Bureau Veritas (BV) Press Release, April 26

[DeeDee Groff]

From Cruise Industry News 19 hours ago:   "Bureau Veritas (BV) has been contracted by the Carnival Corporation to provide health and safety services to facilitate the return to cruising, protecting passengers and crew, according to a press release."

 

Please do not flame me because I have not furnished a link to this press release:  I simply am not tech savvy enough to do so.  If you were to do a Google search for "Bureau Veritas, Carnival," the link will immediately be shown.

 

I am posting this on CC's Holland America Line Ask A Question because I avidly read here, and even though I am not so literate as many of you are, I believe the fruits of this contract between BV and Carnival will eventually trickle down to HAL.

[KirkNC]

Here is the link

 

https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/24852-carnival-contracts-bureau-veritas-for-a-safe-return-to-service.html

 

 

 

[Mary229]

@DeeDee Groff It appears to be  for the whole of the US corporate operations not just Carnival Cruises

[chengkp75]

As I've said on other forums regarding this, the CDC has allowed that third party auditors can be used to audit a cruise line's plans and compliance with the CSO (of course they have to have an approved plan first).  Carnival is signaling that they would prefer to have an auditor that they pay, rather than one they have no control over (CDC).  Given Carnival's record with impartial auditors (their environmental compliance problems), I can see why.

 

It is for all of Carnival Corp, not just US operations, as BV is initially focusing on the UK operations.

[VMax1700]

6 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Carnival is signaling that they would prefer to have an auditor that they pay,

Don't most, if not all, businesses pay for their own auditors, whether Safety, Health, Financial or otherwise?

[chengkp75]

4 minutes ago, VMax1700 said:

Don't most, if not all, businesses pay for their own auditors, whether Safety, Health, Financial or otherwise?

Which is why they are not truly independent.

[JRG]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Which is why they are not truly independent.

 

Not true.  Independence is one of the principle requirements for financial auditing.

 

The SEC has requirements too.    Publicly traded firms are required to hire independent CPA firms to audit their financial statements and render an opinion.    

 

The principle of independence is 'portable' too and that is why it applies here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JRG]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

As I've said on other forums regarding this, the CDC has allowed that third party auditors can be used to audit a cruise line's plans and compliance with the CSO (of course they have to have an approved plan first).

 

I'm not looking to start an off-shoot here I'm just commenting,   but I don't remember seeing you post that comment before.

 

All I remember is you saying that the CSO has not been changed substantially from one version to another and also that you haven't seen the ports doing anything to get their act together.   

 

From what I can remember,   this BV thing is the first press release about any port agreement.

 

Regardless,  it is good to see some progress.

 

 

Edited April 27, 2021 by JRG

[Mary229]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

As I've said on other forums regarding this, the CDC has allowed that third party auditors can be used to audit a cruise line's plans and compliance with the CSO (of course they have to have an approved plan first).  Carnival is signaling that they would prefer to have an auditor that they pay, rather than one they have no control over (CDC).  Given Carnival's record with impartial auditors (their environmental compliance problems), I can see why.

 

It is for all of Carnival Corp, not just US operations, as BV is initially focusing on the UK operations.

What is new in the press release is the North American contract as it says BV is already operating in other locales 

[Mary229]

1 hour ago, VMax1700 said:

Don't most, if not all, businesses pay for their own auditors, whether Safety, Health, Financial or otherwise?

You are of course right.   Why would taxpayer dollars be used to audit a private company.  The auditing company has its own set of check, balances and regulations to assure its independence.  Of course that can break down as it did in the early 2000s in the financial industry and truly that is the rare event.  

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

What is new in the press release is the North American contract as it says BV is already operating in other locales 

Did I miss something?  I don't see mention of "North America" anywhere in the press release.

[Mary229]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

Did I miss something?  I don't see mention of "North America" anywhere in the press release.

It does not say specifically say North America it says it will cover the fleet and........

 

BV’s initial work has been focused on ships operating under the Cunard, P&O Cruises and Princess Cruises brands that will resume cruises out of Southampton under Carnival UK with added assurance from BV's independent verification of effective COVID-19 protocols.

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, Mary229 said:

You are of course right.   Why would taxpayer dollars be used to audit a private company.  The auditing company has its own set of check, balances and regulations to assure its independence.  Of course that can break down as it did in the early 2000s in the financial industry and truly that is the rare event.  

And it has broken down for decades in the maritime industry with class societies like Lloyd's Register certifying ships as seaworthy and then the ship breaks in two a few months later.  Or the ABS certifying the El Faro.  Ultimately, the responsibility to ensure that a class society is maintaining independence rests with the flag states that approve those class societies for their country.  Countries like Panama and Liberia.

[JRG]

The new buzzword is 'Outbreak Management'.

 

Hopefully the CDC will buy into the BV independent audit instead of stepping thru phases beyond phase 1 to get things rolling on the seas again safely.

 

I can see the value to the cruising public,  the port public,  and the host country public in having cruiselines participate in an independent program which certifies some level of satisfactory compliance,  whatever that may end up being.

 

 

 

 

[harkinmr]

34 minutes ago, JRG said:

The new buzzword is 'Outbreak Management'.

 

Hopefully the CDC will buy into the BV independent audit instead of stepping thru phases beyond phase 1 to get things rolling on the seas again safely.

 

I can see the value to the cruising public,  the port public,  and the host country public in having cruiselines participate in an independent program which certifies some level of satisfactory compliance,  whatever that may end up being.

 

 

 

 

"Outbreak Management" has been the whole point all along, and is the impetus behind the CSO.  The CDC is not going to drop the framework phased approach as it incorporates so much else beyond managing an outbreak.  It includes continued testing for crew, port personnel and passengers along with reporting of results, health protocols and enforcement measures, and a phased and limited restart.  Oversight of the process by the CDC is an important element as well.  This news about Bureau Veritas is welcomed because it means that Carnival Corp. may now be starting the process of complying with the phased approach and preparing plans to be submitted to the CDC.

[rucrazy]

I found the press release a SNOOZE.

It said nothing of importance.

"BV will verify the procedures and protocols of Carnival Corporation’s ships to identify and manage COVID-19 related risks in port, at embarkation and disembarkation points, and, of course, on the ships."

Edited April 27, 2021 by rucrazy

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, harkinmr said:

Oversight of the process by the CDC is an important element as well.  This news about Bureau Veritas is welcomed because it means that Carnival Corp. may now be starting the process of complying with the phased approach and preparing plans to be submitted to the CDC.

Yes, you have to have a plan, and that plan has to be approved, and you have to initiate that plan, before any audit process can happen.

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

And it has broken down for decades in the maritime industry with class societies like Lloyd's Register certifying ships as seaworthy and then the ship breaks in two a few months later.  Or the ABS certifying the El Faro.  Ultimately, the responsibility to ensure that a class society is maintaining independence rests with the flag states that approve those class societies for their country.  Countries like Panama and Liberia.

I hope that "then the ship breaks in two a few months later" is an exaggeration and not a fact.  

[chengkp75]

3 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I hope that "then the ship breaks in two a few months later" is an exaggeration and not a fact.  

Sorry, no.  The MV Erika sank in December 1999, after having been inspected and given certification by RINA (apologies to Lloyd's Register for this one, but they are known to have problems) for things like "Safety Construction" and "Load Line", which are 5 year certificates issued at dry dockings, just one year prior.  Erika broke in half in the Bay of Biscay.  Lloyd's did class on the MV Flare and MV Derbyshire, both bulk carriers that broke apart and sank.

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Sorry, no.  The MV Erika sank in December 1999, after having been inspected and given certification by RINA (apologies to Lloyd's Register for this one, but they are known to have problems) for things like "Safety Construction" and "Load Line", which are 5 year certificates issued at dry dockings, just one year prior.  Erika broke in half in the Bay of Biscay.  Lloyd's did class on the MV Flare and MV Derbyshire, both bulk carriers that broke apart and sank.

🤦‍♂️ I really was hoping it was an exaggeration. 

 

Please say at least those aboard were saved.

[chengkp75]

11 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

🤦‍♂️ I really was hoping it was an exaggeration. 

 

Please say at least those aboard were saved.

There was no loss of life on the Erika.  The Derbyshire went down with all 42 hands onboard, and the Flare lost 21 of 26 crew.

[AmazedByCruising]

7 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

And it has broken down for decades in the maritime industry with class societies like Lloyd's Register certifying ships as seaworthy and then the ship breaks in two a few months later.  Or the ABS certifying the El Faro.  Ultimately, the responsibility to ensure that a class society is maintaining independence rests with the flag states that approve those class societies for their country.  Countries like Panama and Liberia.

 

Shouldn't that be ultimately resolved by companies, or mutual insurers, saying they won't insure a ship inspected by ABS or demanding a higher price for their risk? If I had some spare money left to insure ships, I wouldn't rely on Panama saying that company X is very good at inspecting ships but would look at the track record of company X itself. Or ask "inspector-inspector inc." that rates inspectors for historically being right or wrong on the ship I'm asked to insure. 

 

[chengkp75]

8 minutes ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

Shouldn't that be ultimately resolved by companies, or mutual insurers, saying they won't insure a ship inspected by ABS or demanding a higher price for their risk? If I had some spare money left to insure ships, I wouldn't rely on Panama saying that company X is very good at inspecting ships but would look at the track record of company X itself. Or ask "inspector-inspector inc." that rates inspectors for historically being right or wrong on the ship I'm asked to insure. 

 

The flag state can say which class societies it accepts.  If the shipowners don't want to use that class society, then they are free to flag in another country.  And, hull insurance companies can decide which class societies they want to accept for ships they cover, and the companies again have the choice to go to another insurance source.  It's all about the dollars, and that means the dollars today, not a possible cost a few quarters or years down the road.  That is not how business is done these days.  If a shipowner can find a class society that traditionally does not require a lot of expensive inspections leading to expensive repairs or expensive maintenance procedures, and this society is accepted by an insurance company that offers low premiums, would I go with a higher cost option?

[Heartgrove]

8 hours ago, Mary229 said:

You are of course right.   Why would taxpayer dollars be used to audit a private company. 

 

What? Then what do you call inspections done by the Federal, State, and Local governments of businesses? 

[chengkp75]

3 minutes ago, Heartgrove said:

 

What? Then what do you call inspections done by the Federal, State, and Local governments of businesses? 

Hmm.  Health inspections, building code enforcement,  fire marshals, OSHA, FAA, ICC, FDA, EPA, and the rest of the alphabet.