The State Government has delayed and potentially halted the development of Len Buckeridge’s cargo port proposal at Kwinana after deciding that a competing Fremantle port authority project should be given priority.
The State Government has delayed and potentially halted the development of Len Buckeridge’s cargo port proposal at Kwinana after deciding that a competing Fremantle port authority project should be given priority.
The ruling by the WA Planning Commission is the latest setback for James Point Pty Ltd, a company backed by Mr Buckeridge’s BGC and listed engineering company WorleyParsons.
It is the second major project associated with Mr Buckeridge to have been frustrated by the Government’s planning policies.
BGC is seeking to build a new brick factory, at a time when Perth has experienced a shortage of bricks, but has been unable to secure a site.
James Point signed a contract with the Court Government in 1999 to develop a cargo port in the heart of the Kwinana industrial strip and ever since has been working on environmental and planning approvals.
The planning commission advertised amendments to the metropolitan region scheme last month, which James Point chairman Hans Moonen saw as a positive step.
However, the planning commission has decided that it cannot make a final decision on the James Point proposal until State Cabinet selects a preferred option for Fremantle Ports’ ‘island’ port, which could be 2.6 kilometres long and cost up to $600 million.
Fremantle Ports, headed by chief executive Kerry Sanderson, has released four options for public consultation, two of which (the southern options) overlap with land earmarked for the James Point project.
“Therefore, this amendment will not be considered for finalisation prior to adoption of the final preferred access route for the Fremantle Ports outer harbour proposal,” the Planning Commission said.
“If the southern option is chosen, reconsideration of the James Point port configuration will be required by the developers.”
The Planning Commission adds that James Point, which has just spent four years securing environmental approval, may need to get its amended project reconsidered by the Environmental Protection Authority.
It also notes that the Fremantle Ports and James Point proposals “could potentially coexist” but adds again that James Point may need to amend its proposal to achieve this outcome.
The competing proposals come against a backdrop of rising freight volumes at Fremantle harbour, which is expected to reach capacity in the next decade.
Mr Moonen said he was surprised by the approach adopted by the Planning Commission.
“The implication is that if [Fremantle Ports] decide to go for the southern option, then bad luck James Point,” he said.
He added that James Point was seeking legal advice.
Chamber of Commerce and Industry of WA director Bill Sashegyi, who is keen to see competition in cargo and container handling, was also surprised.
“It was not what I would have expected,” Mr Sashegyi said.
The James Point proposal has been contentious from the outset, with critics labeling it a ‘union busting’ port.
Planning and Infrastructure Minister Alannah MacTiernan has been among the critics, saying it was never subject to appropriate planning and that the contract terms were overly generous.
A spokesman for the planning commission told WA Business News that the needs of a variety of planning proposals needed to be balanced.
“A proposal is assessed on whether it will benefit the broader operations of the state’s future ports,” the spokesman said.
“These ports must be able to service all economic sectors in Perth and as such are not assessed individually but whether they contribute to the broader strategic view.”
