There were howls of protest from shippers and carriers as US President George Bush enacted into legislation a bill that calls for scanning at foreign ports in five years of all containers destined for the US.

Members of the Global Shippers Forum (GSF) voiced grave concerns and believe 100 percent scanning of container cargo will result in enormous costs to users, suppliers and ultimately consumers without accomplishing the very objective that the scan-all requirements are seeking to achieve.

It was a major setback for the trade community, which has worked hard to support the idea that container security based on risk was the optimum balance between fighting terrorism and facilitating the flow of legitimate international trade.

Nicolette van der Jagt, secretary general of the European Shippers' Council (ESC) said: "Business will be paying the lion's share of providing the equipment, but I suspect the biggest cost to shippers will be the costs of delays: we already have the prospect of worsening congestion in many of the world's container ports as volumes grow year-on-year. One can only imagine the huge queues that will form when every container has to run through radiation and image scanners.

"We regret that the US has acted unilaterally and did not await the results of the pilot actions the EU and US Customs are about to launch before pressing ahead with this piece of legislation.''

John Lu, chairman of the Asian Shippers' Council said: "Being the main exporter to the US, Asia will be the hardest hit. The enforcement of this ruling will slow down cargo and cause a gridlock at ports. Shippers are likely to bear the brunt of increased costs as carriers exploit their position of strength over shippers in this region of the world."

Ted Kawamura, managing director of the Japan Shippers' Council said: "This comes as a shock for shippers because we had anticipated the terminology in the bill to propose screening rather than scanning which would have meant a multi-tiered risk assessment approach being used based on risk analysis and targeted inspections. This would have been far more acceptable to business and far more effective.

"There are a growing number of security initiatives based on the risk assessment approach, in Asia, Europe and in the US; but shippers involved in trade with the US will now be left wondering whether there is any point to these initiatives if all their freight is to be scanned anyway.

"And shippers, industry and eventually the consumer will ask the most important question of all: is this really the best way to prevent terrorist attacks? The Global Shippers' Forum does not believe so, and thinks this is a giant mistake.''

It is a 100 percent mess, added a trade analyst.

The WSC, whose member lines carry more than 90 percent of the world's containerised cargo, was especially critical of the House for passing the bill without having committee hearings or allowing floor amendments on this issue. They also noted that the Senate did not have a hearing on these issues.

The US National Indus-trial Transportation League drafted a letter to committee leaders in the House and Senate which said: "We would seriously caution that the use and reliance on scanning ocean containers would create a false sense of security," but to no avail.

Peter Gatti, executive vice-president of the league said: "We believe the scan-all container amendment contradicts many goals and objectives of the 9/11 Commission and would divert vital funding from other programmes that in combination to 'screening' and 'scanning' have proven effective in thwarting attacks on seaborne commerce.

"This legislation represents a very worrying development that could have disastrous consequences for trade between the US and its major trading partners. Currently, there is no scanner that we know about that can do the job the law demands. We also have serious doubts whether all the identified ports which handle containers bound for the US will be able to have the scanners required, or have the space needed to facilitate scanners, with all the holding areas required, and areas needed to place those containers that cause an alarm.

"In the final analysis the needed technology must be a practical tool which helps and does not hinder the very supply chains we are seeking to protect.''

The NIT League has worked to defeat scan-all proposals as part of a broader industry coalition that includes the Retail Leaders Industry Association, the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America, the American Association of Exporters and Importers, the US Chamber of Commerce and the Joint Industry Group.

The import-export industry has been asking the government to continue on the current path of using risk-based methods to identify potentially dangerous shipments through data analysis and conducting automated inspections on those limited number of containers.

They have pressed for Congress to give the Secure Freight Initiative it ordered a chance to produce real-world test results in six foreign ports where X-Ray type machines and radiation detectors work simultaneously to produce data feeds for review by US Customs prior to loading on a vessel. Hong Kong has agreed to participate in this intiative and containers leaving Hong Kong for the US delivered through the in-gate of Modern Terminals in Kwai Chung will be scanned on a voluntary basis.