HUMAN Rights at Sea said the Australian government is “fundamentally failing seafarers” by not legislating a funding mechanism for seafarer welfare facilities.

“For a state that critically relies on sea trade, conflicting self-interests are increasingly responsible for the ongoing fiasco, which is rapidly becoming embarrassing in comparison to providing a solution,” the nongovernmental organisation said in a recent statement.

Last year, HRAS pointed out that Australia might eventually breach its welfare obligations under the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 if it does not take reasonable steps to secure sufficient long-term funding for shore-based welfare facilities.

HRAS said there were more than 26,000 ship visits from more than 6000 vessels in 2020, despite the restrictions of the time.

“HRAS assessed that any change to Australian legislation in favour of sustainable levy funding could affect circa 250,000 seafarers per year across the 41 ports listed by Ports Australia,” the organisation said.

“Even conservative estimates mean that should updated legislation be passed … significantly better welfare safeguards could be easily secured for an island nation from which 98% of goods come by sea.

“The Australian Labor government’s prime opportunity to assure long-term seafarer welfare funding and sustainability with minimal legislative amendment is now being derailed and side-stepped with what appears to be the proverbial can-kicked-down-the-road approach.”

In 2021, New Zealand amended its 1994 Maritime Transportation Act to provide long-term and sustainable funding of seafarers’ services.

HRAS said the legislation created a state-level pathway to ensure seafarer welfare needs and associated costs could be sourced from the existing maritime levy funding stream.

“Co-ordinated advocacy efforts internal and external to New Zealand delivered a minor text update to primary legislation resulting in a historic change,” HRAS said.

“It simply meant that ongoing outlays for seafarer centres, staff and associated costs would no longer be borne through fundraising, dedicated pro bono local community volunteering efforts, or the seemingly perpetual requirement to shake the can at donors for much-needed dollars.”