Terry Hutson GOVERNMENT HAS not weakened in its resolve on terminal concessioning and the process remains as alive as it has ever been. That’s the word from both Jeff Radebe, minister of Public Enterprises and his director for port restructuring, Richard Goode. Radebe told the Maritime Industry Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) Charter Indaba in Durban last Friday that he was puzzled how the report that concessioning was being delayed by 18 months had appeared. “I was out of the country when this was supposed to have been announced,” he told delegates. In the meantime Goode explained to FTW that the daily newspapers had got the whole thing muddled. “The government’s policy remains quite clear on this matter and shouldn’t be confused. It is as stated in the Government White Paper. Legislation for the process had its second reading in parliament on 18 September and we have every reason to remain confident it will continue to go ahead.” It appears the misreporting came as a result of Goode’s report to a parliamentary committee where he said that once the transaction starts it could take up to 18 months to conclude. “It may take much less than that, that is something we don’t know,” he said. Turning to opposition from the unions, Goode said that a number of packages had been offered which were intended to address labour’s concerns on social and work related issues. He said that the strike factor had been taken into account when negotiating with labour. “My personal view is there is a lot to lose if confrontation happens - God forbid - which would make it more difficult to reach agreement. We’re all working very hard to reach agreement before it comes to that.” He said that although it was unlikely the unions would change their view on concessioning, there was a chance they might come on board to secure the best possible deal for their members. Regarding the actual concessioning Goode confirmed that government policy was to give preference to independent operators. However that preference had to be limited. “We are concerned that market forces must be introduced but we cannot simply bar a company like AP Moller, merely on the grounds that they operate a shipping line. However, the onus will be on them and others to demonstrate that we won’t be replacing one monopoly with another.” Jeff Radebe . . . ‘Labour’s concerns addressed.’
