EU Port policyPia Farstad von Hall, chief adviser portsBergen 21. June 2013

Ports - an important link in the transport chain

1. KS Bedrift Havn2. Challenges3. Norwegian port policy4. EU port policy

Board 2013

Roar Johansen Havnealliansen ChairFinn P. Olsen Stavanger havn IKS Vice-

chairHalvar Pettersen Tromsø havn KFRune Hvass Arendal havn KFBente Levin Horten havn KF

Vara:Randi Thørring Tromsø havn KFLeif Gustav Prytz Nordkapp havn KFMerete R. Gundersen Moss havn KF

Members 2013

• Harstad Havn KF• Tromsø Havn KF• Hammerfest Havn KF • Borg Havn IKS• Moss Havn KF• Drammen Havn• Horten Havn KF• Larvik Havn KF• Grenland Havn IKS• Stavangerregionen Havn IKS• Vardø Havn • Hadsel Havn• Ålesundregionens Havnevesen

• Stavangerregionen Havnedrift AS• Karmsund Havnevesen IKS• Molde og Romsdal Havn IKS• Kristiansund og Nordmøre Havn IKS• Mo i Rana havn KF• Bergen og Omland havnevesen • Nordkapp- og Porsanger havn IKS• Arendal havn KF• Bydrift Longyearbyen AS • Eigersund Havnevesen• Kragerø Havnevesen KF• Florø havn• Farsund havn

Sjøtransportalliansen – working together

Norwegian ports in general

• Owned by local authorities• App. 50 ports – transport• App 700 ports – fisheries – state owned• 31 ports – part of main roads

(stamnetthavner)• 5 ports – designated (utpekt)• Port of Bergen largest including oil• Port of Oslo largest in TEUs (containers)

A typical Norwegian port

Important for local municipaities

Goods in tons 4. q in 2012

Borg Hav

n IKS

Moss Hav

n KF

Oslo Hav

n KF

Drammen

regionen

s Inter

kommunale

Havnev

esen

Tønsb

erg Hav

nevese

n

Sandefj

ord Hav

nevese

n

Larvik

Havn KF

Grenlan

d Havn IK

S

Kristian

sand Hav

n KF

Eigers

und Havnev

esen KF

Stava

nger In

terko

mmunale Hav

n IKS

Karmsu

nd Inter

kommunale

Havnev

esen IK

S

Bergen

og Omlan

d Havnev

esen

Flora

Hamn KF

Breman

ger H

amn og N

æring K

F

Nordfjord

Havn IK

S

Ålesundreg

ionens H

avnev

esen

Molde og R

omsdal

Havn IK

S

Kristian

sund og N

ordmøre

Havn IK

S

Trondheim

sfjord

en In

terko

mmunale Hav

n IKS

Indre Tro

ndheimsfj

ord Hav

nevese

n IKS

Brønnøy H

avn KF

Mo i Ran

a Hav

n KF

Bodø Havn KF

Narvik

Havn KF

Tromsø

Havn KF

Hammerf

est Hav

n KF

Store

Norske S

pitsberg

en Gru

bekompan

i AS

Private

foret

ak m

ed eg

en ka

i0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

TEUs volum (containers) 4. q 2012 Lo-Lo

Borg Hav

n IKS

Moss Hav

n KF

Oslo Hav

n KF

Drammen

regionen

s Inter

kommunale

Havnev

esen

Tønsb

erg Hav

nevese

n

Sandefj

ord Hav

nevese

n

Larvik

Havn KF

Grenlan

d Havn IK

S

Kristian

sand Hav

n KF

Farsu

nd Havnev

esen

Eigers

und Havnev

esen KF

Stava

nger In

terko

mmunale Hav

n IKS

Karmsu

nd Inter

kommunale

Havnev

esen IK

S

Bergen

og Omlan

d Havnev

esen

Flora

Hamn KF

Breman

ger H

amn og N

æring K

F

Nordfjord

Havn IK

S

Ålesundreg

ionens H

avnev

esen

Molde og R

omsdal

Havn IK

S

Kristian

sund og N

ordmøre

Havn IK

S

Trondheim

sfjord

en In

terko

mmunale Hav

n IKS

Indre Tro

ndheimsfj

ord Hav

nevese

n IKS

Brønnøy H

avn KF

Mo i Ran

a Hav

n KF

Bodø Havn KF

Narvik

Havn KF

Tromsø

Havn KF

Hammerf

est Hav

n KF

Store

Norske S

pitsberg

en Gru

bekompan

i AS

Private

foret

ak m

ed eg

en ka

i0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

Challenges: Sea transport

• State fees• Finance• Cargo handling• Pilotage• Port labour regime• Competition EU

(relevant for Norwegian ports)

• Adequate coordination of information (Blue belt)

The aim is to make sea transport more competitive towards other transport means

KS Bedrift Havn – policy suggestions infrastructure

State investments in ports, 1 billion NOK yearly

Criteria:• Significant contribution to increase sea transport

• infrastructure onshore• port infrastructure

• Significant contribution to regional development• Government support/investments may be 50 percent for the

investment costs• Government support/investments in LNG terminals and/or

shorepower

Norwegian port policy /sea transport

• NTP 2014 – 2023 Stimulate use of short sea transport Initiate state investments in dedicated

ports Initiate state economic support for ports

cooperating and concentration of goods Strengthen research and carry out a

study on goods transported by sea in combination with other transport

• Pilotage – reorganise to become more efficient

• Reduction in state fees

EU ports in general

• 1200 commercial ports• 319 TEN-T ports• 83 core network ports

EU ports policy

• Adopted by the Commission on 23rd of May 2013

• Includes a communication on ports policy that replaces the last one from 2007 + regulation on market access and financial transparency

• 3rd attempt to legislate on market access for port services in the EU from the Commission

• Important contribution to EU transport policy – combines sea, road and rail

EU port policy – policy suggestions €10 billion2030

EU impact assesment

The impact assessment identified five operational objectives related to the two main challenges:

1. Modernise port services and operations: (i) clarify and facilitate access to the port services market; (ii) prevent market abuse by designated port service providers; and (iii) improve coordination mechanisms within ports.

2. Create framework conditions to attract investments in ports: (i) make the financial relations between public authorities, port authorities and providers of port services transparent; and (ii) ensure autonomously set and transparent port infrastructure charges.

Legislative proposal (2013/0157(COD) - 23/05/2013)

Employees’ rights: employees' rights should be safeguarded and the Member States should have the option to further strengthen these rights in the event of a transfer of undertakings and the relevant staff working for the old undertaking.

Regulated competition: where managing bodies of the port benefit from public funds, there shall be a transparent accounting in order to show the effective and appropriate use of these public funds.Where designated port service providers have not been subject to an open public tendering procedure and in the case of internal operators, it should be ensured that the price for the service is transparent, non-discriminatory and that it is set according to normal market conditions, in particular in such way that the total charges do not exceed the total incurred costs and a reasonable profit.

Transparent port infrastructure charges: managing bodies of the port shall define the port infrastructure charges in an autonomous way and according to its own commercial and investment strategy. The port infrastructure charges may be varied in accordance to commercial practices related to the frequent use of the port or in order to promote a more efficient use of the port infrastructure, short sea shipping or a high environmental performance, energy efficiency or carbon efficiency of transport operations.

Advisory committee: a port users' advisory committee should be set up in every port. This committee would bring together representatives of operators of waterborne vessels, cargo owners or other port users which are requested to pay a port infrastructure charge or port service charge. This committee should be consulted on the structure and the level of the port infrastructure charges and, in certain cases, the port service charges.

Consultation of stakeholders: the managing body of the port shall consult stakeholders such as undertakings established in the ports, providers of port services, and port users on issues like the coordination of port services, hinterland connections or administrative procedures.

Monitoring and supervision: Member States shall ensure that an independent supervisory body monitors and supervises the application of this Regulation. It can be an existing body. The different national independent supervisory bodies shall exchange information about their work and decision-making principles and shall cooperate closely for the purpose of mutual assistance in their tasks.

BUDGETARY IMPACT: the proposal has no impact on the budget of the European Union.DELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions empowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Legislative proposal (2013/0157(COD) - 23/05/2013)

Scope: 319 TEN-T ports in the EU

Market access:• Freedom to provide services• Limitation on the number of service providers• Public service obligations• Employees’ rights• Regulated competition

Financial transparency:• Transparent port infrastructure charges• Advisory committee• Consultation of stakeholders • Monitoring and supervision

Comments to EU policy

• It is a good initiative• Sea transport is environmental friendly for larger volumes• Sea transport will ease pressured roads in EU

• Norwegian port policy is corresponding to EU policy

• Important for Norwegian ports to be able do develop infrastructure on equal terms as TEN-T ports

• The social dialogue in EU is positive – Port labour regime is important to modernise

• Blue belt (Safe sea net) important initiative

Thank you