ACP Administrator/CEO Alberto Alemán Zubieta said: “This proposal is well thought out and well researched. We recognize the value of the Panama Canal and its service to the shipping and maritime communities, and, indeed, to global trade.

“These new prices will allow us to continue providing the industry with the service they want and the service they deserve.

“At the same time, they will allow us to make the programmed investments for the Panama Canal Master Plan, which proposes to expand the capacity of the existing Canal through the construction of a third set of locks.

“The industry has continually requested price stability and we have included this in our proposal and extended it until 2009, unparalleled in the industry.”

International Chamber of Shipping secretary general, Tony Mason told the Panama Maritime VIII conference that the global shipping industry was concerned about the newly announced Panama Canal toll fee increase proposals.

He said: “Everything in life has to be paid for, and a US $5.25-billion capital project is certainly no exception.  It is therefore perhaps no surprise that while the majority of ship owners have in principle welcomed the additional capacity and greater lock dimensions that this project will bring, they are somewhat nervous as to how they will be expected to pay for it!”

Mr. Mason added: “We have read the basic parameters set out in the ACP’s business plan as to how it is intended to finance the expansion, and we have just seen the detailed proposals from the ACP of their intended toll increases for the next three years.  The quantum of the increases in each of the next three years looks to be a matter of concern.  ICS will be commenting in detail once we have studied the detail, and we will be taking the opportunity to make formal comments on them.  However one question which I am sure we will be asking (of Canal Administrator and CEO Alberto Alemán Zubieta) is what his intentions are beyond the three year horizon, given that the average increases for these three years would appear to be well above what was indicated as an average annual increase in his Business Plan discussed with the industry previously.

Mr. Mason went on to make a number of cautionary points:

•  Where there is a move to sectoral pricing, the ability of individual sectors and markets to absorb cost increases must be carefully considered.
•  Increases need to be both manageable and predictable, so that users can build them into their own business plans.
•   Any increases need to be proportionate and not such as to challenge a sector’s ability to compete with other routes with other modes or indeed with other sourcing of cargo.
•   The burden of the cost of financing the expansion should not be too heavily loaded on current users, given that the major proportion of the benefits of expansion will accrue to future users.  Clearly that may involve the ACP in financial mechanisms to carry capital costs until they can generate the additional revenue stream from the expansion.  This is indeed quite normal with capital expansion projects.

He concluded: “I make these points not only from the self interest of the industry and indeed of my members, but also with a genuine wish to see this project succeed for the benefit of users, the ACP and the Panamanian people alike.”

Proposed changes to the pricing system and Canal regulations include toll increases dependent on vessels type: container vessels, passenger vessels, general cargo, refrigerated cargo, dry bulk, tankers and vehicle carriers. The ACP says: “These adjustments provide Panama Canal price stability for three years. Of note, tolls for non-container segments have not increased in the last four years. “

Vessels charged based on their displacement will pay according to the maximum displacement draft instead of the arrival draft.

The ACP is proposing an assessment of tolls based on maximum passenger capacity. In general, under this change, large vessels will be charged tolls on a per berth basis, and smaller ships will continue under the Canal tonnage tolls system.

It says: “These changes are largely due to suggestions from industry representatives and evidence another example of the ACP listening to the industry.”

Some minor administrative changes have also been proposed.