Ferry firms give Dover privatisation a cautious nod
Move could improve competitveness, but increase costs
Ferry operators have cautiously welcomed the plan to privatise the port of Dover, but have “serious concerns” over the impact on rates.
Norfolkline’s route director for the Channel, Andreas Teschl, said he was “in principle, not against the idea”.
He said privatised ports tended to be more efficient than state-owned facilities, which is important to keep service levels high and costs down. And it would improve Dover’s competitiveness against the Channel Tunnel, he believed.
However, he did have some concerns about the impact on rates charged by the port to ferry operators.
He said: “Dover Harbour Board (DHB) has a monopoly in the shortsea ferry market. A recent example of this is that it has increased prices in 2010, even though we are in a recession and other ports have reduced their prices.
“We have made it clear to DHB that this is not acceptable, but we have not received a firm commitment to change the 2010 prices.
“It’s one thing for a trust port to be able to do that, but we would have serious concerns about a private company having that sort of pricing power.”
He said one way to break the monopoly and create competition in the port would be to allow the proposed Terminal Two (Western Docks) and the existing Eastern Docks to be owned and operated by two different companies.
A P&O spokesman agreed the port would become more efficient if exposed to market forces. However, he questioned whether the operators should receive a refund from funds the port had been building up to develop the £400m (US$628m) Terminal Two, which has had its start delayed from 2014 to between 2016-2018.
He said: “The port has been charging high fees to its customers in anticipation of funding a new terminal development that has already been postponed.
“As the largest single customer of the port, P&O has concerns about where the port’s cash pile would end up under privatisation, and whether these inflated fees will be seen as the norm.
“There may be a case for some refund of charges to customers.”
Christophe Santoni, MD of LD Lines, said: “ “We support the idea of DHB being privatised, as a way to better ensure its expansion plan – particularly Terminal Two, which will be a much needed tool over time.”
Norfolkline’s route director for the Channel, Andreas Teschl, said he was “in principle, not against the idea”.
He said privatised ports tended to be more efficient than state-owned facilities, which is important to keep service levels high and costs down. And it would improve Dover’s competitiveness against the Channel Tunnel, he believed.
However, he did have some concerns about the impact on rates charged by the port to ferry operators.
He said: “Dover Harbour Board (DHB) has a monopoly in the shortsea ferry market. A recent example of this is that it has increased prices in 2010, even though we are in a recession and other ports have reduced their prices.
“We have made it clear to DHB that this is not acceptable, but we have not received a firm commitment to change the 2010 prices.
“It’s one thing for a trust port to be able to do that, but we would have serious concerns about a private company having that sort of pricing power.”
He said one way to break the monopoly and create competition in the port would be to allow the proposed Terminal Two (Western Docks) and the existing Eastern Docks to be owned and operated by two different companies.
A P&O spokesman agreed the port would become more efficient if exposed to market forces. However, he questioned whether the operators should receive a refund from funds the port had been building up to develop the £400m (US$628m) Terminal Two, which has had its start delayed from 2014 to between 2016-2018.
He said: “The port has been charging high fees to its customers in anticipation of funding a new terminal development that has already been postponed.
“As the largest single customer of the port, P&O has concerns about where the port’s cash pile would end up under privatisation, and whether these inflated fees will be seen as the norm.
“There may be a case for some refund of charges to customers.”
Christophe Santoni, MD of LD Lines, said: “ “We support the idea of DHB being privatised, as a way to better ensure its expansion plan – particularly Terminal Two, which will be a much needed tool over time.”
Click here to email the editor and comment on this story
Receive our FREE news email bulletin click here
