14.05.2014 Views

weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

23 Aug 2005 <strong>Queensland</strong> Competition Authority Amendment Bill 2597<br />

Mr MALONE (Mirani—NPA) (3.22 pm): With pleasure I rise to support the <strong>Queensland</strong><br />

Competition Authority Amendment Bill. From the outset I would like to talk a little about the twin ports of<br />

Dalrymple Bay and Hay Point, as they are in my electorate. There is some confusion from time to time,<br />

and the ports are confused one to the other, and I would like to allay that confusion. Dalrymple Bay is<br />

owned by the Ports Corporation. It currently exports about 53 million tonnes of coal per year. With<br />

upgrades in the next three to four years, the expectation is that it will export in the vicinity of 85 million to<br />

90 million tonnes per year.<br />

The Hay Point terminal, side by side to the south, is owned and operated by BHP Billiton and<br />

partners. It exports currently in the vicinity of 35 million tonnes. It is currently upgrading its facility to<br />

export somewhere between 65 million and 70 million tonnes in the next two to three years. I note that<br />

the Premier was there recently when one billion tonnes of coal had just been exported through Hay<br />

Point. Hay Point was obviously the first port to be established in that area.<br />

There has been much talk about 60-plus ships anchored off the ports. That is a fact. Some of<br />

those ships were obviously anchored there for BHP Billiton, but mostly those ships were tied up to<br />

export coal through Dalrymple Bay. The issues were numerous and rather complicated. At that time<br />

there was a need to export. There was a requirement for a lot of coal to be shipped offshore—there was<br />

a huge demand. Quite a number of ships were being directed to the port without any prior knowledge or<br />

without being ordered to carry coal. That maximised the number of ships out there. Quite a number of<br />

those, as I have said, were turning up from time to time on the off-chance that they might be loaded over<br />

a period of time. That exacerbated the whole issue, and it became national news, and international<br />

news for that matter.<br />

Members of parliament will recollect that probably four years ago the <strong>Queensland</strong> government,<br />

through the Ports Corporation, leased Dalrymple Bay to Babcock and Brown and, more importantly, to<br />

its offshoot, which was called Prime Infrastructure. It is interesting to note that Prime Infrastructure has<br />

reverted to the original parent company of Babcock and Brown. That lease was for 51 years, and the<br />

upfront payment on demand was about $580 million for the 51 years. I was not privy to the contract, as<br />

members would be well aware, but I understand that there was a requirement for the infrastructure at<br />

Dalrymple Bay to be kept in an acceptable condition over the period of the lease and that, when the<br />

lease options were taken up for the other 49 years, there would be a sign-off on the state of the<br />

infrastructure on site.<br />

I would have thought that within the contract there would be a requirement for Prime<br />

Infrastructure to upgrade the infrastructure in line with the demand by the users. The user group is<br />

comprised of a number of companies that export out of Dalrymple Bay, and they are numerous.<br />

Obviously, six or eight months ago, when those ships were sitting off the port, the users were<br />

demanding a greater capacity through the port. The port was keen to access the coal boom and export<br />

more coal. The customers were desperate to get coal and were paying hugely inflated prices for spot<br />

cargoes of coal. So there was a willingness of all parties, I believe, to come to an agreement as quickly<br />

as possible.<br />

My understanding is that the problem came about when QCA became involved and could not<br />

make a decision on a price to the users. Indeed, off the top of my head, there was a dispute for probably<br />

close to a year over what the users should pay to utilise the port and what the port required to upgrade<br />

its infrastructure. Pleasingly, that dispute has now been overcome, and there is a clear plan to upgrade<br />

the port over a number of stages over the next two to three years. Indeed, estimates vary. It appears<br />

that somewhere between $900 million and $1.5 billion could be spent at Dalrymple Bay to upgrade it to<br />

export 85 million to 90 million tonnes per year.<br />

That brings us to the issue of the rail links between the coalmines to the west and the port<br />

facilities. Currently there is a dual track from Moranbah to Hay Point or Dalrymple Bay. The train traffic<br />

on that line is quite substantial now. Sooner or later it will get to the stage where it will be impossible to<br />

put more coal on the line. There is some talk of building another access line to the south of the current<br />

dual line because that line has to come down Connors Range, which is quite steep. Some members of<br />

parliament will recollect that there was a substantial derailment at Black Mountain some years ago when<br />

both lines were closed for quite a considerable time.<br />

It is just a matter of time before there is another disaster on the range. Due to the number of trains<br />

travelling the track, it is becoming very difficult to maintain the track. I speak regularly with railway<br />

maintenance workers on the line and they are saying that the line has never been in worse condition.<br />

With that in mind, it is just a matter of time before there is another derailment that will close the line to<br />

the port for some period of time. Let us hope that none of the drivers are hurt in the episode.<br />

That brings to mind the point raised by the member for Gregory in relation to the missing link.<br />

Currently there is a line that connects Abbot Point to Newlands, and that is a non-electrified line.<br />

Newlands and Abbot Point are under capacity, particularly Abbot Point, and the missing link has the<br />

opportunity of lifting the accessibility to extra coal through that port fairly easily. However, there is a need<br />

to join the missing link, as it is called, between South Walker and Newlands. About 60 to 70 kilometres<br />

of line has to be built and there will have to be some upgrades to make that happen. I understand that<br />

there is an infrastructure task force looking at that currently. However, it will not happen tomorrow and it

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!