Melbourne Airport has delivered an overview of its performance over the past year and has detailed its current projects and future plans to an audience of almost 700 people from business, government and the wider community.
Australia’s undisputed freight capital - with 16 per cent growth in freight exports during the year - also posted passenger gains.
Chris Woodruff, its chief executive told the meeting total passenger numbers grew by six per cent during 2012/13 to exceed 29 million passengers.
International passengers increased by five per cent to 7.1 million, while domestic passengers grew by six per cent to 22.7 million.
Airlines with new services included Emirates’ daily A380 between Melbourne and Dubai and Auckland, while Singapore Airlines increased to four daily services between Melbourne and Singapore. Belly hold cargo featured in those decisions.
Local carrier Jetstar reintroduced its service to Honolulu, while Sichuan Airlines commenced direct flights between Chengdu and Melbourne.
Qantas, Garuda Airlines, Air New Zealand, Thai Airways, China Eastern, Virgin Australia, AirAsia X, Philippines Airlines and Fiji Airways all increased capacity.
On the domestic front, Jetstar delivered the largest domestic seat capacity increase and Tigerair continued to rebuild its services.
A major refurbishment of Virgin Australia’s domestic terminal was completed during the year, including the arrivals and check-in halls, both terminal concourses and 12 gates.
Woodruff said growth in domestic aviation was driving the development of Melbourne Airport’s new T4 domestic terminal, with work on the project now under way.
Also, freight continued to play an important role in Melbourne Airport’s operations, he said.
Melbourne Airport boosted its capital expenditure by 21 per cent to A$249 million during 2012/13, with investments in air side and land side projects, including new apron areas on the airfield, the upgrade of the terminal forecourt, road network upgrades, further expansion of the freight area and a new airside road.
More than A$100 million of development was undertaken in Melbourne Airport’s business park during the year, including new warehousing and logistics facilities for companies including Borders Express, Fellowes, Panalpina and ABR.
Woodruff said Melbourne Airport’s privately funded investment in airport infrastructure in the near future would be more than four times the total revenue earned from car parking last year.
“This will include further upgrades and expansion works to our international terminal, with more space and better facilities for passenger processing, more check-in facilities, and more aircraft gates.”
Total revenue for Melbourne Airport’s owners, Australia Pacific Airports Corporation, increased by nine per cent to A$642 million. Profit before tax and change in the fair value of investment property also increased by nine per cent to A$245 million for 2012/13.
In addition to physical infrastructure, Melbourne Airport has been planning for growth over the next two decades through its 2013 draft master plan.
That plan includes a proposed third runway to be operational around the end of this decade and a long-term solution for ground transport access on the airport precinct with an elevated loop road system.
Woodruff said Melbourne Airport’s investment in new roads, terminals and airfield facilities needed support from all levels of government, particularly to improve access to the airport.
The modern practice of the law now requires significant technological assistance. Mobile phones, emails, Twitter and Facebook apparently now are indispensable measures used to deliver services faster than ever before, writes Andrew Hudson.
When I was a young lawyer, the fax machine was the cutting edge of practice – now I hardly ever see it being used and clients certainly don’t accept it as a means to deliver advice.
Clients these days expect comprehensive advice at very short notice together with absolute certainty of outcome as soon as instructions are provided. Consequently, I now have a crystal ball on my desk to advise on issues ahead of time. It is a wonderful addition to the practice as well as being decorative.
I have used it this week to provide details on outcomes for industry following the upcoming Federal election.
Below, please find the outcomes of my discussions with the magic crystal ball on what could be on the Australian agenda after the vote on 7 September.
Please keep in mind that the Coalition Trade Policy has not been made public and we need to rely on Coalition Manufacturing Policy to provide some indication on the likely direction for Trade Policy.
International trade Both parties have gone to some lengths to affirm their commitment to the WTO Doha round of negotiations. Not entirely unexpected. However, it would also seem that both major parties recognise that the Doha round is unlikely to deliver the desired happy ending of an international reduction in trade barriers so other avenues will need to be addressed, whether that be the separate Trade in Services Agreement or an increase in negotiations for various bilateral or multilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs).
Many academics criticise the plethora of these FTAs as creating an undesirable “spaghetti bowl” of FTAs that is not ideal and detracts from the aim of improvements in trade.
However, personally, I would prefer a spaghetti bowl to no bowl at all and I think that both major parties share that view and will continue to pursue the FTA agenda we already are following.
No real difference there – a nil-all draw really, but things may change with the specifics below.
Where to on the FTA agenda? Both main parties have promised to complete the proposed FTAs with China, Japan and Korea as well as supporting the completion of the Trans Pacific Partnership. However, the completion of all those deals may depend in part on the willingness of a new Federal government to resile from the position adopted by the current government some years ago, which required all deals to be comprehensive and for no deal to include an “Investor/State Dispute Resolution” provision.
While the current government seems wedded to those positions, a change in government may well allow for Australia to pursue more flexible outcomes include Investor/State Dispute Resolution provisions. While the Coalition will be subject to certain pressures from the National Party and its constituents, it appears that it may be better disposed to further compromises that allow the FTA with China, Japan and Korea to be completed in the near future. As much as the current government has promised positive outcomes, it may take a change of parties and in attitude to complete the deals.
Anti dumping At the risk of being seen as a ‘dumping nerd’, my view is that the government’s position on AD is a predictor of government’s attitude to free/fair trade and the degree to which protectionism could surface.
Certainly the WTO has counselled against additional protectionist advances around the world and there also is some political benefit in being seen as supporting local industry and opposing unfair overseas practices.
Unfortunately the Coalition Manufacturing Policy has some holes here. It calls for AD to be taken from Customs (which already has happened with the new ADC) and has suggested a ‘reverse of onus’ in Investigations (which already has been proposed in rejected legislation). The same policy calls for ‘tougher’ action without details and seems to ignore the significant recent reforms. All in all it’s hard to see how the Coalition would change very much and any changes would push us further away from the WTO ideal. All things considered, given the extent of recent change which has yet to be completed, it is difficult to see significant change in policy other than additional and more aggressive action by Customs to enforce current measures and stop the attempts to circumvent those measures.
The role of Customs? One conspiracy theory has been that Customs would relinquish its revenue role to the ATO and focus on ‘border control’ issues. However, at this juncture the only available evidence points to both major parties supporting the current reform process initiated in relation to Customs. Both major parties support the ‘tough’ stance on border control and revenue issues as well as ensuring fair trade. On that basis, it is probably fair to expect no major changes and possibly a higher level of enforcement action by Customs against those perceived to fail to comply with statutory obligations.
Conclusion? We face an economy under perceptible stress locally and from overseas. We also see significant pressure for tough measures at the border and to protect local industry against unfair competition from overseas while trying to advance our FTA agenda. The upshot is likely to be the same from both political parties – continuing the current measures and reforms for Customs, a focus on improved compliance and revenue recovery but with the chance of a less “pristine” FTA agenda and an increased likelihood of deals focusing on main issues and less attention on peripheral issues of environment and labour standards. Tougher for all those in industry with the chance of quicker and less comprehensive FTA for the foreseeable future. This all places a premium of maintaining close attention to the current and future agenda and focusing on ensuring compliance at all times – no matter how difficult that may prove to be.
Australia now has a B757 freighter on its aircraft registry and, while it’s the fourth to carry VH tags, it’s the first to actually operate here. VH-TCA, a B757-236PCF model, came into operation under this registration in early July following pre-certification work at Air NZ’s engineering base in Auckland.
It was previously registered as G-CSVS, flying for Tasman Cargo Airlines – as it continues to do – in full DHL livery.
It replaced another British-registered 757 on the DHL trans-Tasman runs, that one having been diverted into Australasian services when Tasman Cargo Airlines’ long-serving 727 freighter fell foul of Anthony Albanese’s noise and pollution restrictions at Sydney and other key airports.
The 727 sat on the tarmac at Auckland International Airport for some time before being sold to K-Mile Air. It is now based at Suvarnabhumi Airport, Bangkok.
TCA - whose registration letters echo the operator name - was brand new in freighter mode when it arrived in this part of the world. It had undergone P2F conversion by Flightstar Aircraft Services in Jacksonville, Florida, after operating in passenger configuration since 1992. It initially flew for Airtours International and then had a long stint with Greenlandair/Air Greenland.
Its three 757 predecessors on the Australian registry were all owned initially by Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services (AWAS) and its subsidiary, Nordstress Australia.
VH-NOF originally was a passenger variant, but later took the P2F path and now flies as a freighter with Icelandair. VH-BRN and AWE were bought new as freighters by AWAS, with BRN still in service with Yakutia Cargo, carrying a Bermuda registration.
AWE came to a tragic end in the well-known accident in German airspace near the German-Swiss border when a breakdown in European air traffic control procedures led to its mid-air collision with a Bashkirian Airlines Tu-154 in July 2002. There were 71 fatalities, many of them children. AWE was at the time registered in Bahrain as A9C-DHL.
United Cargo, which has been expanding its temperature-sensitive network over recent months, also has improved a service most freight forwarders seldom need - Lifeguard.
Lifeguard is UA’s premium service for the shipment of human organs and other urgently-needed life-saving medical materials, such as vaccines, blood products, biological and vital medicines.
It is designated Lifeguard on the air waybill by the shipper and travels via United’s guaranteed QuickPak product. United has a special TrustUA service desk dedicated to the booking and proactive monitoring of these critical shipments, which receive priority-expedited handling across United’s network.
Within the US, the air traffic control system gives take-off and landing priority to flights carrying emergency medical material shipped under Lifeguard. All UA staff complete a Lifeguard training session.
Bright orange Lifeguard labels are applied at tender for maximum shipment visibility, ensuring the cargo receives expedited handling and recovery at the destination airport.
UA will refund 100 per cent of freight charges, on request, if the Lifeguard shipment fails to ride on the flight or flights specified on the AWB and confirmed by UA at the time of tender.
For more general temperature-sensitive cargo, UA recently added nine further cities to its TempControl network, taking the total to 37. Plans are under way to expand this further.
New ports include Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International, Boston Logan International and New York’s JFK International. Trucking is available for temperature-sensitive shipments to and from these cities and Newark Liberty, as well as Washington Dulles.
Other stations now in the network are Cleveland Hopkins International (with trucking links to Chicago O’Hare and other airports), Honolulu International and Seattle-Tacoma International.
Also in the network are Manchester International in the UK, Milan Malpensa Airport in Italy and Istanbul Ataturk Airport, Turkey.
Istanbul is certified to handle TempControl shipments in CSafe RKN containers only.
“Enormous monetary penalties may be issued where cargo reports are not provided in an accurate and timely manner - US$5,000 per late or incorrect report.”
“John Law, who is Freight & Trade Alliance (FTA) Compliance and Litigation Counsel, certainly captured my attention with these words,” says Paul Zalai, FTA director.
In a detailed report, John said US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is to enforce the “liquidated damages” phase of Importer Security Filing (ISF).
“Enforcement” will be by issuing penalties (via a bond) for the submission of an inaccurate, incomplete or untimely filing. If goods for which an ISF has not been filed arrive in the US, CBP may withhold the release or transfer of the cargo. Additionally, non-compliant cargo could be subject to further inspection on arrival.
The ISF and Additional Carrier Requirements were born out of the Security and Accountability For Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006. This Act mandates the filing of additional advance data designed to assist CBP to make earlier and more informed targeting decisions, as well as improving CBP’s ability to target high-risk US-bound containerised vessel cargo prior to its arrival in the US. The 10+2 rule has been in effect since January 26, 2009.
This approach is similar to that of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS), who recently issued letters to industry in reaction to cargo-reporting breaches. ACBPS also warned that (a) further action will be taken in any instances of non-compliance, including the non release of cargo until the ACBPS reporting requirements have been met and (b) sanctions will be imposed as ACBPS deem to be appropriate.
The primary focus of this compliance approach has been as a follow up to Australian Customs Notice 2009/47, which explained the ACBPS definition of “consignor” and “consignee” and associated cargo reporting expectations.
Both the US and Australian Customs administrations are focused on a measured and common sense approach to enforcement, with CBP declaring that its aim is to achieve maximum compliance, with the least amount of disruption to trade and to domestic port operations.
In recent correspondence received by Freight & Trade Alliance (FTA), ACBPS stated that depending on the facts of any case, their response could range from (i) further education and warnings, (ii) administrative action such as the suspension and revocation of licences, (iii) the application of infringement notices or (iv) prosecution. ACBPS has elaborated by explaining that officers consider relevant factors when weighing up their response and treatment options. For example, the significance of the breach, efforts to comply, any relevant remedial or risk mitigation action, compliance history, reliance on ACBPS advice and reasons beyond the person’s control.
It is interesting to note that both Customs administrations are now more rigorously enforcing legislative and policy positions established in 2009. Perhaps it’s nothing more than a coincidence, but this shift in enforcing compliance policy is indicative of a changing operational environment, where commercial practices may need to evolve to meet global statutory requirements. From an industry perspective, increased standardisation of global
Customs reporting requirements will certainly assist in getting the message through to our overseas business partners, freight networks and suppliers.
We watch with interest locally to see how the ACBPS Blueprint for Reform 2013 – 2018 integrates outcomes into a global context.
NEW Zealand is moving towards much clearer – and potentially more punitive – criminalisation of cartel behaviour, with the draft Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill reported back to parliament by the commerce select committee and likely to come up for further consideration soon, despite parliament’s busy agenda, writes Kelvin King.
Other governments, Australia included, are believed to be keeping a close eye on developments.
The country’s long-running airline and freight forwarder cartel blitz that spread internationally caused considerable angst, not only because cartel-type behaviour had occurred but also because it proved complicated to tackle legally.
Many target companies opted for a type of plea bargain, agreeing to a fine and costs because it was too debilitating and expensive to keep fighting. Now the NZ government is making it clear that it will have the tools to hit hard ... and it will use them.
Commentators have pointed out that the law is something of a significant shift in corporate regulation, one that will have wider implications than many people envisage.
Anne Callinan, senior partner for law firm Simpson Grierson said: “Arrangements between competitors that have a significant anti-competitive impact are now going to be criminalised.
“This is going to be (treated as) serious white collar crime.”
Encouraging collaboration But the amended law also seeks to ensure companies are not deterred from legitimate, pro-competitive and efficient arrangements with other firms. It does this through a number of new exemptions as well as a clearance mechanism that allows those intending to be involved in collaborative conduct to test with the Commerce Commission (NZCC) whether the arrangement would raise concerns.
The collaborative activity exemption would cover arrangements such as joint ventures, strategic alliances, syndicated loans and consortium bidding, providing the dominant purpose of the arrangement is not anti-competitive.
In assessing whether conduct is prohibited, NZCC and the courts are likely to look at business documentation such as emails, file notes, board documents and business agreements, as well as oral evidence from individuals.
The select committee’s report recommended the bill be passed with some amendments, such as repealing the outdated competition regime for international aviation and international shipping. This had been asked for by the responsible minister.
Significant reform The minister of Commerce, Craig Foss, describes it as “a significant piece of law reform as the competition provisions of the Commerce Act have not been subject to any substantial amendment since 2001”.
Discussing the bill, he noted that “the initial stages of the policy process focused on whether or not to criminalise hard-core cartel conduct ... .so it is understandable that when people think about the bill, they focus on criminal sanctions”.
But, he stressed, it is a lot more than that.
“It aims to clarify the scope of the prohibition against hard-core cartels, in part by introducing the collaborative activity exemption. The scope of the collaborative activity exemption is broad and focuses on the substance of the activity, not the form of the arrangement.
“As a result, it should apply to all pro-competitive collaborations.”
The minister said that the exemption “has also been designed so that businesses can assess for themselves whether their proposed collaboration falls within the exemption. The exemption sends a clear signal that the government recognises that pro-competitive, innovative and efficiency-enhancing collaborative activities are essential to New Zealand realising its productive potential”.
Foss said the government was “not shy about the fact that people intentionally participating in hard-core cartels deserve to go to jail. Any behaviour that distorts prices and undermines the competitiveness of New Zealand markets is not acceptable.
“People who intentionally participate in hard-core cartels deserve to be sanctioned in the same way as those that participate in tax evasion, fraud and other white collar crimes.”
Most of the bill’s provisions will come into effect on the day the law is given royal assent. However, it has been decided to hold off on the criminal sanctions for a period. “This should leave sufficient time for the regime to bed in, alleviating some of the uncertainty,” said Foss.
Melbourne Airport has delivered an overview of its performance over the past year and has detailed its current projects and future plans to an audience of almost 700 people from business, government and the wider community.
Australia’s undisputed freight capital - with 16 per cent growth in freight exports during the year - also posted passenger gains.
Chris Woodruff, its chief executive told the meeting total passenger numbers grew by six per cent during 2012/13 to exceed 29 million passengers.
International passengers increased by five per cent to 7.1 million, while domestic passengers grew by six per cent to 22.7 million.
Airlines with new services included Emirates’ daily A380 between Melbourne and Dubai and Auckland, while Singapore Airlines increased to four daily services between Melbourne and Singapore. Belly hold cargo featured in those decisions.
Local carrier Jetstar reintroduced its service to Honolulu, while Sichuan Airlines commenced direct flights between Chengdu and Melbourne.
Qantas, Garuda Airlines, Air New Zealand, Thai Airways, China Eastern, Virgin Australia, AirAsia X, Philippines Airlines and Fiji Airways all increased capacity.
On the domestic front, Jetstar delivered the largest domestic seat capacity increase and Tigerair continued to rebuild its services.
A major refurbishment of Virgin Australia’s domestic terminal was completed during the year, including the arrivals and check-in halls, both terminal concourses and 12 gates.
Woodruff said growth in domestic aviation was driving the development of Melbourne Airport’s new T4 domestic terminal, with work on the project now under way.
Also, freight continued to play an important role in Melbourne Airport’s operations, he said.
Melbourne Airport boosted its capital expenditure by 21 per cent to A$249 million during 2012/13, with investments in air side and land side projects, including new apron areas on the airfield, the upgrade of the terminal forecourt, road network upgrades, further expansion of the freight area and a new airside road.
More than A$100 million of development was undertaken in Melbourne Airport’s business park during the year, including new warehousing and logistics facilities for companies including Borders Express, Fellowes, Panalpina and ABR.
Woodruff said Melbourne Airport’s privately funded investment in airport infrastructure in the near future would be more than four times the total revenue earned from car parking last year.
“This will include further upgrades and expansion works to our international terminal, with more space and better facilities for passenger processing, more check-in facilities, and more aircraft gates.”
Total revenue for Melbourne Airport’s owners, Australia Pacific Airports Corporation, increased by nine per cent to A$642 million. Profit before tax and change in the fair value of investment property also increased by nine per cent to A$245 million for 2012/13.
In addition to physical infrastructure, Melbourne Airport has been planning for growth over the next two decades through its 2013 draft master plan.
That plan includes a proposed third runway to be operational around the end of this decade and a long-term solution for ground transport access on the airport precinct with an elevated loop road system.
Woodruff said Melbourne Airport’s investment in new roads, terminals and airfield facilities needed support from all levels of government, particularly to improve access to the airport.
The modern practice of the law now requires significant technological assistance. Mobile phones, emails, Twitter and Facebook apparently now are indispensable measures used to deliver services faster than ever before, writes Andrew Hudson.
When I was a young lawyer, the fax machine was the cutting edge of practice – now I hardly ever see it being used and clients certainly don’t accept it as a means to deliver advice.
Clients these days expect comprehensive advice at very short notice together with absolute certainty of outcome as soon as instructions are provided. Consequently, I now have a crystal ball on my desk to advise on issues ahead of time. It is a wonderful addition to the practice as well as being decorative.
I have used it this week to provide details on outcomes for industry following the upcoming Federal election.
Below, please find the outcomes of my discussions with the magic crystal ball on what could be on the Australian agenda after the vote on 7 September.
Please keep in mind that the Coalition Trade Policy has not been made public and we need to rely on Coalition Manufacturing Policy to provide some indication on the likely direction for Trade Policy.
International trade Both parties have gone to some lengths to affirm their commitment to the WTO Doha round of negotiations. Not entirely unexpected. However, it would also seem that both major parties recognise that the Doha round is unlikely to deliver the desired happy ending of an international reduction in trade barriers so other avenues will need to be addressed, whether that be the separate Trade in Services Agreement or an increase in negotiations for various bilateral or multilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTAs).
Many academics criticise the plethora of these FTAs as creating an undesirable “spaghetti bowl” of FTAs that is not ideal and detracts from the aim of improvements in trade.
However, personally, I would prefer a spaghetti bowl to no bowl at all and I think that both major parties share that view and will continue to pursue the FTA agenda we already are following.
No real difference there – a nil-all draw really, but things may change with the specifics below.
Where to on the FTA agenda? Both main parties have promised to complete the proposed FTAs with China, Japan and Korea as well as supporting the completion of the Trans Pacific Partnership. However, the completion of all those deals may depend in part on the willingness of a new Federal government to resile from the position adopted by the current government some years ago, which required all deals to be comprehensive and for no deal to include an “Investor/State Dispute Resolution” provision.
While the current government seems wedded to those positions, a change in government may well allow for Australia to pursue more flexible outcomes include Investor/State Dispute Resolution provisions. While the Coalition will be subject to certain pressures from the National Party and its constituents, it appears that it may be better disposed to further compromises that allow the FTA with China, Japan and Korea to be completed in the near future. As much as the current government has promised positive outcomes, it may take a change of parties and in attitude to complete the deals.
Anti dumping At the risk of being seen as a ‘dumping nerd’, my view is that the government’s position on AD is a predictor of government’s attitude to free/fair trade and the degree to which protectionism could surface.
Certainly the WTO has counselled against additional protectionist advances around the world and there also is some political benefit in being seen as supporting local industry and opposing unfair overseas practices.
Unfortunately the Coalition Manufacturing Policy has some holes here. It calls for AD to be taken from Customs (which already has happened with the new ADC) and has suggested a ‘reverse of onus’ in Investigations (which already has been proposed in rejected legislation). The same policy calls for ‘tougher’ action without details and seems to ignore the significant recent reforms. All in all it’s hard to see how the Coalition would change very much and any changes would push us further away from the WTO ideal. All things considered, given the extent of recent change which has yet to be completed, it is difficult to see significant change in policy other than additional and more aggressive action by Customs to enforce current measures and stop the attempts to circumvent those measures.
The role of Customs? One conspiracy theory has been that Customs would relinquish its revenue role to the ATO and focus on ‘border control’ issues. However, at this juncture the only available evidence points to both major parties supporting the current reform process initiated in relation to Customs. Both major parties support the ‘tough’ stance on border control and revenue issues as well as ensuring fair trade. On that basis, it is probably fair to expect no major changes and possibly a higher level of enforcement action by Customs against those perceived to fail to comply with statutory obligations.
Conclusion? We face an economy under perceptible stress locally and from overseas. We also see significant pressure for tough measures at the border and to protect local industry against unfair competition from overseas while trying to advance our FTA agenda. The upshot is likely to be the same from both political parties – continuing the current measures and reforms for Customs, a focus on improved compliance and revenue recovery but with the chance of a less “pristine” FTA agenda and an increased likelihood of deals focusing on main issues and less attention on peripheral issues of environment and labour standards. Tougher for all those in industry with the chance of quicker and less comprehensive FTA for the foreseeable future. This all places a premium of maintaining close attention to the current and future agenda and focusing on ensuring compliance at all times – no matter how difficult that may prove to be.
Australia now has a B757 freighter on its aircraft registry and, while it’s the fourth to carry VH tags, it’s the first to actually operate here. VH-TCA, a B757-236PCF model, came into operation under this registration in early July following pre-certification work at Air NZ’s engineering base in Auckland.
It was previously registered as G-CSVS, flying for Tasman Cargo Airlines – as it continues to do – in full DHL livery.
It replaced another British-registered 757 on the DHL trans-Tasman runs, that one having been diverted into Australasian services when Tasman Cargo Airlines’ long-serving 727 freighter fell foul of Anthony Albanese’s noise and pollution restrictions at Sydney and other key airports.
The 727 sat on the tarmac at Auckland International Airport for some time before being sold to K-Mile Air. It is now based at Suvarnabhumi Airport, Bangkok.
TCA - whose registration letters echo the operator name - was brand new in freighter mode when it arrived in this part of the world. It had undergone P2F conversion by Flightstar Aircraft Services in Jacksonville, Florida, after operating in passenger configuration since 1992. It initially flew for Airtours International and then had a long stint with Greenlandair/Air Greenland.
Its three 757 predecessors on the Australian registry were all owned initially by Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services (AWAS) and its subsidiary, Nordstress Australia.
VH-NOF originally was a passenger variant, but later took the P2F path and now flies as a freighter with Icelandair. VH-BRN and AWE were bought new as freighters by AWAS, with BRN still in service with Yakutia Cargo, carrying a Bermuda registration.
AWE came to a tragic end in the well-known accident in German airspace near the German-Swiss border when a breakdown in European air traffic control procedures led to its mid-air collision with a Bashkirian Airlines Tu-154 in July 2002. There were 71 fatalities, many of them children. AWE was at the time registered in Bahrain as A9C-DHL.
United Cargo, which has been expanding its temperature-sensitive network over recent months, also has improved a service most freight forwarders seldom need - Lifeguard.
Lifeguard is UA’s premium service for the shipment of human organs and other urgently-needed life-saving medical materials, such as vaccines, blood products, biological and vital medicines.
It is designated Lifeguard on the air waybill by the shipper and travels via United’s guaranteed QuickPak product. United has a special TrustUA service desk dedicated to the booking and proactive monitoring of these critical shipments, which receive priority-expedited handling across United’s network.
Within the US, the air traffic control system gives take-off and landing priority to flights carrying emergency medical material shipped under Lifeguard. All UA staff complete a Lifeguard training session.
Bright orange Lifeguard labels are applied at tender for maximum shipment visibility, ensuring the cargo receives expedited handling and recovery at the destination airport.
UA will refund 100 per cent of freight charges, on request, if the Lifeguard shipment fails to ride on the flight or flights specified on the AWB and confirmed by UA at the time of tender.
For more general temperature-sensitive cargo, UA recently added nine further cities to its TempControl network, taking the total to 37. Plans are under way to expand this further.
New ports include Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International, Boston Logan International and New York’s JFK International. Trucking is available for temperature-sensitive shipments to and from these cities and Newark Liberty, as well as Washington Dulles.
Other stations now in the network are Cleveland Hopkins International (with trucking links to Chicago O’Hare and other airports), Honolulu International and Seattle-Tacoma International.
Also in the network are Manchester International in the UK, Milan Malpensa Airport in Italy and Istanbul Ataturk Airport, Turkey.
Istanbul is certified to handle TempControl shipments in CSafe RKN containers only.
“Enormous monetary penalties may be issued where cargo reports are not provided in an accurate and timely manner - US$5,000 per late or incorrect report.”
“John Law, who is Freight & Trade Alliance (FTA) Compliance and Litigation Counsel, certainly captured my attention with these words,” says Paul Zalai, FTA director.
In a detailed report, John said US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is to enforce the “liquidated damages” phase of Importer Security Filing (ISF).
“Enforcement” will be by issuing penalties (via a bond) for the submission of an inaccurate, incomplete or untimely filing. If goods for which an ISF has not been filed arrive in the US, CBP may withhold the release or transfer of the cargo. Additionally, non-compliant cargo could be subject to further inspection on arrival.
The ISF and Additional Carrier Requirements were born out of the Security and Accountability For Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006. This Act mandates the filing of additional advance data designed to assist CBP to make earlier and more informed targeting decisions, as well as improving CBP’s ability to target high-risk US-bound containerised vessel cargo prior to its arrival in the US. The 10+2 rule has been in effect since January 26, 2009.
This approach is similar to that of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS), who recently issued letters to industry in reaction to cargo-reporting breaches. ACBPS also warned that (a) further action will be taken in any instances of non-compliance, including the non release of cargo until the ACBPS reporting requirements have been met and (b) sanctions will be imposed as ACBPS deem to be appropriate.
The primary focus of this compliance approach has been as a follow up to Australian Customs Notice 2009/47, which explained the ACBPS definition of “consignor” and “consignee” and associated cargo reporting expectations.
Both the US and Australian Customs administrations are focused on a measured and common sense approach to enforcement, with CBP declaring that its aim is to achieve maximum compliance, with the least amount of disruption to trade and to domestic port operations.
In recent correspondence received by Freight & Trade Alliance (FTA), ACBPS stated that depending on the facts of any case, their response could range from (i) further education and warnings, (ii) administrative action such as the suspension and revocation of licences, (iii) the application of infringement notices or (iv) prosecution. ACBPS has elaborated by explaining that officers consider relevant factors when weighing up their response and treatment options. For example, the significance of the breach, efforts to comply, any relevant remedial or risk mitigation action, compliance history, reliance on ACBPS advice and reasons beyond the person’s control.
It is interesting to note that both Customs administrations are now more rigorously enforcing legislative and policy positions established in 2009. Perhaps it’s nothing more than a coincidence, but this shift in enforcing compliance policy is indicative of a changing operational environment, where commercial practices may need to evolve to meet global statutory requirements. From an industry perspective, increased standardisation of global
Customs reporting requirements will certainly assist in getting the message through to our overseas business partners, freight networks and suppliers.
We watch with interest locally to see how the ACBPS Blueprint for Reform 2013 – 2018 integrates outcomes into a global context.
NEW Zealand is moving towards much clearer – and potentially more punitive – criminalisation of cartel behaviour, with the draft Commerce (Cartels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill reported back to parliament by the commerce select committee and likely to come up for further consideration soon, despite parliament’s busy agenda, writes Kelvin King.
Other governments, Australia included, are believed to be keeping a close eye on developments.
The country’s long-running airline and freight forwarder cartel blitz that spread internationally caused considerable angst, not only because cartel-type behaviour had occurred but also because it proved complicated to tackle legally.
Many target companies opted for a type of plea bargain, agreeing to a fine and costs because it was too debilitating and expensive to keep fighting. Now the NZ government is making it clear that it will have the tools to hit hard ... and it will use them.
Commentators have pointed out that the law is something of a significant shift in corporate regulation, one that will have wider implications than many people envisage.
Anne Callinan, senior partner for law firm Simpson Grierson said: “Arrangements between competitors that have a significant anti-competitive impact are now going to be criminalised.
“This is going to be (treated as) serious white collar crime.”
Encouraging collaboration But the amended law also seeks to ensure companies are not deterred from legitimate, pro-competitive and efficient arrangements with other firms. It does this through a number of new exemptions as well as a clearance mechanism that allows those intending to be involved in collaborative conduct to test with the Commerce Commission (NZCC) whether the arrangement would raise concerns.
The collaborative activity exemption would cover arrangements such as joint ventures, strategic alliances, syndicated loans and consortium bidding, providing the dominant purpose of the arrangement is not anti-competitive.
In assessing whether conduct is prohibited, NZCC and the courts are likely to look at business documentation such as emails, file notes, board documents and business agreements, as well as oral evidence from individuals.
The select committee’s report recommended the bill be passed with some amendments, such as repealing the outdated competition regime for international aviation and international shipping. This had been asked for by the responsible minister.
Significant reform The minister of Commerce, Craig Foss, describes it as “a significant piece of law reform as the competition provisions of the Commerce Act have not been subject to any substantial amendment since 2001”.
Discussing the bill, he noted that “the initial stages of the policy process focused on whether or not to criminalise hard-core cartel conduct ... .so it is understandable that when people think about the bill, they focus on criminal sanctions”.
But, he stressed, it is a lot more than that.
“It aims to clarify the scope of the prohibition against hard-core cartels, in part by introducing the collaborative activity exemption. The scope of the collaborative activity exemption is broad and focuses on the substance of the activity, not the form of the arrangement.
“As a result, it should apply to all pro-competitive collaborations.”
The minister said that the exemption “has also been designed so that businesses can assess for themselves whether their proposed collaboration falls within the exemption. The exemption sends a clear signal that the government recognises that pro-competitive, innovative and efficiency-enhancing collaborative activities are essential to New Zealand realising its productive potential”.
Foss said the government was “not shy about the fact that people intentionally participating in hard-core cartels deserve to go to jail. Any behaviour that distorts prices and undermines the competitiveness of New Zealand markets is not acceptable.
“People who intentionally participate in hard-core cartels deserve to be sanctioned in the same way as those that participate in tax evasion, fraud and other white collar crimes.”
Most of the bill’s provisions will come into effect on the day the law is given royal assent. However, it has been decided to hold off on the criminal sanctions for a period. “This should leave sufficient time for the regime to bed in, alleviating some of the uncertainty,” said Foss.
