The clash was revealed In their 2017 Annual Report, which showed that Ports made £46.2million in revenue and £11.5million in pre-tax profit last year, with 2.3million travellers through each of their gateways. In it, they criticised the regulator for refusing a tariff price rise in line with inflation (RPI), warning that it will “inevitably lead to a diminution of the level of investment and/or customer service that can be provided.”
“Against rising costs, despite efficiency improvements and an asset base requiring considerable investment, such a situation is unsustainable if we are to maintain and enhance our assets so that the people can continue to enjoy the use of modern and efficient services from [Ports of Jersey],” the report read.
Pictured: Ports argued that not being allowed to increase prices was particularly damaging to the already struggling Harbour.
The price hike block was reported as having had a “disproportionate effect” on the island’s harbours, which saw passenger numbers decline by over 110,000 between 2015 and 2017 to 659,480, dropping revenue by around £0.2million. These challenges were slightly offset by “steady freight and fuel revenues”, with around 500,000 tonnes shipped last year.
Ports argued that the decision of JCRA – with whom they said they had “not forged as strong a relationship… as with our operational regulators” – went against the “core assumption” made when the Ports was formed that RPI increases were not only permissible, but “necessary to achieve the aim of financial self-sustainability whilst providing continuing service levels.”
The body also highlighted the fact that focus groups paid for by the States-funded JCRA provided similar feedback to that already gained by the Ports of Jersey through their own customer surveys on service quality. Further, they noted that a consultation on the matter undertaken by the JCRA received just three responses – one of which was from the Ports of Jersey themselves.
Pictured: 2017 in numbers for the Ports of Jersey.
Despite their disagreement, the two authorities will find themselves working more closely together in future – the regulator last week announced that it would be keeping a closer eye on the timely arrival and departure of flights, queueing time at security and the efficiency of the baggage handling process at the airport; punctuality at the harbour; and waiting times for new berths at the marinas.
Ports of Jersey nonetheless confirmed that discussions with the JCRA continue and that their “hope is that we can develop a workable regulatory model for the long term.”
Their annual report comments come as the JCRA – the Jersey branch of CICRA, the Channel Islands’ overall competition oversight authority – faces increasing political and public scrutiny.
Pictured: The regulator last week announced new performance measures for Ports’ facilities, including checking on the promptness of flights.
This week a top UK barrister was appointed to investigate a decision they made about ATF Fuels, which was later overturned by the Royal Court. The litigation cost taxpayers’ £500,000.