A parliamentary question addresses Fortescue Metals Group's application for railway access in the Pilbara, questioning the government's role in ensuring BHP adheres to third-party access provisions under the 1964 state agreement.

AnsweredQoN 794Legislative Council
Asked
29 September 2004
Portfolio
State Development

QuestionView source ↗

With regard to the application by Fortescue Metals Group Ltd - FMG - for access to railway construction in the Pilbara to expand iron ore exports to China, I ask - (1) Does the minister concede that under the terms of the 1964 BHP state agreement Act there are clear provisions for third party access to rail infrastructure? (2) Will the minister table any submissions made to the National Competition Council in this regard? (3) Does the minister support the FMG strategy of opening up third party access to port and rail infrastructure to increase competition within the current BHP-Rio Tinto duopoly? (4) Will the minister explain why the Government has not taken a role in compelling BHP to adhere to the terms of its state agreement Act? Hon KEN TRAVERS

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised - (1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(1) Does the minister concede that under the terms of the 1964 BHP state agreement Act there are clear provisions for third party access to rail infrastructure? (2) Will the minister table any submissions made to the National Competition Council in this regard? (3) Does the minister support the FMG strategy of opening up third party access to port and rail infrastructure to increase competition within the current BHP-Rio Tinto duopoly? (4) Will the minister explain why the Government has not taken a role in compelling BHP to adhere to the terms of its state agreement Act? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised - (1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(2) Will the minister table any submissions made to the National Competition Council in this regard? (3) Does the minister support the FMG strategy of opening up third party access to port and rail infrastructure to increase competition within the current BHP-Rio Tinto duopoly? (4) Will the minister explain why the Government has not taken a role in compelling BHP to adhere to the terms of its state agreement Act? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised - (1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(3) Does the minister support the FMG strategy of opening up third party access to port and rail infrastructure to increase competition within the current BHP-Rio Tinto duopoly? (4) Will the minister explain why the Government has not taken a role in compelling BHP to adhere to the terms of its state agreement Act? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised - (1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(4) Will the minister explain why the Government has not taken a role in compelling BHP to adhere to the terms of its state agreement Act? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised - (1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised - (1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised - (1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(1) The Iron Ore (Mt Newman) Agreement Act 1964 includes obligations whereby the company would agree to arrangements for third party access to rail facilities on reasonable terms and charges, provided it did not unduly prejudice or interfere with the company’s operations. The State has subsequently negotiated the rail transport agreement which sets the principles and guidelines by which the parties should negotiate to arrive at a commercial solution. (2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(2) The Government has yet to make a submission to the National Competition Council. (3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(3) The Government supports the concept of third party access to significant infrastructure facilities. (4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.
(4) The Government works with agreement Act companies to ensure that obligations under state agreements are met. In the case of third party rail access the essential ingredient is that a commercial agreement be struck and the rail line operations not be unduly prejudiced.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more