Threat of sanctions wont help
The UKs Freight Transport Association (FTA) has criticised the port of Felixstowe for introducing a controversial security surcharge and threatening to give a ” lower priority” to some imported containers, delaying them within the port.
The charge has been levied by the port to cover the cost of implementing the ISPS Code and the FTA believes that it should be factored into the normal operational costs charged to the port’s customers – the shipping lines – and that a separate surcharge is unacceptable. It is particularly concerned that the security surcharge is being billed to those who do not even have contracts with the ports – i. e. shippers and freight forwarders.
Felixstowe’s threat to give a “lower priority” to imported containers under the control of non-paying declarants – that is, whoever has registered the container onto the port’s community system, was put into place on 14 June. From 28 June export containers belonging to “non-payers” were to be turned away from the port altogether.
FTA’s Head of Maritime Freight Policy, Dr Andrew Traill, says: “FTA is dismayed that the port of Felixstowe has implemented security surcharges in such an abrupt manner – it will only serve to make existing disputes between shippers, forwarders and the port itself even more heated. Shippers could be forced to take legal action, and indeed many believe that the port has no right to withhold freight not belonging to them or of those it has no contractual relationship with.
He goes on: “Unfortunately, many of FTA’s members are finding it increasingly difficult to refuse to pay the additional security charge. The port invoices the container “declarant” (be that a haulier, forwarder or port agent) but the “declarant” is often unable to bear the cost of this surcharge and as such is forced to pass it onto the shipper. Many shipping lines that are “declarants” themselves have also issued notices that they too have no choice but to pass the cost on to the shipper.”
The FTA is attempting to resolve the issue through discussions with the European Commission raising its concerns about the consequences on competition, the undermining of the security regulation itself and its possible impact on the supply chain security proposals expected later this year from the Commission.