Beanspiller

Let’s just say that the communication between Federal (customs aka borderforce), State (Primary Industries) , Viking and passengers seems ‘interesting’…..

Viking Orion was banned from in port anti fouling, hence it was done outside the 12 mile zone. That was the information distributed in writing by Viking. They would know, wouldn’t they?

Perhaps this is a somewhat hasty conclusion from a very convoluted text. Here is some further info for your consideration: 1. see attached guidelines for commercial vessels. Although from 2009, they have not been superseded, as far as I understand. If you have evidence they ARE superseded, please reference, that would be helpful. If anything, rules and restrictions in this area have only become stricter. See chapter 8. 2." Be aware that in-water cleaning requests are unlikely to be approved due to the high biosecurity and environmental risks associated with in-water cleaning and treatment activities." : from https://www.agriculture.gov.au/biosecurity-trade/aircraft-vessels-military/vessels/marine-pest-biosecurity/biofouling/anti-fouling-and-inwater-cleaning-guidelines This is the situation since November 2022. 3. You will notice from the document you refer to that there is strong cooperation between Australia and New Zealand on this matter. If the ship can't be cleaned in NZ waters, the same will apply in Oz, and vice versa. 3. At the Q&A session on board the Orion the 2IC officer (who appeared very embarrassed) quite clearly said words along the following lines, when asked why the hull cleaning couldn't been done in port: "that can't be done anywhere in Australia'. He was clearly infering that they knew this all along. The above confirms what I have always heard 'on the waterfront' in Australia. commercial-vessels-biofouling-guidelines.pdf

My reference was not to the above link, but to an official email (dated 9 January) from the relevant NZ government authority. Here is the text. I have deleted the recipient as I don't know if that person wants to be mentioned in some bulletin board. From: MPI Media <media@mpi.govt.nz > Sent: 09 January 2023 13:33 To: [deleted] > Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] - RE: Viking Orion Kia ora [deleted] Please see below. If attribution is required, please do so to Paul Hallett, manager environmental health BiosecurityNew Zealand. Thanks. MPI Media A Notice of Direction that biofouling was present and a dive survey required was issued to the agent of the VikingOrion on December 15. To establish the extent of the biofouling, the dive survey was undertaken in Wellington on/about December 17. On December 18, Biosecurity New Zealand received images and a report from the divers. While no high-riskorganisms were found, the density of the biofouling meant there was a risk that such organisms could be present. Another Notice of Direction was issued to the agent on December 20, instructing the vessel to leave New Zealandwaters by 8am on December 29, and that cleaning was required before its next visit to New Zealand. The vessel operators chose to have its cleaning done off Australia, and left NZ waters on December 26. Hope this clarifies.

An email from an officer of the media liaison unit of the Ministry of Primary Industries to a NZ newspaper, due to a request for info from that newspaper.In the end it wasn't published for whatever reason. My suspicion is that Viking wanted it to appear as if this was an unexpected event, that happened during the cruise, so they wouldn't have to provide a full refund (as might have been the case in some jurisdictions). I do recall that several passengers I spoke with and who had some knowledge of the 'maritime environment' were very suspicious about the logic in Viking's announcements. Rightly so, as it transpired later on. They not only let their passengers down, but in a sense also the crew which in my view did an admirable job under difficult circumstances.

It appears Viking knew before embarkation that this cruise was ‘doomed’, but apparently chose not to inform the passengers. Embarkation was on 22 December, Viking received orders on or before 20 December to leave New Zealand waters by 29 December. The bio hazard was suspected on 15 December. It is unlikely that there would not have been daily contact between Viking and NZ Department of Primary Industries on this issue. viking also misled the passengers when they initially anounced that anti fouling would take place in the port of Adelaide and they were busy planning shore excursions. They knew Australia doesn’t permit commercial vessels to have anti fouling done in Australian waters, hence it eventually was done just outside the 12 mile zone. Not a very good look….