PPA approves 24% tariff hike for North Harbor firm

DESPITE protests from major clients of Manila North Harbor, the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) has approved a 24-percent increase in the cargo handling tariff for the Manila North Harbour Port Inc. (MNHPI), a move that an umbrella group of consum- lead to higher cost of goods.

PPA’s technical working group made always be at the losing end. MNHPI the recommendation to approve the says it wants to upgrade its facilities to tariff hike even after receiving the pojustify the tariff increase, but they want sition papers of Manila North Harbor consumers to pay for their upgrade. It clients opposing the upward adjustis as if MNHPI wants to be the only ment. The tariff increase was upheld by PPA General Manager Jay Daniel Santhe technical working group sided with tiago through Memorandum No. 4. them,” he said.

“The members of the technical Javellana also slammed the double working group are going against what President Rodrigo Duterte had laid which holds majority share of MNHPI down in his 10-point socio-economic, through Petron Corporation, will enwhich is to increase business comjoy with the tariff adjustment. petitiveness, attract investments and “This adjustment serves two purprotect Juan dela Cruz from economic poses: on one hand, tariff increase shocks,” United Filipino Consumers for MNHPI, and on the other hand, and Commuters president Rodolfo Javellana Jr. said. what they claimed to be increases

“Consumers will ultimately bear the brunt of this tariff increase because Petron and a double-whammy for all traders will just pass on the added consumers,” he said. costs to the public. The public will “The technical working group that recommended the approval of the tariff increase is aware of this. In fact, during the consultations held by the PPA, almost all stakeholders have opposed the plan of MNHPI. Yet PPA still favored the increase,” Javellana said.

In his memorandum, Santiago said the upward adjustment will be implemented in three tranches.

MNHPI’s January 2015 tariff rates will take effect this year, while the two suc 2019, respectively.

Javellana said MNHPI virtually has a monopoly on domestic trade, which means it should actually reduce cost rather than increase it.

Various port stakeholders have earlier slammed MNHPI’s original petition for a 37.45-percent tariff hike.

The Philippine Inter-Island Shipping Association (PISA) rejected the claim of the port operator that it needs to adjust cargo-handling tariff to compensate for the “upward trend in cost drivers” and the increasing cost of operating Manila North Harbor.

“For every increase incurred for computed per twenty- foot equivalent unit [ TEU], there is already a proportionate revenue earned to compensate such costs incurred by the port operator,” PISA said.

The group said statistics from the PPA would show that MNHPI’s net income has been steadily increasing from P305.7 million in 2013 to P332.6 million in 2014.

MNHPI cited labor, fuel and power rates as among the cost drivers to justify its tariff hike petition.

But the Philippine Liner Shipping Association (PSLA) said the fuel and power consumption MNHPI was “alarming” at the very least and should trigger an audit instead.

PLSA said the port operator’s “remarkable” increase in fuel consumption—55 percent from 2012 to 2013

Within the same period, MNHPI’s power consumption also increased by almost 2 million kilowatts, or a 103.12 percent hike in power cost per TEU.

PLSA also raised the alarm against possible increase in prices of consumer goods if the MNHPI tariff increase is approved.

Using 2014 PPA statistics, additional annual cost of stevedoring for PLSA mem

In addition to stevedoring, other cargo handling rates, which may eventually be passed on to the shippers are shifting, among others.