Harbour Board Proposals For Economies At Port

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31598, 8 February 1968, Page 9

Harbour Board Proposals For Economies At Port

Instead of raising the charges by their cargo handling company at Lyttelton, the overseas shipping companies should co-operate in attempts to increase efficiency at the port, says Mr A. J. Sowden, general manager of the Lyttelton Harbour Board, in a letter to the New Zealand European Shipping Association.

Mr Sowden says the proposed increase in handling rates at Lyttelton would have the eflect of driving cargo away from the port.

The total proposed charge from the hook through the shed to the carrier’s truck at Cashin Quay is a little more than §3.86 a ton —an increase of $1.94 a ton on the present charge of $2.12.

Instead, says Mr Sowden’s letter to the overseas shipping companies, handling costs at Lyttelton could be reduced by: Setting a pre-determined price for the work, to ensure efficiency; Harbour board control of stevedore's charges; Fuller utilisation by stevedores and ship-owners of equipment supplied by the board; Closer supervision of labour; Requisitioning a realistic amount of labour during labour shortages; Putting watersiders on a permanent employment or some other basis to allay their fears of redundancy; Better liaison in keeping refrigerated cargo up to the ship's side to ensure continuity of loading: Use of large units and pallets to ensure faster handling: Complete documentation by customs and clearing agents; Adequate supplies of rolling stock from the Railways Department; and Liaison between road transport operators and stevedores to eliminate waiting by vehicles. Mr Sowden’s letter says it 1s unfortunate that wharf handling losses have been allowed to accummulate without adjustment for so long. “The problem now is whether they should be recouped from the freight, the wharf handling charges, or deducted from subsequent pro fits resulting from more efficient cargo handling methods.

isation and the Harbour's Association.”

Mr Sowden says the harbour board does not intend to take over the operation of the I Lyttelton wharfingering and stevedoring services in the meantime, but will soon license wharfingers and stevedores so that the board’s traffic manager can have greater control over their activities. “It is felt that with the cooperation of all interested parties on the waterfront a more efficient service can be given to the ship-owners and the port-users, which in turn will reduce costs and obtain a quicker turnround of shipping,” his letter says. The New Zealand European Shipping Association said in a letter to the board that neither the board nor the Harbours’ Association had given any valid reasons for ! the “extreme measure” of resisting the imposition of higher wharfingering charges. This action was hardly the constructive approach to the solution of a problem, said the association, in view of the fact that any increases had to be approved by Governmentappointed nominees and that the Harbours’ Association had agreed to acept the recommendations of the Transport Commission. It asked the board whether it was prepared to take over the operation of wharfingering services at Lyttelton on the present charges, and if so, from what date. If the board did take over wharfingering at Lyttelton, the association would require an assurance that the board would not at any time in the future seek to recoup any losses on the operations by increasing its charges for any of the various services to ship-owners.

“This is a matter which will affect other boards and could be the subject of further discussions between your organ-

If the board would not take over wharfingering operations, why had it decided to recommend resistance to higher charges, asked the letter. The association also asked the board to indicate the posi-

tive steps it felt should be taken to reduce wharfingering costs at Lyttelton by either the board, the ship-owners and/or their stevedores, shippers, consignees and their agents, or any other parties.