Dar es Salaam port is targeting to cut time of clearing a vehicle at the port by 50 per cent by mid next year.
Clearing a car at Dar es Salaam port is currently pegged at seven days, but the authority wants to reduce the number of days to less than five days.
Dar Port Manager, Mr Idd Mkwata, to told the ‘Daily News’ that it was very possible by sensitizing clients that once receiving a bill of lending should start clearing procedures.
Most of the clients were waiting until the ship calls at the port to start clearing procedures, hence consuming a lot of time, Mr Mkwata said.
Apart from that Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA) has approved two private firms out of the port car freight terminals both with the capacity of handling 3000 cars.
The terminals – dubbed Cargo Freight Stations (CFS) are less than five kilometres from Dar es Salaam port along Nyerere Road – one at Kamata near the Shoprites and the other where it was MECCO headquarters.
"These two yards are in operation. They will increase the port ability to handle more cars at once," Mr Mkwata said.
The move will increase the port ability to man more vehicles from the current 3,600 cars, which is the port’s capacity, to 6,600 units at a go. Motor vehicle traffic has been rising at an average of 15.8 per cent yearly since 2000.
In 2009 a total of 51,710 units were handled by the port while the first eight months of this year the port delivered 36,708 cars. About 60 per cent of cars passing Dar es Salaam port are for domestic and 40 per cent transit units.
Namibian Seafarers Face Mass Job Loss in Uruguay
According to the vice-president of the Trade Union Congress of Namibia (TUCNA), Dawid Imbili, Namibian crewmen are "stranded in Uruguay" due to irregular contracts and licensing of foreign-flagged vessels on which they were working.
He was speaking at a press conference in Walvis Bay late last week on he fate of the ‘stranded seafarers’.
"We have learned with shock when we were approached by three Namibian crew who went missing for quite some time through a Spanish captain, and they confirmed that there are still Namibians stranded in Uruguay. How will we rescue them and what does the Ministry of Transport or the Directorate of Maritime Affairs (MDA) do on this matter?" he said.
According to him, there were a total of five Namibians, who are now back in Namibia, employed on the fishing vessel Escatero in 2001, after they were recruited from the Walvis Bay harbour and signed a "Spanish contract" when they arrived in Uruguay.
According to Imbili the crew, namely : Eduarde Mbalobumo, Gabriel Nghishekwa, Joseph Hamukwaya, Boas Ngenokesho and Haimbodi Jelomino (all Namibians) worked there for eight months before the vessel was repossessed by the Uruguayan authorities, but the captain, Ernesto Garsia, who was also allegedly the owner of the vessel, allegedly "fled". "The Namibians were left without food; no salaries; and no water as Namibia does not have an embassy in Uruguay.” "They suffered a lot until they found one union there that got hold of our embassy in Brazil."
According to him, "not much was done" except that this foreign union bought them plane tickets to return to Namibia – although without any money – in 2003.
"There families here thought they were dead," he said.
They were apparently stuck in Uruguay for one year and six months, but according to Imbili, but the news was unknown because they allegedly did not tell local authorities of their situation. That was until about two weeks ago.
One of the crewmen was about to look for work again on a fishing vessel when he recognized Garsia.
"They approached us, and with the help of the police in Walvis Bay, he was arrested," Imbili told The Namibian.
Garsia was forced to pay all five of the men their dues, which, according to him, amounted to about N$14 000 per person. "There are still several Namibians in the same situation over there and who are stuck – and our hands are cut off to help them," Imbili said.
He called upon the MDA and Namibian government to assist in bring these crewmen back to Namibia.
"There should be stricter control when it comes to foreign recruitment of Namibians so that they don’t end up in a predicament like this," Imbili said.
Iraq Partners Swiss Firm Tom Shore- up Merchant Fleet
Iraq has signed a deal with a Swiss company to jointly operate 66 ships in a major leap to restore the country’s war-ravaged cargo fleet.
Ismat Jiad, the head of state-run Maritime Transportation Co., says the five-year deal with Global Refinery will help Iraq develop its maritime business. He says the deal could later be extended for five more years.
Jiad said Tuesday the fleet will transport goods to and from Iraq and will work mainly with the Iraqi government. Iraq now only has two cargo ships now and four oil tankers.
Iraq’s fleet of oil tankers and cargo vessels was devastated by shelling during the 1980-88 war with Iran and attacks during the 1991 U.S.-led Gulf War.
Kenyan Textile Firms Protest Over Delays At Port
Local manufacturers of textiles under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) market are up in arms over vessels delay at the port of Mombasa.
Director of Kapric Mr Thomas Puthoor said for the last one month, vessels that were bringing containers to the port had to wait at the high seas for 10 days before they were allowed to berth.
He said as a result of inadequate equipment to discharge container, the ships take three to four days. Mr Puthoor said this has forced the textile industry to shut down production regularly in the months of August and September.
"The delays will kill the industry that depends on imported fabrics from China and India," he said.
Mr Puthoor who is the chairman of the Garment Manufacturers Association Mombasa chapter said there is nowhere in the world that discharge of cargo takes so long.
"The operation should take a day. The port management needs to address the issue or else the exporters will continue to suffer," he said.
A source from within Kenya Ports Authority said the delays cannot be attributed to the port since they have enough equipment to handle vessels.
The delays might be as a result of other factors but not the port," said the source who declined to be named because he is not authorised to talk to the press.
Thieves Plunder Historic Ship Wreck
The wreck of an historic Royal Navy submarine has been plundered by thieves who dived 90ft to the sea bed to remove part of it.
HMS Holland, which sank in bad weather off the Sussex coast while being towed to a scrap yard in 1912, is protected by law because of its historical importance.
Now police are investigating after divers from the Nautical Archaeology Society discovered during a routine check that its torpedo tube hatch is missing.
Thieves are thought to have floated the 66lb piece of ironwork to the surface in 90ft of water by attaching buoyancy balloons.
Experts say it was an audacious raid which may have been carried out at the request of a collector with an interest in naval history. Both Sussex Police and English Heritage, which is responsible for the wreck’s care, have appealed for the return of the artefact and hope that someone in the diving community may provide them with a lead.
Police say that whoever took the hatch, which is about 30in in diameter, is liable for prosecution under the Protection of Wrecks Act.
The Holland 5, as the wreck is known, lay undiscovered until the mid-Nineties. It is the only surviving example of five Holland class vessels commissioned by the Admiralty to test the fighting capability of submarines, which were at the time a relatively new type of technology. They were top secret and only a few senior officers and crew knew of their existence.
The submarines were built by Vickers at Barrow-in-Furness between 1901 and 1903. The 64ft-long vessels were fitted with one of the first periscope designs, had a top speed of 9.2mph and a crew of eight.
But they were unreliable – an attempt in 1903 to sail round the Isle of Wight on the surface ended in four of them breaking down before they had covered much more than four miles.
Britain was one of the last major maritime powers to form a submarine fleet because senior Admiralty staff considered it to be unacceptably devious to attack the enemy from beneath the waves.
Admiral Sir Arthur Wilson, Controller of the Royal Navy, said in 1901 that submarine warfare was ‘underhand, unfair and damned un-English’.
Discussion about this post