Strand 1 : Development of maritime safety and security policies and regulations

Session 1 : Maritime safety – Current state of play and existing obstacles
This session is divided into 2 round tables.

Round table 1 : The increasing scale and technical sophistication of cargo, container and passenger ships.

Mr KINNEY (Director, legal and external affairs, IMO) makes a rough presentation on existing international rules and regulations. Participants : Mr PERISSE (Director of maritime affairs, Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions), Mr BOISSON (Legal adviser, Bureau Veritas), Mr DIAZ PEREZ ((Training and certification programmes manager, Sociedad de Salvamento y Seguridad, Spain), Mr FORTIN (Mid St-Laurent pilots), Mr LE DIREACH (Administrator general for maritime affairs, France), Mr RONDEAU (French shipowners’ federation), Cpt ARDILLON (CESMA). Is the more words on container vessels than passengers ones due to the fact that in France we have some large container vessels but no giant passenger vessels ? Research and development programs show that actual size limits will be exceeded very soon. Mainly port environments are giving actual limits, so port authorities are working on port extensions to increase the size of the vessels they can receive. St-Laurent pilot notes that vessels over Seaway max size are now coming into St Laurent river, « because there is a demand », he says.

Shipowners also insist on this demand, and remark that bigger is a vessel, less pollution is generated. The ton of a cargo carried has abetter CO2 rate.
Mr DIAZ PEREZ and I insist mainly on the need for education and training for crews sailing on these kind of vessels. Technically for manœuvrability of vessels (with one or two propellers), stresses during cargo operations and at sea (ballast exchange at sea). But probably most important education and training in human factors, in front of risk and emergency, mainly for big passenger vessels. Noted also that multinational crews (for large passenger vessels) are needed, due to multinational passengers. But if we already have a working language onboard vessels, there is no possibility for a « tourist language ».
The last remark from the public, without an answer but maybe no enough time was allowed : what about salvage means ashore, do States have enough means to react, to answer alone ?
What will happen the day when a 20 000 EVP container vessel collides with a 10 000 passengers vessel ?

Round table 2 : Ship source accidental and operational pollution
Presentation by Mrs SELLIER (DG MOVE)
Participants : Mr RABUTEAU (Réseau Allegans, France), Mrs BAHE (VIGIPOL, France), Mrs BELLORD (French shipowners’ federation), Mr HAY (Université de Bretagne Occidentale), Mrs MARCHAND (ITOPF) and Mr ROUSSEAU (CEDRE, France).
Of course pollution incidents are decreasing along french coast, and particularly for Brittany. We are satisfied that the fear of the police was the biggest determinant for that.
Words also on the difficulties that mayors of small cities encounter in trying to organize cleanup and to obtain compensation.
Concerning atmospheric emissions and ballast water treatment, somebody notes that, as usual, rules and regulations are going faster than technical advances.
French ports are better and better equipped for dirty waters collection.
Remark also on large vessels which will generate a new waste management, Marpol IV.

Answer from french shipowners to my question on the fact that in french law only the captain is fully responsible (and presumed guilty) on bunker quality delivered on vessel, despite that he is not able to verify same at time of delivery : in such a case, owners will be with the captain (same level or behind captain ?).

Session 2 : Evolution of the geostrategic context and maritime safety, an appraisal and new challenges

Session also divided into 2 round tables

Round table 1 : Piracy and other non-traditional threats
Presentation by Mr WATIN-AUGOUARD (Secretariat general of the Sea, France)
Participants : Mr FRECON (French naval academy), Mr BALTMITGERE (CMA-CGM), Mr HOUETTE (Prorisk group), Mr KENNEY (IMO), Mr KERGOAT (International expert in maritime safety and economic intelligence)
Good news (?) that piracy is decreasing. Even if this is baszed on reports sent by merchant vessels having suffered an attempted attack. No vessel taken this year in east Africa, but still some crewmembers kept as hostages.
The main threats, other than Horn of Africa (which should be kept in mind till awakening of pirates) are in the China sea and the gulf of Guinea, for which the threat is going out of territorial waters where it will be easier to answer.
Prorisk director makes an assessment of action, small assessment of action, as legal authorization for french flag vessels to have private guards is very recent.
However crews appliying BMP are strongly congratulated.
Other threats mentioned : arms, drugs, people trafficking, as well as terrorism attacks against oil fields and windfarms.

Round table 2 : Cybersecurity
Presentation by Mrs CULLERRE (Deputy chief of staff for maritime air operations, France)
Participants : Mr FRECON (French naval academy), Mr CLARAMUNT (French naval Academy), Mr KAZLESKIND (Brittany Regional Council), Mr MUCCIN (US Merchant Marine Academy), Mr PRIGENT (Diateam), Mr RIBAN (National agency for information systems security), Mr Verhaegen (Commander of the port of Antwerp)
Critical issue as well ashore in port infrastructures than on vessels.
For vessel, one reports the study and achievement by US students to send a false course signal bigger than the GPS one to a vessel, in order to force her to change course.
It is easy from shore to hack into a ship's computer and to take control of important means or to send false corrections to ECDIS for example.
Ashore is it noted the « loss » of containers, sometime momentary loss. Same for ships which are found back without cargo and/or crew.
Even if all participants are confident on their means and results, they are well aware of the advance made by hackers.

Then AFCAN asks about the great number of multi addressed messages to be send before and after a call. Even if to send only one message, with a big attached file in which it is possible to find a lot of information about the ship, crew and cargo, to an hub in which each port, each terminal, each state will be able to pick up their necessary information for their papers will not stop a cyberattack, but will decrease considerably the possibility to inform the bad person at the bad email address which could be included in the addresses package. And same will save time to captain for administrative work in view of forthcoming calls. Answer is that some european projects such as Mona Lisa have exactly this goal to create an information exchange hub for terminal (not for vessels ?) but time is also needed to put it in force.
We can note that for international trucks carrying cargo inside Europe, there is already an existing regulation which allows the same paper to be valid for each border. Why is it so complicated to make it for vessels ?

Strand 2 : Maritime safety : an opportunity to develop new markets

After a qualitative analysis and assessment of future developments by Mr MOULINIER (Pôle Mer Bretagne) and a quantitative analysis by Mr du PAYRAT (Cabinet Odyssée Développement) on the knowledge of the maritime environment in view of blue growth, the second day opens.

Session 3 : Improving knowledge, monitoring and protection.

Presentation on satellite capabilities by Mr JEANJEAN (CNES)
Round table participants : Mr GARELLO (Institut Mines-Telecom Bretagne), Mr FILIPOT (France Energies Marines), Mr HERBERTS (Citizen Data), Mr KERBAOL (CLS), Mr LAISNE (Marine Protected Areas Agency, France), Mr LE MOAN (EMSA), Mr STRASSER (DG MARE).
A lot of miscelaneous data. We very well know how to detect and to monitor the ships. It is the same thing for natural phenomena at sea and ashore. The first effect is to help the securing of maritime and ports activities. But for the high sea, a lot of effort is still needed mainly for the great depths for which actual knowledge is very poor.

Session 4 : Routes and ships of the future in extreme zones.

Presentation by Mrs GIGUERE (Technopole maritime du Québec) and Mr VANDENBROUCKE (Technopole Brest-Iroise Science park)
Round table participants : Mr ZACHARIAE (IALA), Mrs CHOQUET (Brest Business School), Mr CROSBIE (IAATO), Mr EVEN (SHOM-IHO), Mr KENNEY (IMO), Mr KRAMP (WMO), Mr RICHARD (Master mariner, Québec).

Words about the forthcoming polar code. Rules in terms of building and education/training, but also for responsibilites of States (Arctic and Antarctic). Code will be really useful for a 1.5 month period annually for Arctic.

Words also on the actual knowledge of geographical sites and depths, detection of the exact dimensions of icebergs.
Few words, only, on the environment protection and the safety of persons.

Personnal comment : I still cannot understand the compatibility between the environment protection, fight against the global warming and the willingness to send more and more and bigger and bigger vessels (cargo and passenger) in these sensitive areas. In my opinion : more vessels means more pollution (Marpol IV, V et VI).

Session 5 : Developing and managing port activities

Presentation by Mr JOSCHT (Water, Sea and Rivers Directorate)
Round table participants : Mr ANVROIN (CPMR-EU), Mr CASANOVA (French sea pilots), Mr COSTA (Conference of Atlantic Arc Cities), Mr LE MOUILLOUR (Chamber of commerce and industry, Brest), Mrs MARINI (AIVP), Mr ROSENBERG (Port of Kiel), Mr SIWE (Mona Lisa project), Mr LAN TRAN (Haiphong port authorities).

Ports adapt to the market (size of vessels which means change of depths alongside, exchange for bigger cranes, bigger capacity for tourists) and to the environment (new liable to flooding areas, particularly in Haiphong).
France is expecting to build a special berth off Guyana in order to overcome the insufficient depths in local rivers, with the view to create an hub for foreign countries such as Brasil. Few days later, french maritime newspaper announces same intention in Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon.

For this session, two things can be kept. First is that if ports should adapt to maritime transport, they should also do the same for terrestrial transport (rail and road), but with a real and strong view on safety and security, and being in an urban project respectful of environmental and life quality.
Second, the Mona Lisa project whom goal is to improve vessels movements in ports, with the sharing of some information, predictability (vessels in and out), port efficiency such as time at berth. The representative of Mona Lisa project, noting that curently the port is the weakest link of maritime transport, is confident that the project to improve considerably information exchange between european ports is the good solution. However, after my question on this project and the Maritime Single Window project, which should considerably decrease the captain’s administrative paper work before each call, it is answered that currently tests are concerning 13 european countries. But this is the official answer in the conference room, but after the conference the representative’s confidence for a result (middle term or even long tem) was not so strong.

Conclusion