The Norwegian government wants to cut the next coastal route contract from ten years to four–five years. Havila Voyages is putting planned investments on hold and warns that the proposal will hit the coast: jobs, settlement, emissions cuts, and emergency preparedness. The Norwegian parliament (the Storting) will decide the framework in December.

In its proposed national budget for 2027, the government proposes reducing the contract period for the Bergen–Kirkenes coastal route from ten years to four–five years after 2030. The new framework will form the basis for the tender, which Havila Voyages has been given signals will be issued in the first half of 2027.

Havila Voyages are putting planned investments for the next contract period on hold, including modifications that would make it possible to handle private cars at all ports.

“A ship is built to sail for decades. A four- to five-year contract provides no basis for investing in new ships or major technological advances. We therefore have to put some investments on hold and reconsider others pending clarification,” says Bent Martini, CEO of Havila Voyages.

At the same time, Martini is clear that the company will manage regardless. The ships are built for alternative use, the organization is in place, and the international travel market is attractive.

“This is not about Havila Voyages. We have ships, the people, and several alternative markets outside the coastal route, both nationally and internationally. It is the coast that will suffer: the jobs, the settlement, the emissions cuts, and the emergency preparedness,” says Martini.

FEWER BIDDERS – AND MORE EXPENSIVE FOR THE STATE
Havila Voyages believes such a short contract will in practice limit competition to today’s operators and their existing fleets. At the same time, the oldest ship on the route will be more than 50 years old when the next contract expires.

“Short contracts are normally more expensive, because the investments must be recouped over a shorter period. It is hard to understand why the government would choose a solution that could make the coastal route more expensive for the state,” says Martini.

WOULD SLOW EMISSIONS CUTS
Havila Voyages also objects to the government’s proposed climate requirements. The Ministry of Transport writes that climate requirements beyond those in legislation should only be set where the abatement cost justifies it.

In the fall of 2025, both Havila Voyages and Hurtigruten demonstrated that alternative fuels can significantly reduce emissions. Havila Voyages aims to make its entire fleet climate-neutral on biogas by 2028 and achieve zero-emission operation from 2030.

“Both companies achieved this without compromising on safety. Our ships already have lower CO₂ emissions than the contract requires,” says Martini.

“If the next contract does not set clear requirements, or give us time to invest in better solutions, Norway as a maritime nation risks halting a development that is already underway. The government must use its purchasing power to drive renewal and major emissions cuts.”

WARNS AGAINST A MANAGED PHASE-OUT
Havila Voyages believes that a shorter contract, weak climate requirements, and new assessments of the coastal route in the National Transport Plan together create uncertainty about the route’s future.

“Seen together, the proposals leave the door open to discontinuing the coastal route after 2035. The coastal communities depend on daily port calls, freight and passenger transport, jobs, and local suppliers. This is about far more than the shipping companies, which will find alternative uses for their ships,” says Martini.

THE OPPOSITE OF LONG-TERM THINKING
Havila Voyages founder Per Sævik entered the coastal route with a clear goal: employment, value creation, and local roots along the coast. When he handed the helm to the next generation last year, Energigass Norge (article in Norwegian) summed up his life’s work this way: “The common thread has been long-term thinking, innovation, and jobs along the coast.”

Sævik believes the government’s proposal points in the opposite direction.

“We have always built to stay. Ships, people, and jobs along the coast are not something you build up in four or five years, and you do not get them back once they are gone. A contract this short gives no reason to invest. Then it is not the shipping companies that lose – it is the local communities that depend on the ships arriving every day,” says Sævik.