![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
<< Return to previous page | House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs Navigation: Previous Page | Contents Appendix I – Vessel Flag StatesSupplementary Submission 009.2 Dear Thomas, I am writing on behalf of Carnival Australia’s CEO, Ann Sherry, in response to a request for additional information regarding our fleet of cruise ships from the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs in relation to its current inquiry into Arrangements Surrounding Crimes Committed at Sea. I understand the Committee specifically seeks a list showing the name of each vessel in the Carnival Group fleet that is scheduled or likely to visit Australia in the next five years and the flag state of each of those vessels. Please find below a table detailing ships within the Carnival Group only, that are booked to visit Australia until 2019. Please note, while the following list provides a reasonable indication of the range of ships scheduled to visit Australia in the next 5 years, it is by no means complete. Ship schedules are only confirmed 18 months to two years ahead of the departure date, so bookings beyond this time frame are tentative and it is quite possible other ships may be added. I also note that this list of cruise ships covers the Carnival Group only. The other main operator of cruise ships to Australia is Royal Caribbean. Finally, I also note in brief, points made in our original submission to the Committee that in the very few investigations we are aware of as having been reported to the flag state of our ships, the current legislation does provide a regime for dealing with crimes on foreign flagged ships. If you have any further questions or require additional information please do not hesitate to contact me. Kind regards,
Submission 23 07 June 2013 Royal Caribbean International:
Celebrity Cruises:
I would also like to take this opportunity to address issues that were raised in the media by the Chairman of the Committee, Mr Perrett over the last week concerning allegations that evidence of crimes is covered up by cruise companies. The Sunday Telegraph on May 26 reported: A "culture of cover ups" remains entrenched on Australia's cruise ships despite moves to improve safety and reduce crime, industry insiders claim. Federal Labor MP Graham Perrett, who is chairing a Parliamentary inquiry into crimes at sea, said evidence from cruise industry sources suggested a lack of transparency with "When you get on a cruise ship, people think that the long arm of the law covers them, but the reality is they are covered by a contract with the cruise company rather than the Crown and the police," Mr Perrett said. He said concerns had been raised about cruise lines under-reporting crimes once ships left port. We have certainly had evidence of people saying there is a culture of cover-up rather than revealing," he said. "It is the old problem- if the people doing the investigating are also the ones that would be in the firing line if things go wrong, it can lead to complications, he said." The basic premise of Mr Perrett's comments regarding the coverage of criminal law is not correct. Whilst passengers on cruise ships are subject to the terms of their contract of carriage, this does nothing to displace the criminal law of the relevant jurisdiction applying at the time of any incident. I believe it is a serious overstatement to suggest that the "long arm of the law" does not apply on board cruise ships or any other ship for that matter. In respect to the suggestions of a "culture of cover ups" and "under-reporting of crimes ", our examination of the publicly available evidence of the Committee does not reveal any statements to this effect from industry witnesses who gave evidence in open hearings.
During the Canberra hearings the Chairman stated that the Committee had received
evidence from a former security officer regarding alleged cover ups on board cruise ships. In response to that Mrs Duffy and I spelled out the current industry position in which all crimes are reported to the appropriate law enforcement authorities. Please see the transcript extract below. My concern is that the evidence received by the so called industry insiders does not reflect that contemporary situation. As it would appear that this evidence was made in private I am unable to determine whether the witness has recent experience of cruise ship security. I am quite certain that their comments do not reflect the security arrangements on board RCCL ships. Mr Smith: In regard to Mrs Duffy's response, the desire of the industry is to establish a global reporting regimen through the IMO, and, if the Australian delegation to the IMO could support that, we would be looking at a standard implementation of a reporting regime that would take away any doubt of any interpretation of the obligation to report crime. In my experience, cruise lines report crime, and jurisdiction is established very quickly between coastal waters, international waters and next port of call. The cruise lines will report a crime to the next port in the event they need the support of the local law enforcement officers. They will report that crime in the case of anything around Australia and to do with an Australian citizen to the Australian Federal Police, or indeed the water police. If the ship was on a round trip; Sydney. If it was an itinerary, then it would be also reported to the water police. Then between those law enforcement agencies they would establish primacy, and that is very much based on practicality. So, in the case of Mrs Brimble, New South Wales Water Police established primacy, and they travelled to Noumea to attend the vessel. The habit of cruise lines is to report and report very quickly. We do not judge crime. We report it and then we work with those law enforcement agencies as they establish primacy-and indeed attend the vessel on arrival at the port or on return to the port. It is a very well established practice. CHAIR: We had evidence and information provided from people in the security industry to the committee saying that because reporting a crime is not something that is going to make it onto the brochure for the cruise line-that is just the reality; you do not want rape,
assault and murder in your brochures-the idea is to conceal information. If there were
crimes that could not be made public- Mr Smith: Disclosed. The current state of industry practice was also referred to at the Sydney hearings by former NSW Police Commissioner Ken Moroney AO APM, who studied cruise industry security arrangements and dismissed the suggestion that those investigating on board incidents would be inclined to under report. The transcript extract is also repeated below: "CHAIR: Would that mean that, if something happens on your watch, you would be more likely to cover up than to report it-if you are going to have your employment terminated whenever the data starts to show that there are some troubles in the ranks? On the same day Michael Giglia, Director Fleet Security and Investigations, Global Security, Royal Caribbean Cruises Lines Ltd pointed out that RCCL not only reports all incidents to the appropriate law enforcement agency but publishes the number of alleged serious crimes in our annual Stewardship report, whether these result in prosecutions or not. Additionally Mr Giglia described in detail the training and procedures for security staff in reporting crime and crime scene prevention: Mr Giglia: Most definitely. The training that you may be most interested in is training and crime reporting and crime preservation. We have always trained our security officers in that but the Cruise Vessel Security And Safety Act-a federal law passed in the United States, sometimes known as the Kerry act-requires that all of our ships have at least one person certified in a very specific course in crime reporting and evidence preservation. The course is known as the model course. The syllabus was produced by the United States Coast Guard, the United States Merchant Marine Academy and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Every one of our chief
security officers and deputy security officers must complete this government mandated course
and be certified in order for a vessel to be allowed into United States ports.
It is a business decision-and I believe it is true in all the cruise lines; it is easier for us to train all of our security officers, regardless of what port they are going to. Every one of them is trained because ships move around, as do our personnel. In conclusion I would like to thank the Committee for its work in what, to our industry, is the most fundamental responsibility we have, the safety and security of our passengers and crew which remains our primary concern.
Yours sincerely
Gavin Smith
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents |
![]() |