Does the shipping industry need a stronger voice?

SHIPPING needs one voice to represent it globally and enable the maritime community to communicate more effectively with regulators. That was the message delivered forcefully by Mark O'Neil, president of ship-management association InterManager and chief executive officer (CEO) of Columbia Shipmanagement, at the recent International Shipowning and Shipmanagement Summit, held during London International Shipping Week.

As the industry builds up to the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) environmental world discussions in November, Mr O'Neil urged it to "capitalise on the cooperation achieved in collectively working to tackle the challenges presented by the Covid-19 pandemic, in order to address other global issues".

He proposed the creation of an International Maritime Committee (IMC) comprising representatives from all maritime sectors with a presidency rotating between member organisations. He recommended this committee would collate all relevant views and opinions from within the various diverse maritime sectors, and present the results of informed industry debate to governments making decisions which will impact how shipping operates in the future.

"I do think as an industry there is a crying need for greater collaboration between those bodies that govern the various aspects of the industry," he stated. "We need to influence the debate when it comes before the governments who decide. At the moment we have various bodies all doing their part for their members but those members representing only a part of the industry. We need our industry views put across in a single voice."

So is he right? Well, the shipping industry does have a strong representation in the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The two biggest industry organisations, the shipowners' International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) and the wider industry body BIMCO, are generally effective at getting the industry's view across - sometimes individually, but often together and with other industry organisations as the Round Table of International Shipping Associations.

The Round Table comprises the International Association of Dry Cargo Shipowners (Intercargo), the International Association for Independent Tanker Owners (Intertanko), BIMCO and ICS. But Intermanager is not a full member of the Round Table, although I understand it has asked to be several times. Is that perhaps behind this call for an IMC?

It is also worth mentioning the International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA), which is very active in Singapore. It is not a member of the Round Table but participates effectively in the IMO policymaking committees.

Mr O'Neil asserted that "shipping had too often been late to discussions and the 'Johnny-come-lately' of international debate". He added: "Shipping is a long-term investment industry and it cannot operate on knee-jerk, populist policies - otherwise, investors will go elsewhere."

Is that case really valid? The Round Table organisations have been making clear their positions on the big issues affecting shipping for a long time. You couldn't really call their positions knee-jerk or populist. On the contrary, they very often have to contend with policy initiatives that certainly can be described in those terms.

Anyway, it seemed a good idea to find out what the ICS thought of the IMC proposal. Its communications department gave me the following statement from the body's secretary-general Guy Platten: "We have seen unprecedented levels of collaboration throughout the pandemic, with all areas of the industry coming together like never before to tackle the crew change crisis. We continue to work closely together on this and other important issues including maritime security, safety and decarbonisation. It is vital we continue to cooperate and are committed to continue this way of working, especially as the crew change crisis is far from over and the climate emergency requires our greatest collective effort yet."

There is nothing wrong with all of that, with except that it does not answer the question about the proposed IMC. When I pointed that out to the ICS, I was told just to use the statement. So, in other words, the ICS does not want to answer the question.

However, it seems quite clear that the IMC proposal is going nowhere. It is also difficult to see how the shipping industry organisations could be much more effective than they have been, certainly in the recent past. The ICS, especially, is working very hard to put shipping's views across in the run-up to COP26. It is also pushing hard for an effective IMO policy leading to decarbonisation.

The real problem is not that shipping is failing to get its message across clearly but that most governments, individually and at IMO, will always listen to louder and more powerful voices. Singapore is unusual in being very maritime-focused. The same can be said of few other states.