A shipyard in your backyard?

But a Shipbuilder’s Liability Policy is not.

Where does that leave ship repairers and are they covered in respect of their terrorist risks?

Many ports host small ship repair and dry dock operations. They probably would quite like to know where they stand. In any event they have to comply with the ISPS Code insofar as their premises constitute port facilities and are subject to port state regulation.

We understand the P&I Clubs have been in dialogue with the IMO to work towards an IMO sanctioned resolution which would declare terrorism an Act of War. This would mean that the Clubs’ exposure to terrorist risks would be pegged to the limits laid down for war risks (US$ 500m) and not the general limit of liability of the Clubs (US$4.25bn).

This is of very distinct interest to ports and not least to those places where cruise ships call since the revised Athens Convention raises passenger compensation limits for a 3,000 passenger cruise ship to US$1.8bn.

No wonder some of the most securityminded shipping organisations in the world are the dream merchants who run the great white liners.

Port insurers in general have taken the view that compliance with the ISPS Code is a condition of cover. However they know, as well as we all know, that the swiftness of implementation with which it took place left little time for most ports and terminals to really rise up to the challenge of the new regulations. So for now, port operators are mostly working diligently through the process of security risk assessment, security planning, training and testing of plans. Noses are generally being kept clean, but it must be sensible to reckon on less wriggle room as the years wear on and the ISPS Code becomes just another part of the regulatory environment.