A shipping expert has rejected claims that the Dibden Bay project is vital to the future of the UK's container trade.

Andrew Penfold was giving evidence on behalf of Hampshire County Council at the public inquiry into plans for a major new port near Hythe.

Associated British Ports (ABP) says the scheme is important to Southampton Docks and the UK economy as a whole.

But Mr Penfold said ABP had failed to prove the need for an additional terminal to be built on the shores of Southampton Water.

He referred to two other port projects in the UK - and warned that approval for all three schemes would result in severe over-capacity.

"There are clear alternatives to the Dibden Bay project," Mr Penfold told the inquiry.

"It has not been demonstrated that the project represents the only solution to the required expansion of the UK major port container sector. The development of Dibden Bay is not essential to maintain Southampton's role in the container handling business." Mr Penfold is a director of Ocean Shipping Consultants Ltd.

His 24-page presentation to the inquiry included a detailed analysis of international shipping patterns and the future role of Southampton.

He said four factors had to be taken into account when gauging the need for the Dibden Terminal.

These included the demand for extra container capacity in the UK over the next 15 years and proposed facilities at existing and planned ports.

"The shipment of containers at north European ports, for distribution within the broader European hinterland, constitutes a competitive market," he said.

"There is no intrinsic reason why a particular terminal should secure this business. A large part of it could be undertaken in any competitively priced and reliable location."

Mr Penfold stressed that the UK's share of the transhipment market had remained at between 18.6 and 21.2 per cent since the mid-1990s.

Mr Penfold said the future prosperity of UK ports would be governed by their capacity to handle transhipment operations and the degree of competition from their European rivals.

"The general outlook is for a decrease in the share of UK ports in this sector."

Turning to UK container capacity, Mr Penfold warned that a number of British ports would end up competing for much of the same market.

"Major projects are planned for both Shellhaven and Bathside Bay at Harwich," he said. "Both facilities will be competing with the proposed Dibden Terminal."

Inquiry chairman Michael Hurley heard that existing ports were capable of increasing their capacity.

"In the UK Felixstowe records the highest terminal productivity levels, whereas the position at Southampton Container Terminal is much less productive," said Mr Penfold.

"Productivity is also comparatively low at the other major UK container terminals, which suggests that a considerable latent capacity is also available."

Mr Penfold dismissed suggestions that there was no alternative to the provision of a new six-berth terminal opposite the existing Southampton Docks.

He said: "Major planning and development investments are well advanced and will significantly alter the balance of the UK market.

"The Dibden Terminal is simply one possibility for port development to meet UK requirements."

Mr Penfold claimed that ABP had failed to put forward a convincing case for the new terminal.

"A review of supply and demand indicates Dibden Bay is not the only alternative available to provide the capacity additions required by the UK," he said.

Mr Penfold disputed some of the figures supplied by ABP, saying a large part of the projected demand for the new port was based on assumptions.