Hon Deputy Speaker, hon members, it is a simple imperative that both the 1992 Civil Liability Convention and the Fund Convention are given the force of law as soon as reasonably possible so as to ensure that our limits of liability, at least in relation to pollution from tankers, are increased from the unacceptably low-levels contained in the maritime pollution Act and to ensure a claimant's access to the 1992 fund.
The long period of bureaucratic torpor that had characterised the Bill's passage left South Africa in a compromised position. The delay in drafting and passing the Bill was technical and related to the fact that more than one government department was involved. Everyone is aware of the various bulk carriers that have been shipwrecked off various shores of South Africa in the past ten years.
The saying that it is better late than never fits the international maritime oil pollution compensation fund Bill of 2013. This Bill seeks to enact the 1992 protocol and amend the 1971 Fund Convention to become law. This has come at a time when South African taxpayers have been under siege to pay for ships that are stranded and abandoned by their owners in our seas.
In 2009 the Seli 1 was stranded at Blouberg Beach. This was surrounded by controversy. Seli 1's owner abandoned her and insurers washed their hands of the entire affair. The South African Maritime Safety Authority was forced to spend an estimated R40 million on failed rescue operations.
In 2011 the MT Phoenix oil tanker ran aground north of Durban. Even though the High Court in Pietermaritzburg granted Samsa a seizure and sale order, allowing the authority to sell the vessel, millions of taxpayers' money was used to remove more than 400 000 litres of fuel. The vessel also accrued a bill of about R8 million in an attempt to refloat it.
In 2012 South Africa was hit by another headline: "South Africa will foot the bill for salvaging Japanese fishing vessel". That was the headline. This is the vessel which ran aground whose owner refused to cover the costs of the salvage. The question is, do they know something that we don't? Why do they keep refusing to cover the costs? Why do they abandon their ships on our shores?
The answer that one can think of is that they were taking advantage of the fact that there was no legislation that would hold owners liable until now, as we discuss the passage of the legislation. This is the reason why South Africa is always left with the dirty work and sizeable bills at the end of the day.
Cope agrees with clause 2 of the Bill that seeks to enact the Fund Convention into law. We are only hoping that funds that are lost will be reclaimed either from owners or the fund itself. This is not impossible, because the Seli 1 does not seem to be going anywhere anytime soon. The oil spill is still evident and sea life has been destroyed. She is causing an environmental hazard.
The MT Phoenix is still posing challenges for Samsa. Millions are spent on international salvage specialists to explore options for dealing with the vessel. The prospect for Samsa to sell the vessel and use the money to cover the cost of fuel removal and refloating the vessel before it can be towed out of South African territorial waters is very slim.
In the case of the stranded Clifton vessel, Cope can only hope that the Bill will fast-track the process for South Africa to claim back expenses for the ship's removal from the owner, if she is insured, or from the fund.
The polluter pay principle affects all shipowners and it might be prudent that the Bill leaves room for a regulated environment for separate insurance in the event that they are also held accountable for the costs of the clean-up following an oil spill. Without doubt the vetting of tankers by charterers and owners of oil cargoes is now of paramount importance, and this process will need to be exhaustive and rigorous if the parties involved are to have a fighting chance of disproving negligence and contributory risk to the oil pollution damage in both the civil and criminal spheres.
Offshore civil liability is the next step this Bill has to address to be comprehensive. Floating oil slicks put the shoreline at particular risk when they eventually come ashore, covering the substrate with oil. This influences the type of clean-up that will be required to effectively decontaminate the shoreline. This extends to rivers, lakes, estuary shores and possible grass and farmlands as well as to biological productivity and sensitivity.
The Exxon Valdes oil spill served as a major focal point in oil spill governance and reform. South Africa should look seriously at the developments elsewhere to come up with a modern Bill. Nonetheless, Cope will support the Bill. Thank you.