EDITORIAL

Patience needed at the Port

Friday,  February 18, 2005

Cayman Net News has been receiving a number of complaints in relation to the Port Authority’s handling of incoming containers and other cargo.

Such complaints run the usual gamut of alleged favouritism to outright bribery. However, having investigated the situation, we have come to the conclusion that the port staff are doing their utmost to perform as efficiently as possible in very difficult circumstances. Were it not so, our readers know that we would be the first to highlight deficiencies in the system.

Indeed, the Director, Paul Hurlston, is to be commended for his commitment towards dealing with the numerous day-to-day problems encountered and for his level-headedness and overall equanimity in facing the daily frustrations of coping with double the usual volume of imports into the Cayman Islands since Hurricane Ivan.

Many of those who are highly vocal in their complaints and impatience over a delay of a day or two in the delivery of their containers could usefully take a leaf from his book.

Yes, common sense dictates that some shipments will take precedence over others. Perishable cargo will clearly have to be cleared and delivered before shipments that are not going to spoil if left another day or so. Medical supplies will more often than not have to be delivered without delay.

Doubtless, Mr Hurlston and his staff have to make such judgment calls each day and it is equally inevitable that some people are going to feel aggrieved at the decisions made.

Whilst this is indeed a situation that may be open to abuse and money offered and accepted for more favourable treatment, having investigated what is in fact going on we have not found anything to substantiate allegations of such bribery. In fact, Mr Hurlston has been particularly insistent in clamping down on the potential problem before it ever gets started.

The situation does, however, reinforce some points we have addressed in the past.

First, the Port Authority has been trying to cope with more than double the usual volume of imports with damaged equipment and premises, and inadequate infrastructure such as storage space. So far as we can tell, the progress that has been made has been entirely the result of the Port Authority’s own staff and resources.

We therefore have to ask, once again, what are we paying a million dollars to “disaster management consultants” Witt & Associates for, if not for practical assistance in dealing with the logistical nightmare experienced by the Port Authority?

Second, according to the Port Authority, imports are, as mentioned, running at twice the level usually handled by the Port. It therefore seems to be self-evident that the government will be receiving significantly increased customs duties revenue as a result of the jump in imports, even though some of those imports will be charged at the concessionary rate of duty.

It is too late now to go back in time and try to correct what we said at the time was a distinct lack of vision and generosity in only partially reducing the various rates of duty instead of lifting them altogether, but at least the windfall revenue should be fully used to alleviate the losses suffered by the people of the Cayman Islands as a result of Hurricane Ivan.

Members of the Legislative Assembly should therefore be vigilant in ensuring that the people benefit to the greatest possible extent.

Third, the increase in imports may in fact portend a state of affairs that we may have encountered sooner or later as a result of increased growth. The question has to be asked, therefore, is George Town a feasible continued long-term location for the port facilities, especially as the capital has to do double duty as a shopping centre for tourists.

By and large, crowds of people are incompatible with 18-wheelers in narrow streets.

Perhaps the time has come to consider once again what might be some alternative locations for Grand Cayman’s port facilities.

 Back...