The Len Buckeridge-backed James Point Pty Ltd has upped the ante in its long-running battle with the Gallop government by developing plans for a container port at Cockburn Sound to compete directly with the Fremantle Port Authority.
The Len Buckeridge-backed James Point Pty Ltd has upped the ante in its long-running battle with the Gallop government by developing plans for a container port at Cockburn Sound to compete directly with the Fremantle Port Authority.
The proposed container port is in addition to its planned general cargo wharf, for which James Point has spent the past five years trying to obtain government approvals.
James Point chairman Hans Moonen said the necessary statutory approvals for its initial development “seem assured”.
Therefore, the company has applied for planning and environmental appro-val for its stage two development so that it can proceed as soon as possible.
James Point, whose shareholders include Len Buckeridge’s BGC, Roadstone Quarries, and listed engineering company WorleyParsons, secured the rights to develop a new port when it signed a deal with the Court government in 2000.
Mr Moonen said it was originally envisaged that James Point would complete the stage one development in two years and the cargo port within five years. Instead it has been delayed by the statutory approval process, and in the meantime Fremantle Ports has developed its own plans for a massive $600 million island wharf in Cockburn Sound.
Both groups recognise that the ‘inner harbour’ at Fremantle will reach its capacity by 2015 and a new container port will be needed to meet the anticipated growth in container traffic.
Mr Moonen has left no doubt that James Point and Fremantle Ports will be competing head-to-head for container traffic.
“The stage two development will incorporate a container terminal facility that will compete directly with Fremantle inner harbour and the proposed Fremantle Ports’ outer harbour development,” he said.
Mr Moonen believes the James Point proposal has a number of commercial and environmental advan-tages over the proposed ‘island’ port, which would be up to 2.6 kilometres long and linked to the mainland by a causeway.
He said he was confident the James Point port could be delivered “at a fraction of the cost” of the alternative proposal.
The James Point proposal is to create a 700-metre land-backed wharf and to reclaim about 71 hectares of land, near Rio Tinto’s HIsmelt pig iron plant.
No dredging would be required for navigation channels or basins to support the facility.
The development is located wholly within a restricted area where unauthorised vessels and beach access are currently not permitted; therefore he said there would be no loss of recreational use.
Mr Moonen said the pressure on roads leading into the inner harbour caused by container traffic created an “urgent need” for the development of new port facilities.
As well as diverting container traffic from the inner harbour, the James Point project could handle the live sheep trade.
Speaking at a CEDA seminar last week, Planning and Infrastructure Minister Alannah MacTiernan said the pressure on roads had been ameliorated by increasing the amount of container freight moved by rail, from 3 per cent to 7 per cent.
Mr Moonen said this created another set of problems, since the rail line passed through Fremantle’s tourism district.
Ms MacTiernan also noted that much of the container freight would in future move through the outer harbour. She said she would welcome private sector involvement in the outer harbour development, but only for a ‘common user’ port operated by Fremantle Ports.
