Call for common pilotage rules

TORRES Pilots director Perry Sutton has moved to clarify a position he put during an industry meeting with the AMSA board and senior executives in Brisbane this week.

While it has been reported in a social media post that he called for the nationalisation of pilotage services across Australia, Mr Perry has told DCN he had instead suggested AMSA consider national regulation for pilot standards and safety requirements for the pilotage providers’ Safety Management Systems (SMS).

“That is, broaden the scope of their current coastal pilotage regulation, Marine Order 54, such that new regulation would provide a standard for port pilotage SMS. The AMSA safety model that operates for the Great Barrier Reef pilotage should be considered for a national rollout.

“National pilotage safety standards are a very different concept to nationalisation, which usually refers to Government responsibility for the commercial activities and service delivery,” Mr Sutton said.

AMSA Marine Order 54 (coastal pilotage) stipulates the safety issues that must be addressed by a GBR pilotage provider’s SMS.

This allows the SMS to be independently audited as AMSA (or their nominated marine auditor) conducts from time to time on GBR pilot service providers.

“In my view these requirements could easily be imposed on port pilotage providers and pilots to facilitate the adoption of common safety standards,” Mr Sutton said.

“The regulatory structure for the provision of coastal (GBR) pilotage is unique in Australia in allowing for periodic audits of the pilotage providers’ SMS and check-pilot assessments that are independently verified by AMSA. GBR pilot check voyage assessments are conducted by AMSA-licenced check pilots.

“Standardised documentation is used for check-pilot assessments and the documents have been agreed upon by AMSA, GBR pilots and providers. The check pilot voyage assessment of the GBR pilot’s skills, expertise and local knowledge are conducted before licence renewals.

“I said at the forum there was often a conflict of interest in most of the ports where the port authority or corporation employs the pilots, is responsible for pilot regulation, pilot training and licence issuance, commercial arrangements (charging the service user – the ship operator) and investigation of any incident involving a pilot.

“I think I’ve been misunderstood by one of the attendees. The concept of nationalisation is one I oppose. That implies government-owned and operated pilot services,” Mr Sutton said.

“But as outlined, there are fundamental flaws in that pilot service delivery model as it exists.”