Media reports suggest that the overall Australian cruise market has rebounded to pre-pandemic levels, with passenger numbers in 2023 at 1.25 million, which is close to 2018 figures.
More than 720,000 of those passengers came from NSW.
Currently, none of those passengers embark in Newcastle.
While these figures should please the cruise ship companies, it seems the opposite has occurred with the "retirement" of the P&O brand in Australia, and the subsequent loss of the of the Pacific Explorer cruise ship.
In addition, at least one cruise brand has amended its future Australian schedule with fewer sailings, while the Cunard Line will be seen a lot less in Australian waters.
The Pacific Explorer will be 28 years old at "retirement". This is considered old by the major cruise lines, but there are older ships that remain commercially viable.
The Pacific Explorer's problem could be a lack of capacity.
While the other two P&O ships based in Australia have a much larger capacity, it remains to be seen what effect any subsequent retirements will have on this market.
Carnival Australia has said that "folding in" the P&O brand into Carnival was a necessary cost-cutting measure, which along with other strategic moves would increase the capacity of the Carnival cruise line.
Apparently the fact that Australia is the world's fourth biggest cruise market is not enough to offset the particularly high costs of doing business Down Under.
Is NSW doing enough to encourage the cruise industry?
Given that two cruise companies pulled out of Melbourne (due to a 15 per cent increase in port charges), do port charges in NSW encourage or discourage more visits?
Are the costs we pass on to cruise companies competitive, both Australia-wide and internationally?
Earlier in the year, the NSW government was talking up the industry, with even Newcastle and Eden expecting strong growth from visiting cruise ships.
I don't believe this has been reflected in the arrivals schedule for either port in the upcoming Australian cruise season.
Meanwhile, the NSW government has been looking for an alternative port to take Sydney's predicted overload, and their eyes have turned to Port Kembla.
With the industry in flux, is this still the case?
The short answer is probably, because Sydney has a couple of problems.
The first one is the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
The White Bay cruise terminal in Sydney (west of the bridge) replaced the berth at Darling Harbour and was originally intended to handle all domestic cruising.
Many of the current ships that visit Sydney are taller than the bridge's 49 metre clearance, and need to berth at Circular Quay.
At its peak, the Australian cruise season welcomes more than 60 ships a month into Sydney, forcing some taller cruise ships to anchor in Athol Bay.
Additionally, the ships that cruise companies are building are even larger and taller, none of which will come close to squeezing under the bridge.
Sydney's' second problem is that they have no other suitable berths east of the bridge.
Garden Island and Woolloomooloo as well as Botany Bay having been firmly ruled out as viable sites for cruise terminals.
While I could see Australian passengers perhaps embracing (reluctantly) a cruising holiday that starts and finishes in Port Kembla, I can't see an overseas passenger being thrilled with Port Kembla being substituted for the thrill of arriving in Sydney Harbour.
There are better alternatives to Port Kembla that may realise continued growth in the local cruise industry, in particular in NSW.
A re-think is needed, and the Port of Newcastle should once again be considered as a turnaround port, not just for daytime visits.
A dedicated wharf with a purpose-built terminal in Newcastle should once again be a reality.
