Colombo Port ECT: Confusion over Investment

By Eng. D. Godage

The Colombo Port East Container Terminal, ECT, is hot topic, being an important economic nerve centre essential to the country but getting involved as a pawn in geopolitics. Opinion by I. P. C. Mendis in The Island (27.01.2021) prompted to clarify some of the matters and expose true facts.

ECT will neither be sold nor leased; it will be developed through investment from an Indian party and others by giving out 49 per cent share to them while keeping 51 per cent share with the Ports Authority. This is the government stance. Public awareness exists on Build Operate Transfer (BOT) agreements in the port with two terminals operating under this method. Land and sea area are leased to the relevant party by a lease agreement for a specified period, 35 years in both, and the private party invests to develop the terminal. So investment is an essential part in those agreements. But presently announced terminology creates confusion.

The Colombo South Harbour would not have been a reality if not for the Asian Development Bank (ADB), which offered a major loan for infrastructure development when other major donor agencies declined to come forward. The ADB Country Lending programme had only $ 100 million in 2005 while the cost of the South Harbour project was estimated at $ 330 million. There were unfavorable loan covenants such as Jaya Container Terminal (JCT) privatization, and that became a hindrance.

In 2004, the government sought private sector funding for the breakwater works and SEMA (Strategic Enterprises Management Authority) advocated the same even after showing that there was no precedent as regards private sector investment in such port infrastructure globally. Different methodologies, like bond issues, the setting up of a Company as SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) for commercial borrowing were talked about until May 2006 without success. Fresh negotiations thereafter with the ADB reached fruition and the critical covenants were either relaxed or diluted. The loan amount was increased to $ 300 million and the agreement thereon signed in April 2007.

Critical loan covenant was the selection of private investors for the first two new terminals chosen through open competitive bidding process followed by signing of concession agreements. Subsequent amendment to the Loan Agreement in June 2012 at the request of the Ports Authority changed ‘the first two terminals’ to mean ‘any two’. At no stage did the agreement include private participation in all three terminals.

Proposals were invited from prequalified private investors for the first terminal viz. the South Terminal from February 2007 even before signing of loan agreement to comply with loan covenant. In fact, invitation was made on two occasions as the first was cancelled in February 2008 when a total of five offers with two favourable ones were available. Compliance with the loan covenant was delayed by over a year and this led to a delay in the release of funds from ADB and commencement of construction.

The Memorandum of Cooperation signed with Japan and India in May 2019 proposed the development of the ECT under an Operations Company with 51 per cent shares retained by the Ports Authority. When the Minister submitted a Cabinet Memorandum naming one Indian investor, Adani, disregarding Japan, the government deviated from the agreement as well as the ADB loan covenant of open competitive bidding process. These deviations may be of different degree but the fact remains that they are digressions.

Another issue is that Hambantota Port and the Port City are totally different scenarios. The former is a white elephant in short even though the Chinese have acquired it. Two feasibility studies, one by SNC Lavalin of Canada and other by Ramboll of Denmark did not show viability of the project unless container operations started immediately. While both the Colombo South Harbour and the Hambantota Port projects commenced around the same time, the Hambantota project received priority. As regards the Port City, benefits may accrue after 10 years or more. On the other hand, since last October, the ECT has been operational with one berth built by the Ports Authority and is making profits.

The proposed formula for the ECT, in the referred Opinion, is a Joint Stock Co. As regards both SAGT and CICT, there are BOT (Build Operate Transfer) Agreements signed after being cleared by the highest legal authority of the country; they are between two parties, Ports Authority and the investor. They include a condition that Ports Authority hold a particular share, viz. 15 per cent. On the other hand, Joint Stock Company formation by the Ports Authority as the major shareholder seems a different process. The formation of such company is not permissible under the SLPA Act as found some time ago.

Further to the registration of an unlisted company and proposed structure, it is essential to divulge, inter alia, the total equity in order to estimate the Ports Authority share, Articles of Company to be acceptable to other private party, method of raising $ 500 million as building cost and liability on Ports Authority as lead partner.

Another subject that needs attention is the announcement by the Minister that West Terminal has to be commenced now. It has to be noted that ECT requires at least two more years to operationalize in complete form while only one berth of ECT is operational now by the Ports Authority. Another matter worth mentioning is that the Colombo Port Development Plan prepared and presented by the Ports Authority with the assistance of ADB in March 2019 states the capacity shortage starts from 2020, ECT operations start in 2019 and West Terminal commences operations in 2025. The ECT operations have been delayed and as such the WCT operation is not urgent with ample time available for planning.

What is urgently needed is a prompt decision on the ECT operations already behind schedule and the acceleration of the procurement process by the Ports Authority for remaining work and this is time-consuming.

Those in the maritime industry and others who wish for the success of Colombo Port highlighted the delay in operationalisation of ECT. Trade Unions are agitating, politicians are talking but no productive action has been taken. In the end, a prompt decision is essential as terminals cannot be built overnight but that task takes about two years. Otherwise, the Colombo Port will face congestion, ship diversions and bypassing and above all losing global reputation and position.