Jump to content

Did Crown Princess violate federal law today?


Recommended Posts

On 4/3/2020 at 9:59 PM, beg3yrs said:

Carnival is incorporated in Panama with HQ in Doral, Florida. It is the only company listed on both the New York and London stock exchanges.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_Corporation_%26_plc

 

21 hours ago, npcl said:

It is dual incorporated.  In Panama as you indicated.  It is also incorporated in England.  This was the result of when it purchased P&O a few years back.  


It would be nice if people actually read the governing documents at https://www.carnivalcorp.com/governance

rather than use Wikipedia. They make interesting reading especially when one is SIP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, FiredogCruiser said:

After this situation is over, I think what needs to be done is a complete assessment by port municipalities relative to their emergency operations plans for dealing with cruise ship populations. Municipalities spend untold numbers of dollars in advertising to get vacationers to spend their money in their communities, but little to none in planning to insure they have the capability to protect those they attract to their community. And even in those cases where impressive plans might exist, one could question how well exercised they are. Anything more than an occational table top? When you host, and actually market,  facilities that can draw thousands at a time, you have a responsibility not only to your residents, but to the people you attract to be able to adequately service them during an emergency. Abandoning, or attempting to abandon, those in need because you do not have a well exercised plan of operation in my opinion borders on criminal, and cannot be blamed on the cruise ship lines or crews.


That’s quite a claim. Please provide your source ref municipalities not have a plan to ensure safety. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

Thank you. I was referring mostly to her speaking performance. She was uncertain and not confident. Her answers vague and trying to placate. 

 

Yeah, I won't argue that.  I have a natural tendency to defend my friends and coworkers, but it's hard to deny that she wasn't prepared for that role.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brisalta said:

 


It would be nice if people actually read the governing documents at https://www.carnivalcorp.com/governance

rather than use Wikipedia. They make interesting reading especially when one is SIP.

 

 

The carnival statement is just corporate speak and PR. It doesn't tell us much. In real world terms, it's corporate structure does not matter. Pax can sue the company anywhere it does business(?). For corporate loans, the documents specific which judicial jurisdiction applies.

 

BTW, there's an old study that concluded that wiki had no more errors than an encyclopedia. 

 

Think of wiki as a superior form of social media. The more interesting topics are peer reviewed, and edited. Very different from the false news circulating on facebook etc.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, HappyInVan said:

 

 

The carnival statement is just corporate speak and PR. It doesn't tell us much. In real world terms, it's corporate structure does not matter. Pax can sue the company anywhere it does business(?). For corporate loans, the documents specific which judicial jurisdiction applies.

 

BTW, there's an old study that concluded that wiki had no more errors than an encyclopedia. 

 

Think of wiki as a superior form of social media. The more interesting topics are peer reviewed, and edited. Very different from the false news circulating on facebook etc.

 

 

 

I see you failed to follow the link https://www.carnivalcorp.com/governance and read the documents that are linked there. They are the legal  documents incorporating Carnival.

Talking of old studies there is an old study that shows the average age of editors of wikipedia is 14 years. So much for studies about wikpedia. There  is a lot of badly reviewed articles and even false articles plus advertising on wikipedia posing as facts.

Edited by brisalta
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, brisalta said:

 

Talking of old studies there is an old study that shows the average age of editors of wikipedia is 14 years. So much for studies about wikpedia. There  is a lot of badly reviewed articles and even false articles plus advertising on wikipedia posing as facts.

 

 

Can you post a link to that article?

 

Here's the link to the study I mentioned...

 

"In 2005, Nature published a peer review comparing 42 hard science articles from Encyclopædia Britannica and Wikipedia and found that Wikipedia's level of accuracy approached that of Britannica,[22] although critics suggested that it might not have fared so well in a similar study of a random sampling of all articles or one focused on social science or contentious social issues.[23][24] The following year, Time magazine stated that the open-door policy of allowing anyone to edit had made Wikipedia the biggest and possibly the best encyclopedia in the world, and was a testament to the vision of Jimmy Wales.[25]"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia

 

Follow the links to ...

 

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005Natur.438..900G/abstract

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wiki is like any other source--when the content seems fishy, I check it out. I often read many useful and interesting facts. And sometimes see stupid things 

 

But I don't argue with people about it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

Wiki is like any other source--when the content seems fishy, I check it out. I often read many useful and interesting facts. And sometimes see stupid things 

 

But I don't argue with people about it. 

 

The common problem is when people use wikipedia and deny the facts in primary sources. I pointed to the legal governing documents of Carnival and a certain person claimed the legal documents were propaganda. No accounting for people who do not understand what articles of incorporation are.

Any one this is getting way off topic of the main thread.

Edited by brisalta
Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic, did Crown Princess violate federal law?

 

Doesn't matter where Princess and CCL is incorporated. Can be prosecuted and sued. Reminds me that the CCL group is under probation for environmental violations. The federal judge threatened to ban CCL from American ports, as I recall, after the latest round of violations.

 

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_Corporation_%26_plc#Repeated_violations_of_environmental_laws

 

Hope that Crown Princess didn't violate the law willfully. Consequences could be massive in the current political atmosphere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HappyInVan said:

Back on topic, did Crown Princess violate federal law?

 

Doesn't matter where Princess and CCL is incorporated. Can be prosecuted and sued. Reminds me that the CCL group is under probation for environmental violations. The federal judge threatened to ban CCL from American ports, as I recall, after the latest round of violations.

 

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_Corporation_%26_plc#Repeated_violations_of_environmental_laws

 

Hope that Crown Princess didn't violate the law willfully. Consequences could be massive in the current political atmosphere.

And veering right back off topic with a gratuitous mention of the Carnival plea bargain.  If the Crown Princess had violated federal law, actions would have been taken long before today.  And, consequences would be limited by the extent of the law, not by the political atmosphere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Cruzaholic41 said:


That’s quite a claim. Please provide your source ref municipalities not have a plan to ensure safety. 

I have been involved with public safety in one form or fashion at the municipal, county and state levels for many years. I have seen any number of so called emergency operations plans, and been a part of literally hundreds of 'exercises'. In my opinion most of the plans look good on paper, but are clearly not able to be fully implemented for any number of reasons. One is lack of resources. Most do not have nearly enough personnel able to be mobilized to fully implement the plan, needing to rely on outside assistance to function. Worse yet, I have seldom seen an entire plan actually exercised. Most exercises are table top where you sit in a room and simulate what you would do in an actual situation, immediately dispatching resources that are not actually available. It is an academic experience rather than applied. In addition, every hands on exercise I have ever witnessed or taken part in only exercised one aspect of what would be required in an actual event. Those that attempted to do an entire event situation did so on a scaled basis, one crew supposedly simulating what any number would actually be required to do. The size and scope of hands on exercises, in my opinion, have been significantly cut in size and duration primarily due to the personnel and costs involved. Our country has an emergency management system that is built from the local municipality to the county to the state to the federal levels. The initial response, and therefore planning, is a municipal responsibility. When their resources are not sufficient for the task, you go up the chain requesting assistance. A common misconception within the media and public is that when an incident occurs, that county, state and federal assistance and direction is immediately available to overcome local shortcomings. Municipalities spend enormous amounts of money attempting to attract tourist dollars, and in the case of cruising, port cities in addition to the passenger dollars are after the overhead producing jobs involved with restocking food, drink, fuel and other consumable supplies. Large amounts of money have been spend on enlarging port terminals to handle ships carrying the equivalent of a small towns population, and getting bigger all the time. We have seen other viruses impact ship populations to a significant degree. We have had federal and state guidance regarding pandemic response planning for a number of years. Yet as we have seen in places like New York and California, they were under prepared to handle this latest crises. Stockpiles of needed equipment were allowed to be depleted and not replenished due to other spending priorities. New York had the opportunity to replenish and increase their ventilator inventory in 2015 and declined to do so. Gov. Brown in California allowed their stockpile to be depleted from where it had been, again due to cost. In both cases, attempts were made to blame the feds for not instant response to overcome their poor planning and readiness. What my original post pointed out was that when this is over, plans need to be vastly improved. This situation will happen again. And those port communities who want the economic benefit of bringing thousands of people weekly to their communities must do a better job of planning for how to protect those people. Saying we are not prepared, and wanting to refuse assistance to people in need is not an option in my opinion. And I refuse to spend my hard earned money in communities who want me to come and spend my money there, but then attempt to tell me I'm on my own if something happens. and then refuse to accept any responsibility and blame others if criticism is generated. We have a public safety crises in this country, and have had long before this latest virus hit. Lets address it instead of ignoring it then looking for who to blame when we opt not to assist people in need. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, FiredogCruiser said:

I have been involved with public safety in one form or fashion at the municipal, county and state levels for many years.

 

I respect that you may have some experience in this field, but I do not see in your long response where you have any experience in major U.S. ports, and you don't appear to have any experience in vessel traffic safety at all.  Have you any hands-on experience in USCG led initiatives like Ports, Waterways and Coastal Security (PWCS)?  Are you even aware how often USCG boards commercial vessels and discusses security plans?  Are you aware how often port security and safety plans are discussed and revised between federal, state and local officials?  If you did, you would never make the claim "Municipalities spend untold numbers of dollars in advertising to get vacationers to spend their money in their communities, but little to none in planning to insure they have the capability to protect those they attract to their community"  as you did in an earlier post.

 

I do have hands-on experience in PWCS, port and vessel safety, and through my career, I have been involved at the local, state, and federal levels....and all in coastal, port communities....and I'm telling you that your statement is completely wrong.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, HappyInVan said:

Back on topic, did Crown Princess violate federal law?

 

Doesn't matter where Princess and CCL is incorporated. Can be prosecuted and sued. Reminds me that the CCL group is under probation for environmental violations. The federal judge threatened to ban CCL from American ports, as I recall, after the latest round of violations.

 

And even those have their limitations.  To sue Princess must be done in accordance with the cruise contract.  Venue is set for Los Angeles.  Venue for a criminal charge of making false claims is generally in the district to which the claim was made.  In this particular case, it would be in Miami.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

I respect that you may have some experience in this field, but I do not see in your long response where you have any experience in major U.S. ports, and you don't appear to have any experience in vessel traffic safety at all.  Have you any hands-on experience in USCG led initiatives like Ports, Waterways and Coastal Security (PWCS)?  Are you even aware how often USCG boards commercial vessels and discusses security plans?  Are you aware how often port security and safety plans are discussed and revised between federal, state and local officials?  If you did, you would never make the claim "Municipalities spend untold numbers of dollars in advertising to get vacationers to spend their money in their communities, but little to none in planning to insure they have the capability to protect those they attract to their community"  as you did in an earlier post.

 

I do have hands-on experience in PWCS, port and vessel safety, and through my career, I have been involved at the local, state, and federal levels....and all in coastal, port communities....and I'm telling you that your statement is completely wrong.   

I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. I live near a port community, albeit a Great Lakes port with a currently unused cruise ship terminal, and have taken part in USCG led exercise initiatives with shore side emergency services provider agencies, health care providers and regulatory agencies. It is very interesting to see the differences between a USCG led exercise initiative, and say a county emergency management led initiative. We do have cruise ships on the great lakes, calling on lake port cities during the season. They are, as you are aware, much smaller than the ocean going cruise ships, although can be just as densely housed. What started this was thread was reaction to a county led inquiry and initiative, where the USCG was put on the hot seat, not the result of the USCG action so far as I am aware.

The problem I see is a lack of coordination between the multitude of agencies, coupled with a lack of manpower and resources necessary to immediately mitigate. Too many chiefs, not enough indians, to few horses. NIMS/ICS it wasn't. Too many thought to be in charge, and the potential for out of control problems were shoreside lack of resources, both manpower and equipment, and coordination between emergency services providers, heath care facilities and regulatory agencies with competing agendas.

As someone who used to do, and review on a municipal basis, large event plans, I would have the same concerns about a terrorist attack on a sporting event, or any other gathering that greatly increases the population on a temporary basis. It is one reason why some municipalities limit the size of allowable events.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FiredogCruiser said:

I have been involved with public safety in one form or fashion at the municipal, county and state levels for many years. I have seen any number of so called emergency operations plans, and been a part of literally hundreds of 'exercises'. In my opinion most of the plans look good on paper, but are clearly not able to be fully implemented for any number of reasons. One is lack of resources. Most do not have nearly enough personnel able to be mobilized to fully implement the plan, needing to rely on outside assistance to function. Worse yet, I have seldom seen an entire plan actually exercised. Most exercises are table top where you sit in a room and simulate what you would do in an actual situation, immediately dispatching resources that are not actually available. It is an academic experience rather than applied. In addition, every hands on exercise I have ever witnessed or taken part in only exercised one aspect of what would be required in an actual event. Those that attempted to do an entire event situation did so on a scaled basis, one crew supposedly simulating what any number would actually be required to do. The size and scope of hands on exercises, in my opinion, have been significantly cut in size and duration primarily due to the personnel and costs involved. Our country has an emergency management system that is built from the local municipality to the county to the state to the federal levels. The initial response, and therefore planning, is a municipal responsibility. When their resources are not sufficient for the task, you go up the chain requesting assistance. A common misconception within the media and public is that when an incident occurs, that county, state and federal assistance and direction is immediately available to overcome local shortcomings. Municipalities spend enormous amounts of money attempting to attract tourist dollars, and in the case of cruising, port cities in addition to the passenger dollars are after the overhead producing jobs involved with restocking food, drink, fuel and other consumable supplies. Large amounts of money have been spend on enlarging port terminals to handle ships carrying the equivalent of a small towns population, and getting bigger all the time. We have seen other viruses impact ship populations to a significant degree. We have had federal and state guidance regarding pandemic response planning for a number of years. Yet as we have seen in places like New York and California, they were under prepared to handle this latest crises. Stockpiles of needed equipment were allowed to be depleted and not replenished due to other spending priorities. New York had the opportunity to replenish and increase their ventilator inventory in 2015 and declined to do so. Gov. Brown in California allowed their stockpile to be depleted from where it had been, again due to cost. In both cases, attempts were made to blame the feds for not instant response to overcome their poor planning and readiness. What my original post pointed out was that when this is over, plans need to be vastly improved. This situation will happen again. And those port communities who want the economic benefit of bringing thousands of people weekly to their communities must do a better job of planning for how to protect those people. Saying we are not prepared, and wanting to refuse assistance to people in need is not an option in my opinion. And I refuse to spend my hard earned money in communities who want me to come and spend my money there, but then attempt to tell me I'm on my own if something happens. and then refuse to accept any responsibility and blame others if criticism is generated. We have a public safety crises in this country, and have had long before this latest virus hit. Lets address it instead of ignoring it then looking for who to blame when we opt not to assist people in need. 

A lot of thought provoking ideas here, but paragraphs would have made this much more readable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Thank You for 25 Years - Click for Fun Stuff!
      • Forum Assistance
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: Crystal Cruises - New! Luxury Bahamas Escapes
      • ICYM Our Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...