hull phase-out and extra surveys • Industry advocates new measures at global level • Politicians demand regional and local legislation • Industry pushes for Places of Refuge • Politicians demand information on ’dangerous’ ships and cargoes • Industry refers to UNCLOS, MARPOL and SOLAS • Politicians challenge UNCLOS and MARPOL, and support PSSAs • Industry pushes for Reception facilities • Politicians support interceptions and tanker tracking

  12. INTERCEPTION ON THE HIGH SEASThe “political” solution

  13. Seeking solutions • Technical versus Political • Was industry ”listening” ? • Do the public and politicians care what industry says or thinks ? Or only in what they do or do not do ?

  14. As time goes by… • The cold light of day Two years after the accident : • Legal cases pending • Still much speculation • Flag State Accident Investigation Report published

  15. Accident Investigation

  16. Accident Investigations • Accident investigations and reports leave much to be desired • Industry generally has very poor feedback mechanisms • Many impediments to information sharing • More can be learnt from more minor incidents and near-misses • Confidential incident reporting (and subsequent analysis) requires more support

  17. As time goes by… • The cold light of day Two years after the accident: • Action still needed on Places of Refuge • Still more ”sticks” than ”carrots” • Continuing push on ”criminalisation” • Continuing push to increase financial liability • New European safety package in the pipeline • HNS and Bunker Conventions still awaiting sufficient ratifications • CLC and Fund Convention still challenged despite recent revisions • Revisions being sought to UNCLOS and possibly MARPOL

  18. As time goes by… • The cold light of day Two years after the accident : • Some advances in preparedness – ITOPF, EU/EMSA et al • Some advances in response planning – owners, cargo interests but lacks real co-ordination Spotlight on : • Flag state competence and IMO audits • More effective Port State Control targeting • Classification societies • International Group of P&I Clubs • ”Image” of shipping industry

  19. Have we learnt the lessons ? Hopefully YES

  20. Have we learnt the lessons ? • Conclusions Industry’s deliverables: • More transparency • Greater understanding and trust of public and their representatives • Better Preparedness • Better Response planning • Input to more effective regulation • Commitment to continuous improvement

  21. Place of Refuge Would this have helped ?

  22. Have we learnt the lessons ? • Conclusions Individually we can do much. Together we can do even more.

More Related