The document contained 10 concrete suggestions aimed at consolidating Malta’s leading position in the shipping world. Key among these was a proposal for the detachment of maritime industry responsibilities from Transport Malta and the re-establishment of a National Maritime Authority.

This proposal stemmed from the forum’s conviction that, by moving up the value chain, Malta could realise untapped potential as a regional centre of maritime excellence beyond the flag state and the registration of vessels. Indeed, the flag is given very wide exposure in terms of Malta’s maritime successes but it is not the be-all and end-all and neither should it be regarded as so.

Malta offers excellent ancillary services in the area of ship repair, yachting centres, bunker operators, professional service providers, educational institutes and expert legal advisers in marine litigation, to name just a few. All these stakeholders represented by the MMF provide an excellent ecosystem that comes together in what the forum likes to refer to as ‘Maritime Malta’.

The forum believes that further success requires the support and direction of a single entity solely dedicated to the maritime industry and this position is based on the need for better:

specialisation;

• focus;

• urgency and improved reaction time;

• imparting the right message to the international market.

So, a single dedicated maritime authority is needed for ‘Maritime Malta’ to be marketed as a holistic product, as against the current situation where each market sector has to promote its own activities.

Besides, within the current set-up, there is limited time and structure for meaningful consultation between Transport Malta (TM) and the industry. The more numerous the levels of authority, the more difficult and complicated is the line of communication. The maritime industry cannot be regulated by an authority within an authority because it is dynamic and needs timely, proactive and immediate responsiveness.

With the amalgamation of a number of entities and departments into TM, the priority required by the industry on both the national and international levels has become diluted in other overall responsibilities covered by TM, including aviation and road transport; the latter alone includes vehicle registrations, drivers’ licences, VRT stations, the road network, traffic management, road safety, the bus service and all aspects of public transport, animals and animal drawn-vehicles.

MMF members have reported that, over the years, TM has developed from executing the role of an operator (say, of terminals, services) to performing the exclusive function of a regulator. This change in policy is correct, however, TM has become too detached from the maritime industry because it has relegated itself to an interpreter of laws and regulations.

The proposed Maritime Authority should retain the role of regulator but assume the equally important roles of enabler/facilitator, which would entail:

• engaging with the industry – independently of the pertinent ministry but as an industry player;

• facilitating industry initiatives.

From the MMF’s perspective, the country was ahead of time and competition when it established a Malta Maritime Authority in 1991. This provided Malta a competitive edge that has been lost since other important maritime jurisdictions such as the UK, Greece and Cyprus caught up and established their own specialised authorities, which they have retained till the present day.

Nowadays, in fact, some maritime countries like Malta have gone as far as privatising their maritime authorities to ensure that they are in complete sync with the private sector.

A cursory analysis of the top 10 flags of registration (of which Malta is the seventh) shows that these are invariably administered either by a dedicated maritime authority (like Panama, Singapore, Bahamas) or even by a private commercial company (Liberia, Marshall Islands). Even Hong Kong has a dedicated marine department.

Coming closer to Malta, Cyprus has a dedicated shipping deputy minister. This goes to prove beyond any doubt that for the maritime industry to grow and flourish it needs a focused and dedicated maritime authority completely synchronised with the private sector, which is the mainstay of the Maltese maritime industry. Malta need not go as far as the advanced models described. The MMF was encouraged by the words of the former minister responsible for transport, Ian Borg, when he announced, in October 2021,  that the cabinet had given the green light for TM to be divided into separate entities for road transport, aviation and maritime affairs.

Indeed, the execution of such a milestone announcement would now come to reflect the notion that the maritime industry merits a high position in terms of policymaking in the country, bringing it in line with the importance given to other key economic pillars of the country, such as tourism, manufacturing, financial services, gaming, ICT and several others.

Consequently, ahead of a consultation meeting being called by the authorities in late November, the MMF, as the prime interlocutor for the mari­time industry, urges the government to proceed with the demerger of TM as demanded by the industry and as soon as practically possible.

As stated, the re-establishment of a National Maritime Authority would uphold the country’s aspirations to be a regional and global centre of excellence for mari­time affairs and would further contribute to increase the industry’s vast economic contribution while consolidating its systemic importance to the Maltese islands.

Godwin Xerri and Kevin J. Borg are the vice-chairman and CEO respectively of the Malta Maritime Forum.

The article appeared on the Times of Malta, 22 November 2022

The post Malta needs a dedicated maritime authority by Godwin Xerri & Kevin J Borg appeared first on Malta Maritime Forum.

The Malta Maritime Forum (MMF) has considered a public document entitled ‘Exclusive Economic Zone – A Sea of Opportunities’. This document followed the enactment of the Exclusive Economic Zone Act 2021 (Chapter 625 of the Laws of Malta).

The Act enables the Government to declare and designate by legal notice as being in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Malta an area that extends beyond the country’s territorial waters and that partially or fully coincides with the continental shelf of the country, without prejudice to a final designation of the zone itself. The zone has the potential to extend to an area of 71,446 square kilometres.

The MMF examined the document in detail, carried out additional research and formulated a position paper with its views. The position paper is divided into four main sections as it sets out to identify:

a) The economic activity that takes place at Hurds Bank, which to a large extent (albeit not entirely) is situated outside of the country’s territorial waters; and who are the beneficiaries of that economic activity.

b) The opportunity cost of a designated (and, therefore, regulated) exclusive economic zone.

c) The effect of potential designations on international navigation routes.

d) The legal framework which necessarily must be put into place for the purposes of enforcement and control of a designated area.

Particular reference is made to point (b) of the position paper. Of concern to MMF – from an industry and macroeconomic perspective − is the effect of a hindrance to legitimate business activity, and ensuing multiplier effect, resulting from a potential limitation of anchorage at Hurds Bank, even by means of an anchorage fee that could be seen as prohibitive. Such a limitation could potentially be detrimental to the business of bona-fide service providers, with negative impact on the local economy in terms of:

(i) jobs;

(ii) indirect business activity through the multiplier effect;

(iii) investment;

(iv) foreign currency earnings; and

(v) direct and indirect tax revenue.

A comprehensive (though non-exhaustive) list of sectors which would be affected is highlighted in the position paper.

“From a legal perspective, MMF maintains that there are a number of matters which would require consideration”

Another important issue to dwell on is the movement of shipping in the centre of the Mediterranean. A huge concentration of shipping traffic moves along Area 1 (Hurds Bank, as denoted in the diagram) that is directions E to W and E to SE within the Malta Channel (the sea between Malta and Sicily) when compared to the relatively sparse shipping traffic south of Malta.

Even for these reasons, MMF firmly believes that Area 1, that comprises Hurds Bank, should be assigned exclusively for shipping purposes, that is marine traffic and anchorages, under the control of the Malta authorities.

As regards Area 2, MMF is of the view that any regulated allocation of an EEZ should always respect the rhumb lines and navigation routes so as to ensure that maritime traffic may still flow freely, avoiding disruption and costly delays to shipping lines. Because of this concern, MMF recommends that a thorough risk assessment should be carried out prior to any decision regarding the area in question.

Despite the less advantageous bathymetry, Area 2 still lends itself well to marine projects in the area of floating alternative energy-generation installations, aquaculture projects and refuelling infrastructures.

Locating projects of this nature in Area 2 to the west of the coast of Malta would ensure less disruption to maritime traffic and mitigate risk on the east coast of Malta, which is crucial to other pillars of the economy, not least tourism.

From a legal perspective, MMF maintains that there are a number of matters which would require consideration, quite apart from residual risk and the overarching idea that the country must assess its legal rights and obligations, which in turn would translate into financial burdens.

MMF contends that any declaration of an EEZ needs to follow a number of elaborate and technical studies not least: a shipping traffic risk and impact assessment; an environmental impact assessment; and an economic impact assessment.

With reference to the last consideration, it would be of paramount importance, crucial for the authorities, to estimate the net financially-balanced benefits to the country as a whole less the deduction of forecasted costs that would derive from the economic exploitation of a designated area in the EEZ. This crucial exercise would need to incorporate costs that the country would need to incur in shouldering added responsibility, together with rights and obligations related to monitoring and enforcement in the designated area in question.

The authorities have an obligation to examine the projects carefully to ensure they are compliant with ecological and environmental standards. This point is vital, taking into account the declared intention to fast-track PA and ERA permits of EEZ-related projects.

MMF underlines the importance of ensuring that projects sited in the EEZ do not create negative environmental and/or economic externalities which are detrimental to other economic sectors and/or the common good.

Judge Emeritus Joseph Zammit McKeon is the Chairman of the Malta Maritime Forum

The article was published in The Times of Malta

The post An Exclusive Economic Zone for Malta appeared first on Malta Maritime Forum.

As an introduction, I should state that my long involvement in shipping matters started surprisingly quite by coincidence. It so happened that when I was serving as an Executive Officer in the then Customs and Ports Department, I was asked by the Comptroller of Customs to start looking after and administer the office of a senior civil servant (Mr. J. Milanes) who had died suddenly. As this happened prior to Independence, this experienced and highly respected administrator had been doing duties as Shipping Master and Registrar of British Ships in terms of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 of the United Kingdom, which then still applied fully to Malta. I distinctly remember spending days, and often nights, reading through the voluminous British Act and probing the office files to get an understanding of the duties involved. It resulted to me that although the office was officially recognised by the Registrar General in Cardiff, UK as a registrar in respect of the many British mercantile/passenger ships that called at Malta, the actual registration processes were hardly in use. The main duties were those of Shipping Master, which largely involved the engagement and discharge of crews, the repatriation of discharged seamen, the provision of medical care to sick or injured seamen and, not infrequently, resolving disputes between ship captains and crew members. I continued to learn the ropes in this shipping office for about five years when I was abruptly transferred to the Office of the Prime Minister in 1964 doing mainly HR and training duties. It appears however that the shipping label stuck on me.

Soon after Dom Mintoff took over as Prime Minister in 1971, I was approached and directed to help establish a Malta Shipping Register like the one recently established in Cyprus, which had the support of the many Greek shipowners. In early 1972, following arrangements made through diplomatic channels, I visited Cyprus and held discussions with the maritime authorities there. On my return to Malta, I passed the details of my visit to the Attorney General (then Dr Edgar Mizzi) who had already been busy drafting the local legislation to replace the UK Shipping Acts which continued to apply even after Independence until they were repealed through the enactment of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1973. Discussions took place with the Prime Minister and agreement was reached on a set of fees (registration and annual fees) and the consequential exemptions from local taxation which included Income Tax, Succession and Donation duties and Stamp duties.

The new Merchant Shipping Act (Act No. XI of 1973 – Cap 324), consisting of no less than 376 articles and five schedules, came into force on 6 April 1973 and soon after, in June 1973, I was officially appointed the first Registrar-General of Shipping and Seamen in terms of Art. 363 of the Act with responsibility, under the direction of the Minister, ‘to undertake the general superintendence of all matters relating to merchant shipping and seamen and ensure the carrying into effect of the provisions of this Act’. I considered that my first tasks should be to create the administrative systems and documentation (including the Ships Register itself and the many certificates listed in the Second Schedule of the Act) which were necessary to bring the Act into effect. Another major task was to formulate the many regulations which arise from the provisions of the Act. I can now say that seeking the approval of my Minister (being the Prime Minister himself) for the necessary rules and regulations was not a light task as anything I presented was subjected to deep scrutiny by the Prime Minister. Another task, which I considered essential, was that of reaching out to several private shipping agents and firms of lawyers to promote the new Register and attract shipowners through them. Progress was understandably slow, but I was pleased to note that in less than three years (until I moved to Sea Malta in 1976) there were already over 130 vessels flying the national colours for Maltese ships.

No sooner the Prime Minister was satisfied with the work carried out in the development of merchant shipping, he turned his attention to marine pollution, which was a risk that Malta faced, considering the frequency of oil-loaded tankers that plied in the vicinity of the Maltese islands. For this purpose, he asked me to prepare legislation aimed at preventing and controlling sea pollution, which I did.  However, I soon realized that he had a bigger project in mind. He aimed at establishing in Malta an IMO sponsored office for marine pollution control. He asked me to go to IMO in London and try to invite the Secretary General to come to Malta for talks with the Prime Minister. In the discussions that the Prime Minister eventually had with the Secretary General (at which I was present), as could be expected, the Prime Minister’s aim grew loftier, and he tried to persuade the Secretary General to bring the whole IMO organization to Malta and even offered to house IMO at the Bighi building, overlooking the Grand Harbour, which was then still unutilised. The IMO chief thought this was impractical but after further discussions he agreed to the setting up in Malta of a Regional Oil-Combatting Centre, which, I sensed, was the original aim of the Prime Minister. I cannot help recalling that as we were seeing the Secretary General out, the Prime Minister, very unexpectedly, patted me on my back and thanked me.

My liaison with merchant shipping continued strongly. I was soon struck by the dearth of certificated navigation officers, marine engineers and able-seamen. So, I did not lose time to create arrangements for training in nautical subjects. For this purpose, I had talks with the Guardia di Finanza in Rome and Naples and had the opportunity to visit the U.S. Coast Guard, as a guest of the U.S. government. These contacts led to the establishment of a Nautical School and a Cadetship Scheme in the previous Admiralty House in Kalkara.

Early 1977, marked a radical change in my hitherto attachment to the legalistic and administrative side of shipping when I was asked to move to the purely commercial aspect of shipping. I was asked by the Prime Minister to take over the running of the newly formed Sea Malta Ltd. (then under the chairmanship of Mr Albert Mizzi) from the expatriate Managing Director (Mr P. Guez) whose term of office had come to an end. I spent fourteen years in this company as General Manager and Managing Director until I was recalled to the Office of the Prime Minister to take over duties as head of the newly established Management and Personnel Office.

My merchant shipping involvement would not be complete if I do not mention the many directorships that I occupied during my appointments as Registrar General of Shipping and Seamen in 1973 and as Managing Director of Sea Malta Ltd. after 1976. These included:

Tug Malta Ltd.

Mediterranean Offshore Bunkering Co. Ltd

Gozo Channel Co. Ltd. (Chairman)

Malta Shipbuilding Co. Ltd.

Maconte Ltd. (Freeport development)

Mediterranean Insurance Brokers Ltd.

Additionally, I served as a Member in the Port Labour Joint Council (1977- 1987) and Port Workers Board. I acted as Chairman of the Committee for the Reorganisation and Modernisation of Port Services (1987/88) and participated as Malta Delegate in several official conferences relating to ocean chartering, marine pollution, liner conferences, Pacem in Maribus, Transmed 1987, transhipment matters with Algeria, Libya, and Tunis and also a UN technical cooperation meeting held in Argentina.

To conclude, I must not fail to mention that after my retirement from the office of Permanent Secretary in 1997 and the subsequent six years as Chairman of the Public Service Commission I had my long shipping association renewed when I was asked to create and run an association which brought together the many shipowners who operated ships under the Malta flag. Given my shipping inclination and experience, I gladly accepted this proposal and soon set up the Malta International Shipowners Council (MISC) – later described as an Association – and acted as its General Secretary. This association gave me the opportunity to take part in board meetings of European shipowners held at ECSA in Brussels and where I could therefore continue to promote registrations under the Malta flag.  I resigned from this Association in 2011 when I was 75 years of age.

To end this write-up, I wish to express my fullest appreciation of the Registrar Generals who very ably and competently carried out the duties that I had started in 1973. Their work, knowledge, dedication, and efficient administration have made the Malta Register the biggest register in Europe and a leading register globally. They have dealt admirably with several amendments to the original legislation to render it more responsive to operational changes and circumstances which arose over the years, such as eligibility for registration, the payment of fees, provisional registration, chartered vessels, transfer of shares in ship, maritime privileges and mortgages, priority of mortgages, ranking of creditors and bareboat charter registration. Also, highly commendable and impressive is the more recent expansion in superyacht registration.

The post The Birth of the Malta Ship Register by Joseph Curmi MOM appeared first on Malta Maritime Forum.

To read the full article, please click here

The post MMF Chairman on Specialized Court for Maritime Litigations appeared first on Malta Maritime Forum.