battle of the tracks, page-12

It has been speculated about many times on here that this is a front for China etc. and it's all about securing supply, getting a foot in the Pilbara etc. But it is all just speculation, no stage of the future process is ever going to be stopped because the Aus govt claim conspiracy by the Chinese. They couldn't/didn't even stop it when they were blatantly warehousing shares to gain control of BRM.

Yes, FMG are going to try and delay the whole thing as much as possible. But in the end they got assistance from our government under the proviso that they operate an "OPEN THIRD PARTY ACCESS" railway. They can delay, but will eventually lose. The "Chinese" tend to be patient and take a long term approach to business anyway.

From the 14th August decision by the ERAWA:
"TPI knew, at the time it decided to proceed with its investment in the railway infrastructure, that it would be subject to third party access proposals. In particular, in order to obtain the State’s assistance with development of multi-use rail and port infrastructure, TPI made commitments to the State Government in Schedule 1 of the Railway and Port (The Pilbara Infrastructure Pty Ltd) Agreement Act 2004 (TPI State Agreement), including a commitment to operate the railway under open third party access arrangements and to use all reasonable endeavours to promote access to, and attract above-rail customers for, the railway in accordance with the Act4 and the Code.
The Authority is of the view that, in circumstances where TPI owns a regulated railway, any adverse cost impacts to TPI, FMG or other interested users of the railway must be considered in the context of TPI having contractual obligations in relation to providing third party access."

Further, if there are appeals on the grounds of insufficient access, the code has provision for the expansion of the railway as required:

"There is nothing in TPI’s submission to support the conclusion that the provision of sufficient capacity to accommodate Brockman’s proposal would preclude further expansion of the railway infrastructure that is not funded by FMG. Further, there is no evidence in TPI’s submission, or in any of the other submissions before the Authority, that would support a conclusion that such expansion is not technically or economically feasible."

Good discussion here. The document i reference to in my post is a good read for those interested.