One of the questions most frequently asked of the International Tanker Owners' Pollution Federation Ltd, ITOPF, is how much does it cost to clean up an oil spill. Unfortunately, there is no simple answer as the costs of oil spills vary considerably from one incident to another, depending on a number of interrelated factors. It is Cope's hope that, given all the world experience, South Africa will come up with a Bill that will encompass all the major salient points because this is a universal problem. Cope will therefore impress on Parliament today to include the human collateral factor requiring community compensation. Currently we have only seen the law being applied under the 1992 Civil Liability Convention, CLC, fund against the registered owner of the ship. Attention has not been paid in principle to include victims from claiming compensation outside conventions from persons other than the shipowner. The case arises from what is also commonly referred to as the Erika decision for charterers and cargo holders.
In the loss of the Erika in December 1999, which polluted the coast of Brittany, the cargo owner, which is Total in this case, together with the shipowners and the classification society, were found liable to pay compensation to the victims of the spill. The village of Mesquer brought claims under the Waste Framework Directive, WFD. Because of this experience, the government of Canada has combined international conventions with internal regulations established by the International Maritime Organisation with response and recovery undertaking with a collaborative whole-of-government approach. Several departments fall into this, come to think of it, from the Departments of Mineral Resources, of Water and Environmental Affairs, of Home Affairs, and of Police, the Saps, the intelligence services, the coast guard, sea rescuers and the National Response Centre.
Cope has found that this Bill requires key questions to be asked. Firstly, can fuel oil intended to be sold as a product by the producer be classified as "waste" within the meaning of the WFD? Secondly, if so, should fuel oil accidentally spilled at sea, and either on its own or when mixed with water and sediment, constitute waste? Thirdly, is the polluter pays principle tantamount to a test of negligence? Is that constitutional?
In the case of the Erika the introduction of the polluter pays principle seems to amount to a negligence test for maritime ship owners only. Cope would have liked to see the Bill classified as a section 77 Bill for broader consultation before South Africa experiences a major disaster given the frequency of shipwrecks we have seen recently in Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, Knysna and Richard's Bay. The Bill was introduced for public comment and gazetted in 2009 as a section 75 Bill, which excluded the NCOP and tribal authorities, hence no input was received except from the two stakeholders that colleagues spoke about.
Cope would like to see a clear-cut definition of commercial ore tankers versus government-owned vessels. Clause 10 defines clearly which ships apply where government ships are used for noncommercial purposes. Clause 14 scrutinises the part of the Civil Liability Convention where the state provides for the period of validity and for the lapsing of the certificate of liability and sovereign immunity. Clauses 15 and 16 of the CLC pronounce on how long charges and detention costs will be managed until all costs are secured.
Finally, Cope would like to see the development and enforcement of institutions related to training, testing and certification, certifying marine personnel, including seafarers, ship security officers and pleasure craft operators, to ensure the safe operation of all marine activities in South Africa in relation to the fund coming out of this Bill. I thank you.