SHIPPING INVESTMENT $½ BILLION

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34106, 19 March 1976, Page 2

SHIPPING INVESTMENT $½ BILLION

<from Our Own Reporter) i TIMARU, March 18. | Shipping lines in the main trades had a capital investment of more' than ssoom in ships and equipment to be delivered in 1977-78, aj forum at the annual! conference of the Harbours Association was told in Timaru today. The ships cost about 560 ml each, and New Zealand' could not afford not to be! able to turn them around, | the general manager of A.C.T. (N.Z.), Ltd (Mr R. C. White) told the forum. The move to containers had developed rapidly, but with a certain amount of hindsight, especially from the Australia trade, Mr Whvte said. There had been four years of 100 per cent trade in containers, and in the last 12 months freight negotiations I

resulted in no increase at a time when costs were soaring. He doubted that the required facilities would be available in time to meet the upsurge in container shipping. “There is nc way we can introduce these vessels into New Zealand efficiently and economically’ unless we have the container facilities to handle them,” said Mr Whyte. He did not believe that two container ports were required in the South Island. The decision, however, had been made, and there was no point in crying over spilt milk.

"We are being faced with a one-berth, one-crane situation. There is no way we can realistically expect the vessels will not arrive in bunches for different trades," Mr Whyte said.

Because of a shortage of equipment, 89 days had been lost in Auckland, and 40 in Wellington.

"That was a one-berth, one-crane situation. If we are faced with it in the South Island, I cannot see anything but problems,” he said.

The greatest need was more cranes.

“When we started in New Zealand labour costs were 45 per cent to 50 per cent of the total costs in the terminal operation. Today, they approach 75 per cent. We are destroying what we are trying to accomplish." Manning services must be reduced, said Mr Whyte. He believed the problem would be tackled in a "reasonably realistic” way. "The climate in the industrial sphere is such that they no longer want to price themselves out of business.”

The shipping manager of the Meat Board (Mr B. L. A. ■Jeffries) said the West Indies was a significant trade—--15,000 tons a year. It was a “butcher’s shop trade," diffiIcult to organise, and contain-

ers were desirable for it. The Mediterranean was another region where the board was encountering an upsurge in meat exports—mainly to Greece, which commanded a conventional service.

Peru was a high-tonnage potential market for mutton, but most important by far were Iran and Iraq, which in the last two years had made large purchases of carcase lamb. “We see this trade as remaining conventional,” Mr Jeffries said.

However. the Meat Board was convinced containers were a “must” for meat. HYGIENE ADVANTAGE The board's chairman (Mr C. Hilgendorf) said hygiene requirements and reduced handling were among their advantages. Twenty container ships were moving around the New Zealand coast. ‘Tn two years we will have 50, and unless facilites are provided the

costs will be fantastic. We cannot afford the luxury of having container ships that are not being properly handled.” said Mr Hilgendorf. The shipping manager of the Wool Marketing Corporation (Mr D. W. Young) said containers would be acceptable only if the service could be maintained.

It was high time, he said, that shippers examined timetables and ensured that they were compatible and that services would be maintained.] Mr K. Kiddle, chairman of | the Apple and Pear Marketing Board, said the board exported 41m eartons of fruit, and this amount would almost double in the next eight years. New Zealand should be the most efficient and costconscious country in the world. It needed a dual development of container and conventional, unit-load type facilities. DAIRY EXPORTS Mr B. K. Knowles, mana-

ger of the Dairy Board, said) the value of the dairy trade; was s3sorn a year—2oo,oool tons of refrigerated cargo, | and 400,000 tons of dry'cargo. It was not expected: that the number of markets | would diversify, but a change! was expected in the quanti-i ties. -“We are going virtually! everywhere in the world now,” said Mr Knowles. 1 More transhipments were required. Containers alone would not provide the answer, but much of the country's dairy trade would have to leave in containers for transhipment. It was accepted that conItainers were “here to stay,” land the board was happy to I use them provided they were! cheaper. I “We see a need for a lot of space to preassemble cargo, and look to a minimum labour. Our view is that aggregation and frequency of calls are costs to be paid for by the user,” said Mr I Knowles,