News

European shipbreaking tour presents terrible impact of current shipbreaking practices

On 2 June 2003, four representatives from shipbreaking yards in India and Bangladesh started a three-week tour through Europe. Their aim: present the impact of the current polluting practices at the breaking yards to shipowners and politicians. Furthermore they seek cooperation in working towards a real solution to these problems. Bells from the shipbreaking yards in Alang, India, accompany them. They remind shipowners of their role in the dramatic effects of breaking ships on Asian beaches. The sound of each bell echoes the calls of the people in Asia for a cleaner environment and safer work.

2 June 2003
The tour starts when two Asian representatives arrive in the Netherlands to participate in a seminar. Mr Salim works at a Bangladeshi shipbreaking yard. Mr Shakir is a lawyer at the Supreme Court in Bangladesh. The seminar 'Scrapping ships in Asia and liability' is organised by Greenpeace and the International Institute for Asia Studies in the Amsterdam Maritime Museum. It attracts a mixed group of lawyers, shipbreakers, shipowners and trade unions. But also Greenpeace campaigners, academics, students and asbestos firms. Other participants are representatives of international organisations like the ILO.

All participants express the hope that the current pollution and high rate of accidents will end soon. As a first step mandatory rules for all stakeholders involved should be set up. Mr Shakir fully agrees with this approach. His experience is that no state can solve the problem in splendid isolation. Certainly not a developing country like Bangladesh where many people lack basic needs. Mr. Salim agrees as well. He experienced the dramatic consequences when 'solutions' depend on the voluntary initiatives of individual shipbreakers and shipowners.

3 June 2003
Ramapati Kumar visits the Dutch Minister of Environment. Mr Kumar works as a campaigner for Greenpeace India. He frequently visits the shipbreaking yards in his country and is a keen observer of the practices there. Despite many promises and beautiful words by shipowners or their organisations, he has not seen much improvement during the last year. He has witnessed men in suits preparing documents and voluntary guidelines. Meanwhile men on bare feet went into ships that had no gasfree certificate. The men in suits talked diplomatic language. But Kumar saw the remains of the people who died in an explosion on a ship.

The Dutch minister listens carefully. He wants an end to the current status quo. However, most Dutch shipowners continue to send ships to the breaking yards. They pay no attention to the hazardous substances on board of their vessels, with the notable exception of one company. Kumar tells the minister there is only one way to guarantee a better and cleaner future. All shipowners should follow the same mandatory rules, irrespective of country and size of the fleet. The minister seems willing to call on the Dutch Association of Shipowners to cooperate. After all he is responsible for the implementation of the Basel Convention. According to this treaty no hazardous substances can be exported from the Netherlands to countries like India and Bangladesh. That also counts for shipowners.

4 - 6 June 2003
Next stop is Greece. This country has a large commercial fleet. Part of that fleet is in the hands of shipowners who fly their national flag proudly. Yet another part chooses a different flag for a variety of reasons. The participants in the shipbreaking tour have mixed feelings. Only recently the 'Amina' - owned by the Greek company Chandris - exploded in Alang. Ten people died.

In Greece Mr Ganguly plays an important role. He represents one of the largest trade unions in India. In the 40 years of his work for the trade union movement he met several owners of factories or industries. But in Piraeus he is surprised: all four shipowners he meets react in a different way. Brilliantly Mr Ganguly summarises his meetings with the shipowners. He compares the companies to the brothers of one family. One brother is very defensive and will only follow the rules. If there are no rules he will not take a single extra step, despite the good and green reputation he is said to have. The other brother might not have such a good reputation, but he clearly sees the need for change. He is even willing to play a part in this change. A third brother is outspoken in the need for change and is willing to tell this to people outside the family as well. Another brother has done good things in the past. Yet he is by nature inclined to wait for further steps to be taken by the government and the IMO. 'The family has not made up its mind yet', Mr Ganguly says. 'It takes a good and wise father to keep the family intact and to move the family forward. Maybe the Greek Minister of Mercantile Marine is a wise man in this respect. Maybe he has the wisdom and authority to move the family in the right direction.' During the meeting with the Minister it seems there is a chance he uses his wisdom in this way. Perhaps it is at the short-term detriment of one brother. But it certainly is in the interest of the world outside this family.

7 - 8 June 2003
After visiting Greece the representatives board a small Greenpeace vessel for a couple of days. In the port of Antwerp, Belgium, they visit several ships from a large variety of shipowners. Captains and crew on board are informed about the current situation in India and Bangladesh. They are asked to bring this to the attention of the vessel's owner. After all, he needs to take appropriate action. One of the shipowners is Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC). The safety and environment manager of MSC seems quite willing to listen to the demands. Next week there will be a meeting with the company's top-managers in Switzerland. What will their decisions mean for the people and environment in India and Bangladesh?

10 June 2003
Switzerland is a country more than 1,000 kilometres from the ocean. It's studded with mountains. Still there is a connection with shipbreaking: the headquarters of the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) in Geneva. Therefore Switzerland is the next stop in the shipbreaking tour. MSC owns several vessels that were sent for scrap to India or Bangladesh in the recent past. Last week the Asian representatives boarded the vessel MSC Insa in Antwerp. This vessel is likely to be sent to Asia for scrapping soon. If the company agrees to clean ships prior to export, hopefully it will extend this policy to its entire fleet.

In Geneva activists from Greenpeace Switzerland join the group. In front of the MSC building Ramapati Kumar and Mr Salim ring two bells. Mr Kumar is a campaigner for Greenpeace India and Mr Salim is a Bangladeshi shipbreaker. The bells were taken from European toxic ships brought for scrap to Asian beaches. One will be presented to MSC as a symbol of their responsibility: MSC should prevent the export of hazardous substances in their vessels.

Over the weekend MSC has denied the need for a meeting. But senior manager Mr Formisano meets the representatives outside and invites them to come in. Mr Kumar, Mr Shakir - a Bangladeshi lawyer to the Supreme Court - and Mr Salim inform the senior managers about the impacts of breaking ships on the environment and people in Asia. The gentlemen listen carefully. They are even shocked by the dangers people face while breaking ships. Sometimes opinions are expressed fiercely during the discussions. But that certainly helps getting a realistic view on the current situation, both in Asia and within the company. MSC clearly understands it has a role to play and there seems to be room for change. The company agrees that mandatory rules for the entire sector are needed. Because competition is hard a 'level playing field' is needed. Until then MSC sees no room for acting on an individual basis.

11 June 2003
Swiss authorities think the construction of a new shipbreaking yard at the unspoilt beaches of Guinee Buissau is a bad idea. The shipbreaking tour pays them a visit. The Asian representatives want to know what the Swiss policy is on exporting hazardous materials. Will the Swiss government stick to the Basel Convention? Also if contaminated vessels are to be exported for breaking?

The officials are obviously moved by the presentations. Though Switzerland is so far from the ocean, the authorities turn out to care deeply for people's lives and the pollution of oceans on the other side of the world. They clearly see the need to change the current status quo. Only that can really change the lives of people like Mr Salim who work in the shipbreaking yards. Just like MSC the Swiss authorities agree that mandatory rules must be made. In their opinion shipowners have a responsibility in preventing further environmental and social destruction in Asia. The Basel Convention should apply to contaminated ships for scrap. 'Basel' is the basis of any future regulations. The Swiss minister might take an initiative in this direction. Or support such initiatives by other countries.

12 June 2003
The United Kingdom is the seat of the International Chamber of Shipping (ISC). So the shipbreaking tour stops in London. Carrying the heavy bell from the Alang shipbreaking yard the delegates arrive at the building of Intertanko where ISC resides. But two hours later they walk the streets of London still carrying this bell. ISC refuses to accept it. Just as it refuses to accept any responsibility for the environmental and social problems related to shipbreaking. Bluntly ICS's representative even dares to state that the workers in shipbreaking yards themselves generate the hazardous materials and cause the pollution. After all, they break the ships. This attitude is a slap in the face of thousands of workers in Chittagong and Alang. A knife in the back of the families that lost men who died while breaking the ships.

One of the delegates is Sunita Dubey, who represents an Indian NGO. She cannot believe what is happening. Ms Dubey has been involved in court cases in India on shipbreaking since 1996. She knows all the sensitivities from all different angles. The refusal of ICS to accept the ships bell comes as a shocking revelation. During the meetings in Switzerland, the Netherlands and Greece shipowners supported the call for mandatory rules. They all accepted the ship bells as symbols of responsibility. The shipping industry seemed ready to move forward on this important issue and abandon its old bad habits. But obviously the federations that represent shipowners are not that far. 'Clearly these federations are denying reality', says Ms Dubey. 'It is up to politicians in Europe and the International Maritime Organisation to find a solution to this. If we wait for these federations to change, more people will suffer and our oceans will be totally polluted.'

13 June 2003
The next day brings yet another disappointing event for the Asian people. An expert on IMO culture, processes and protocols tells the delegates they should have no hope for a solution from IMO. 'Poor Asian people dying due to hazardous ships are simply not enough of a priority', he says. 'Try Europe, but forget about the IMO.'
Next visit is to Lloyd's, the world's most famous insurance company. Here the Asian representatives learn that any ship involved in illegal matters is confronted with an expiry of its insurance. Conclusion: shipowners act illegally if they do not follow the rules originating from the Basel Convention. Does this mean that every year around 600 vessels sail their final voyage without any insurance covering ship, crew of cargo? This knowledge opens a new perspective from which the issue needs to be looked at.

14 June 2003
Back in Antwerp again to make more visits to ships, captains and crews. It is a relief for the touring delegates to meet real people working on real ships. Captains not only understand the issue. They are also concerned about the people and environment in India. One captain is member of the Greek Helmepa. This NGO promotes clean oceans world wide. The captain cannot understand why his organisation has not spoken out on this so far.
It is clear that the people on board ships support the call for urgent changes. On the other side people in boardrooms will not do anything unless there is a politician telling them to. But what politician will speak on behalf of the environment and the workers in Asia?

16 June 2003
Today the delegation was left standing outside the offices of Euronav in Luxembourg. They were waiting for somebody to discuss the plans of this company for its entire fleet, and how its ships will be scrapped. After all, in the recent past Euronav had sent the ship 'Flandres' to a breaking yard in Bangladesh with all hazardous substances still on board. Mr Salim was personally involved in the scrapping of this vessel. The refusal to meet him and the other representatives was a clear signal. The company sees no problem in exporting hazardous substances.

17 June 2003
The Indian government agrees to organise a meeting of all shipbreaking countries prior to the upcoming MEPC meeting of IMO. This will be crucial as all countries face the same problems with the import of hazardous substances. But none of them is -individually - in a position to change the current shipbreaking practices.

18 June 2003
A positive note was the press release of the European Community Shipowners Association (ECSA). They decided to support the calls of the representatives, for instance for a mandatory regime. This makes them shift away from the position of the International Chamber of Shipping, that denies any responsibility. Another proof that Europe is seriously willing and able to take a stronger stand on this issue. ECSA is increasingly becoming an interesting stakeholder. It will represent a large part of the shipowners world wide with the entrance of new EU member states.

18/19 June 2003
One of the interesting things the delegates observed during the tour was that no individual shipowner is able to make a difference within the market. With the notable exception of P&O Nedloyd and some hesitating steps forward by Ceres. None of the shipowners they met - and also the ones that refused to meet them - accepted any form of individual responsibility. Not for the pollution or for the deaths that occur at a breaking yard due to the export of hazardous substances on board of vessels. No matter how long the vessel had been owned by the company. No matter how good the image of the company might be. No matter if the CEO himself is a board member of Helmepa, a Greek NGO that promotes clean oceans world wide.

In the absence of mandatory international rules they are not at all worried to continue this export of pollution and accidents. Oh yes, they know all about the issue and read it in the papers with interest. Yes, they told the Asian representatives in varying degrees how sorry they were to hear about fatal accidents and pollution. But none came forward to take full responsibility. Shipowners played hide and seek, eager to pass the ball onto the politicians.

'Go to Europe', the representatives were told. 'If Europe moves, the others will have to follow. Do not expect any changes on this issue from IMO or one of its working groups. If you leave it to the IMO changes won't happen. People dying in Asia is simply not a priority for IMO.' So the Asian delegation was shocked, but went to Europe. And Europe spoke out on the issue. The European Parliament wants a guarantee for all single hull tankers that are to be scrapped. The vessels must be broken in a way that is safe to human beings and the environment. In addition the Parliament calls for mandatory IMO guidelines addressing the preparation of all ships prior to export for recycling.

19 June 2003
Important political breakthrough! EU Commissioner for the Environment, Margot Wallström, announced that the European Commission will act to make sure the shipping industry cleans its ships of hazardous materials before exporting them to Asia for scrap. She also declared that she will write to the International Maritime Organisation, requesting to take this issue seriously and closes loopholes in current international legislation. Wallström said that she would write to ministers of all European countries to forcefully implement the European shipment on waste. She added that the proposed reform of the transhipment of waste under the Basel Convention, scheduled for approval on 30th June, is applicable to ships for scrap.

This means that the legal discussion on whether or not ships can become waste is now obsolete and over. During the tour the representatives learned that this aspect had been entered in the debate deliberately to delay the real discussion as long as possible. Almost everyone the delegates spoke to acknowledged that the Basel Convention and its methodology are the basis for action by countries and international organisations like EU and IMO. This was not the case prior to their visit to Europe. They can be proud of this result.

20 June 2003
This day is the last day of the European Shipbreaking Tour. It wasn't easy to try and take a brick from the wall that surrounds the international shipping industry. The Asian visitors talked to shipowners, politicians, ministers, civil servants, ambassadors, and various people within the European Union. No matter how exhausted in the end, they all felt that changes were taking place within the shipping industry as well as within the political arena. After all, there now is support from the European Union and others for the real solution, mandatory regulations to prevent pollution and accidents.

But this is also the day the IMO Council decides to withdraw the consultative status of Greenpeace. The IMO Assembly has to make a final decision on this in November 2003, but the signal is clear. Greenpeace campaigner from India Ramapati Kumar reacts: 'No matter if Greenpeace is banned from IMO. The shipping industry cannot ignore the realities of environmental pollution associated with shipbreaking. There will always be somebody to speak up. There will always be somebody to bring the realities of shipbreaking to those who decide about the future of the shipping industry.'