Ship-breaking industry is also referred to as ship scrapping, ship dismantling and even ship re-cycling. Whatever name we call it by, it involves breaking up a ship at the end of its useful life and then to re-cycle various components. Most of the steel finds their way to re-rolling mills.
While the western world is engaged in high technology industry, some of the third world countries developed the skill in ship breaking. A large number of people in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and China are engaged in this industry directly and many others in associated industries as its by product.
The ship-breaking industry is making substantial contribution to their national economies. It has its down side as well. The health and safety standards are poor resulting into frequent accidents and casualties. The industry with no environmental control or protection has been also causing long term environmental damage.
The industry needs to be regulated to provide safety and environmental safeguards without disturbing its natural growth based on supply demand and expertise. Recently various UN agencies with no respect or regard for each other's role and competence got engaged into the matter. Is it all genuine love for safety and environment or an attempt to build up respective empire or even make it another high technology industry for the western world?
Any attempt to improve safety and environmental standards must not be so radical to deprive the third world countries. It has to be a slow and gradual process otherwise it will disturb the present balance. Any radical attempt will be viewed as a conspiracy to deprive the third world countries of their cheap labour intensive industry.
The International Maritime Organisation is a specialised agency of the United Nations dealing with maritime safety and protection of the maritime environment. It uses the slogan "safe ships and cleaner seas", Till this time IMO has developed a number of International instruments consistent to its role and function.
The Member States implement the provisions of those instruments to make the seas much safer and cleaner then what they would have been without such internationally agreed standards. SOLAS is the paramount IMO Convention and ISM Code (under SOLAS) deals with safe operation of ships and protection of the marine environment.
The important part is "safe operation". Recently IMO has been deliberating a lot about ship-breaking - its safety and environmental impact. The question is whether such matters are IMO remit. Ship-breaking is certainly not a part of the maritime industry and by no means a part of the "safe operation". As a matter of fact when a ship is withdrawn from service and de-registered, it is no more a ship.
It is then merely a structure. At this point the structure is out of the IMO remit. Breaking up such a structure ashore is a shore-based industry. The health and safety aspect including other conditions should be the remit of the ILO and its national link body such as the ministry of industry or labour.
The environmental matter should be of UNEP concern and its national link body dealing with environment in general (and not marine environment alone). There is apparently no role for IMO. It is not clear as to why IMO is trying to get so much involved in this matter.
IMO has done real good work in the field of maritime safety and protection of the maritime environment and has set up a reputation for itself as one of the most effective UN agency. Perhaps it should not tarnish its image by unnecessary involvement in matters beyond its filed of competence.
Talking in terms of 'Flag State' and ' last owner' - are all counter-productive and waste of time. Who is going to declare himself as the last owner? When the ship-owner thinks that further operation of the ship is not viable, he will sell it off. He does not have to declare that he is selling it for scrapping.
The question of "Green Passport" is unrealistic. If the ship has to obtain a green passport' from a highly industrialised country when why should it go to the third world country any more? That is the end of the game. The discussion that took place at IMO even referred to contract between ship-owner and the breaking yard as if it is that simple.
In practice it is a different world. The ship may pass through five different hands before it ends up in the breaking yard. The breaking yard may not own the vessel or any part thereof at any time. The breaking yard may merely be taken on lease by a person or company undertaking the business. References to so many different parties are totally unnecessary and would not provide any practicable solution.
The Basel Convention exists to regulate the transport of hazardous materials to developing countries by making the ship and its exporter responsible. I agree with the philosophy that a developing country should not be the dumping ground but how can a live operational ship be regarded as waste. Application of the concept of export-import (to operational ships) will complicate the whole issue. The Basle Convention certainly does not apply to ships.
The Flag State remains responsible so long the vessel operates under its Flag. Once the vessel is de-registered then it is no more the extended floating territory of the Flag State. Then the structure should be under full control and jurisdiction of the State where it is located. An operational ship sailing for a destination is under no obligation to disclose in advance its future intention of scrapping.
This will only encourage ship-owners and scrap-buyers to indulge into illegal activities, perhaps at sea, to avoid the eyes of law. Until the last day of operation under its own power the ship must comply with all requirements of survey, audit and certification under applicable IMO instruments for safe operation and protection of the environment. A ship should be considered as an export commodity only if it is being towed to another country for scrap.
The ideal solution is perhaps to draw a Convention specifically on ship-breaking. The world maritime community at IMP should adopt a resolution calling up on the competent UN agencies to act without further delay. The lead agency should be ILO with UNEP providing necessary guidance on environment related matters.
Any international instrument must focus on the recycling country because it is only that Party who can exercise effective jurisdiction and control. A broad outline of such an international instrument is suggested below.
Member States should not allow a ship to be abandoned, dumped or broken up within its jurisdiction unless it complies with the requirements of the instrument;
Member States shall after necessary verification license scrapping yards within its jurisdiction that meet the standards of health, safety and environment as stipulate in the instrument. The Member States shall subject the continuation of the license to periodic inspection and review to ensure the compliance of the standards at all times. The owner (person or company) responsible for the ship intended to be scrapped in Member State shall apply to a designated authority for a permit.
The application shall contain the following details:
-- particulars of the company or persons involved in the business ;
-- particulars of the ship:
-- particulars of the licensed breaking yard;
-- brief description of any pollutant, toxic or hazardous substances still remaining on board and plans for their safe disposal;
-- an outline of the ship-breaking programme.
-- Once the authority is satisfied with the proposed plan, it shall grant necessary permit. The authority may attach any clause or condition if deemed necessary;
-- The authority while granting such a permit shall keep the State, under whose Flag the vessel arrived to the recycling State informed.
This will be a simple, workable and effective way of dealing with all aspects (health, safety and environment of the ship-breaking without involving too many parties and certainly without creating any conflict or overlapping of responsibilities of various agencies. The Ministry of Environment shall act as a focal point for recycling of ships, as it is a shore-based industry.
REGIONAL SCENARIO: Record prices for scrap, rising freight market and dearth of vessels on sale has created difficulty for demo business and all yards in the subcontinent are suffering except Bangladesh which demolished 4.8m DWT during 2006, way ahead of Indian's 1m dwt, whilst Pakistan and China Shared 0.25m DWT.
The ship-breaking at Gaddani was flourishing prior to 2004 and offering employment, has virtually collapsed rendering thousands jobless. The historical average till 2004 was 155 USD per LDT, prices are now 500/USD/LDT plus. Bangladesh buyers are offering USD 530/LDT for clean tanker and USD 470/LDT for bulker whereas Indians and Pakistanis can offer Max USD: 470.00 and USD: 435.00 respectively for wet and dry tonnage.
China has forbidden beaching due to environmental consideration and only scraps in docks, with new docks built in China to make demo environmental friendly recycling sites. Only Pakistan, India and Bangladesh allow beaching which is likely to be forbidden by new basell/IMO convention and the efforts of Green peace.
Pakistan's ship-breakers, already reeling from impossible price competition, have been further hit with increase in import and sales tax on scrap tonnage effective July, 1, 2007. The Pakistani ship-breakers are now in no position to compete and will shut down their demo operation/business.
The west was quite upset as most of the demo industry was flourishing in the subcontinent, thus new regulation of green passports and recycling in docks only has been introduced, so that idle yards of west may be re-activated/used.
The Directorate General of Ports and Shipping, being focal point of IMO, must resist the move of passing convention on recycling in the Marine environmental protection committee meeting and in recent IMO assembly of 18th November 2007. We, must save our nascent industry by telling IMO, that its jurisdiction, does not apply, as ship recycling is shore based industry.
The searching question is, does any one is concerned or aware of these developments or are they able to comprehend the negative effects of new international convention on our demo industry. The answer is No Atleast we can support India and Bangladesh who send qualified and competent people to international forums to safeguard their national interest.
We must make efforts to revive the ship breaking industry to meet our needs of iron and steel and employment of thousand of workers attached to this industry, otherwise developed countries with international regulation will bar beaching on shore. We have no dry docks available to comply with the forthcoming regulation, we must educate ship breaking industry for its survival in future.
