Broad coalition opposes Port relocation

Fremantle will be the biggest loser if the rushed Westport process goes ahead as planned by the Cook Government.

from L to R: Dr Brad Pettitt MLC (and former Mayor of Fremantle), Ben Lawver (City of Fremantle Councillor), Adin Lang (City of Fremantle Councillor), Belinda Green (President of Hilton Branch WA Labor) and John Dowson (President of the Fremantle Society). Credit Jean Hudson

Not only will 200-odd years of history be pushed aside as for the first time Fremantle ceases to be WA’s primary port city, but thousands of jobs will depart Fremantle too.

It has been estimated that there are up to 4000 jobs connected to Fremantle working port.

But even before those jobs leave Fremantle forever, the uncertainty created by the Westport project move will stifle economic investment in Fremantle for the decade ahead.

One of the most absurd parts of the Westport Plan is that while containers will go to Kwinana, the roll-on roll-off car trade, live animal trade, and scrap metal trade will continue in Fremantle with no plan to move them. This means that there is no opportunity to develop Victoria Quay, the south side of the Fremantle Port, in the decades ahead. This leaves a parcel of land the size of the Perth CBD sterilized and used to park new cars, the worst of all uses for this amazing bit of waterfront real estate.

A smarter and better approach for Fremantle and WA would be to move the cars, sheep, and scrap metal first, and then containers, when and if required. This approach would reduce truck movements by around 10% almost immediately, not in 2040. It would also mean that it would be possible to stage the redevelopment of Victoria Quay long before the huge tracks of land at North Quay became open to development.

Looking beyond Fremantle, the business case for moving the port is deeply flawed. The business case is predicated on exaggerated container growth numbers that assume a 3.5% growth in containers despite the last decade showing that container growth has been averaging less than half this, only 1.4%.

The State Government agencies have form on exaggerating predicted container growth numbers. Several years ago they predicted that in 2024, there would be almost 1.3 million TEUs coming into Fremantle Port, almost 40% above the 856,000 recorded.

At the heart of the Westport business case is that problematic assumption that West Australians would jump from consuming less than 1/3 of a container of goods per person per year at present, to triple this – a whole container of consumption per year per person – in the decades ahead.

This is of course untenable environmentally, but also ridiculous in a world in which the goods people are consuming are getting flat packed and getting smaller, and one in which manufacturing is returning back home.

The huge $7.2 billion cost for Westport will suck up all of WA’s infrastructure spend for the decade. This is especially the case when we are taking into account that the price tag is likely to be double this once road, rail and other infrastructure is added in.

A simpler cheaper option would be to get more containers onto rail. Currently 20% of containers out of the port go by train. It is possible to double this with a dedicated freight rail bridge something that could be built for less than one 10th of the price of a new port.

There is a broad coalition from fishers to conservationists, from left to right of the political spectrum building to oppose the rushed Westport process. It must be stopped.

* By Dr Brad Pettitt MLC

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

* If you’d like to COMMENT on this or any of our stories, don’t hesitate to email our Editor.

** WHILE YOU’RE HERE –