web analytics
≡ Menu

 Ports of Darwin, Newcastle, Melbourne and more: Chinese!

03.05.21.  Port of Melbourne sold to consortium backed by China in 2016
Sky News host Chris Smith looks at  Australian infrastructure now under influence of the Chinese communist Party MedCare Asia Pacific Director Andrew Phelan says the “world has changed” since a consortium, including the Chinese sovereign wealth fund, bought the Port of Melbourne in 2016. China’s sovereign wealth fund, the China Investment Corp, was part of a consortium of domestic and global funds which bought the port back in 2016. It comes as concerns grow around Chinese ownership of the Port of Darwin and the Port of Newcastle. “The world has changed, and I think these deals should not go ahead,” Mr Phelan said.
Source: Sky News

{ 27 comments… add one }
  • Ozman 03/05/2021, 6:17 am

    Phelan might think the world has changed, but in reality, as far as China is concerned, nothing has changed. Wolf Warrior Diplomacy has always been the deal.

    China seeks to own important infrastructure in countries that it relies upon food to feed its population and natural resources for its economy. There is no non-CCP company of significance that is not controlled by the Chinese government.

  • JS 03/05/2021, 6:32 am

    No way should critical infrastructure as ports be sold off in the first place. Maybe leased but only to 100% Australian enterprise. The extent that politicians, likely senior bureaucrats added by clever lobbyist, fingers deep in the pie compromise national independence staggers me.

    • DT 03/05/2021, 12:58 pm

      State and Territory owned infrastructure, leases signed by those owners on behalf of the people who are the owners via the government.

      It appears that some here at least are unaware of the Federal legislation passed recently with Labor Opposition support giving the Federal Government the power to block State-Territory externally influenced or connected agreements, VicGov Belt and Road Agreement with China already blocked.

  • Finn 03/05/2021, 6:44 am

    How in God’s name, let alone our own, could this happen? So quietly, so smooothly, so quickly?

    Sorry – seniors moment. Obviously 🙄 money greased the path.

    • davey street 03/05/2021, 7:22 am

      It happened in Danjing, Far South China (formerly Melbourne, Victoria) because of three words. Premier Dan Andrews. He flogged off Melbourne port to China because he’s a communist. He’s also responsible for 90% of the China virus deaths in Australia. 819 dead Victorian out of 910 in all of Australia. And no one does anything about him.

      • DT 03/05/2021, 12:55 pm

        Many here will be in shock reading your comment.

        They all think the Federal Government is responsible, they wish.

  • Penguinite 03/05/2021, 7:05 am

    Hung by the “Money” Petard. In days of old, the petard was adopted as a tool of siege to slowly strangle a city into submission. Sounds familiar! What now The Chinese have encircled us?

    • Lorraine 03/05/2021, 9:12 am

      None in Victoria, the media is just a 2nd arm of Government. Peta Credalin could do it if she has the will.

  • Graham+Richards 03/05/2021, 7:25 am

    The easiest way for the CCP to achieve these purchases is to first of all
    purchase a few officials & politicians. Let’s see if there are any willing investigative journalists, officials or politicians out there.
    I reckon we’ll see many rats running for cover!!!

  • Disgruntled 03/05/2021, 8:12 am

    Across the bloody ditch again (re China/Aus).

    I had the radio on Newstalk ZB and Mike Hosking Breakfast show was going ( the guy is very decent with his views) and there was a opinion by an X PM of NZ (I think it was John Key) who was in total agreement with the China/NZ trading goings on at present and their current discussions; There is a China Business Summit on today in Auckland and he is one of the speakers along with probably a lot of the China sycophants. Adern seems to be besotted with China; What could be expected with her background.

    He also did not see anything wrong with the recent comments of the NZ minister re security comments; Methinks five eyes should be four eyes!; I had a search around and found the interview; here it is and there is audio. Xi Jimpy is gonna get NZ!!

    https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/audio/sir-john-key-new-zealand-allowed-a-different-stance-on-china-to-five-eyes/

    Last night after the Moto GP race I went to Overnight Talk on Newstalk ZB which sometimes is quite interesting (sometimes more informative than Aussie radio) and a lot of callers to the show were not at all comfortable with how the NZ Govt is performing.

    They also have “seperation” worries with the Maori people not a lot dissimilar to our issues with our Aboriginal people and that got a lot of discussion and opinion going. Another good link!!

    https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/opinion/

  • Sir Peter 03/05/2021, 8:57 am

    Perhaps bribes could be relabeled as ‘ard erned’ cash.

    Ardern and Mahuta must be removed by ANY means possible. A skinny horse faced commie twat and a fat ugly race-baiting bitch who collectively will destroy New Zealand (aka New Xi Land)

    Anybody anywhere who votes for labour government is an ignorant fool. More so parties led by women.

    • Lorraine 03/05/2021, 9:15 am

      well you sure got that right Labor and Labor women,,,equals disaster day in day out

  • Pensioner Pete 03/05/2021, 9:36 am

    The time has arrived for a national referendum on the subject of nationalisation of critical national assets, such as ports, railways, major highways, airports, electricity/energy production and distribution and other assets important to we, the people.

    • DT 03/05/2021, 12:53 pm

      The leased ports are State Government owned public properties.

      So the new Federal Legislation used to block the VicGov Belt & Road Agreement with China can now be used to block State-Territory lease agreements, now under consideration I understand.

  • JK. 03/05/2021, 10:05 am

    And who was the treasurer when the port of Darwin was sold ?? you guesed it our present priminister, maybe our security agencies should have a good look at him, it certainly doesn’t pass the pub test.

    • DT 03/05/2021, 12:51 pm

      Leased – owned by the Northern Territory Government that leased the Port of Darwin, being a small area within Darwin Harbour.

    • Disgruntled 03/05/2021, 12:56 pm

      Yep JK. I don’t think our present prime minister is a security risk unless you mean that him being thick (as a brick) is the risk and that IS the more likely!

      • DT 03/05/2021, 12:59 pm

        How rude and based on ignorance Dis, see my comments.

  • DT 03/05/2021, 12:43 pm

    SMH

    Published: 1 May 2014

    Newcastle will receive much-needed funding to revitalise its CBD, following the lease of its port to Port of Newcastle Investments.
    The NSW Government leased the port for 98 years to deliver gross proceeds of $1.75 billion. This means an extra $1.5 billion will be invested in much-needed infrastructure, with 30% directed toward projects in rural and regional NSW.
    NSW Minister for Transport and Minister for the Hunter Gladys Berejiklian said $340 million from the proceeds would go towards revitalising Newcastle’s CBD, in addition to the $120 million the government had already allocated to the project, including a new light rail service.
    The remainder (more than $1.2 billion) will be invested in the government’s dedicated infrastructure fund, Restart NSW.
    While visiting the Hunter region, Ms Berejiklian also joined local MPs to announce public transport customers would soon benefit from a major refresh of Hunter train carriages, with a $5 million investment to upgrade the region’s 14 dedicated Hunter train carriages, with work set to get underway immediately.

    NOTE: LEASE

  • DT 03/05/2021, 12:46 pm

    ABC

    The Victorian Government is poised to go on an infrastructure spending spree after clinching a record $9.7 billion deal to lease the Port of Melbourne for the next 50 years.

    Key points:

    The State Government sold the Port of Melbourne 50-year lease for $9.7b
    Victorian Treasurer Tim Pallas had expected it to fetch $7b
    The windfall will be spent on infrastructure, level crossing removals
    The long-term lease was bought by a consortium including the Queensland Investment Corporation, Future Fund and Global Infrastructure Partners, giving the Government a bigger-than-expected windfall to spend on road and rail projects.

    NOTE” LEASE

  • DT 03/05/2021, 12:48 pm

    ABC

    Former prime minister Kevin Rudd says the federal government should conduct a cost-benefit analysis to determine whether the 99-year lease of Darwin Port to a Chinese company is justified on national security grounds.

    Key points:

    The federal government recently nullified a Victorian MOU with China
    DFAT says the Darwin Port lease is not subject to the Foreign Relations Act
    Kevin Rudd says the Commonwealth could revoke the lease for political reasons
    Landbridge secured the long-term operational control of the commercial facility in 2015 as part of a $506 million deal with the Northern Territory government.

    The lease has been controversial from the outset and has remained in the national spotlight amid rising diplomatic and economic tensions between Australia and China.

    Last month, a federal parliamentary committee recommended the Commonwealth consider reclaiming Australian ownership of the port if the lease was deemed to be against the national interest.

    NOTE: LEASE

  • DT 03/05/2021, 12:49 pm

    LEGAL AID DICTIONARY

    What is a Lease Agreement
    A lease agreement is a legal contract used when a party conveys land or personal property to another party for a specific amount of time in return for payment. The lease agreement outlines all of the aspects of the lease arrangement so that each party understands his rights and obligations under the lease. Formal lease agreements are legally binding on both parties, and breach of the agreement, or failure to uphold the provisions of the agreement, has legal consequences.

    A good example of lease agreement terms pertains to rental property. When John leases a house from David, he signs a lease agreement that specifies the location of the home, the monthly payment amount, the duration of the lease, and any other requirements of the parties, such as a ban on pets. The lease is legally binding, so if John moves out early, he may be held liable to pay for the entire length of the lease, even though he was no longer living there.

    Terms commonly included in a lease agreement:

    Duration – How long the lease agreement is in effect.
    Rent – The amount of rent that will be paid to the owner each month, and the consequences for failing to pay the agreed upon amount by the due date.
    Deposits – The amount of any deposits required, and the purpose of each deposit, and conditions for return of any deposit at the end of the lease.
    Occupancy – The maximum number of occupants permitted in the building. When referring to a car, it may list the people allowed to drive it.
    Terms of Use – The purpose for which the property is to be used, and other issues, such as illegal acts committed on the property, or with the item leased.
    Utilities – Which utilities are included in the rent, and which utilities the tenant is responsible for.
    Insurance – Whether the lessee is required to maintain insurance on the property. This is most often used in commercial rental agreements.
    Repairs and Maintenance – Who is responsible for repairs and maintenance to the property.
    Rental Agreement
    A rental agreement is similar to a lease agreement, but only provides for use of the property for a short period of time. Where a lease agreement for real property, such as a home, is commonly signed for a period of six months to one year or more, a rental agreement is usually only valid for 30 days. At the end of the rental period, the rental agreement automatically renews for the next period. This is known as a month-to-month tenancy. The terms of a lease agreement remain valid for the entire term, but the terms of a rental agreement can be changed by either party with sufficient notice.

  • Cliff 03/05/2021, 1:16 pm

    Pensioner Pete suggests a referendum on the lease of vital infrastructure (like ports).

    Given the current fracas over ‘Australian citizens/permanent residents’ being prevented from returning to Australia from India, could I suggest a second question for any such referendum – should Australia dispense with dual citizenship.

    Surely it is time we dispense with the notion of dual citizenship. There should be no hyphen-Australians. If a newcomer here feels – for whatever reason – that he/she cannot surrender the citizenship of the country he or she has chosen not to reside in, he or she should retain that citizenship and NOT take on Australian citizenship as some sort of second string.

    • DT 03/05/2021, 1:29 pm

      Agree, this should be a priority matter.

  • DT 03/05/2021, 1:26 pm

    SKY NEWS

    Department of Defence to investigate Darwin Port lease
    03/05/2021|1min
    The Morrison government has asked the Department of Defence to review Darwin Port’s 99-year lease by Chinese company Landbridge. The agreement was reached in 2015 under the then-Country-Liberal Northern Territory government. Officials will now investigate whether the company should be forced to give up its ownership on national security grounds. Prime Minister Scott Morrison delivered his strongest words yet regarding his position on the Chinese- leased Darwin Port while visiting the Northern Territory. He said if security agencies or the defence department changed their view about any piece of critical infrastructure he would “take that advice very seriously and act accordingly.”

    NOTE:

    Recent Federal legislation supported by the Labor Opposition now enables the Federal Government to overturn agreements by State Governments and Territory with foreigners.

  • AH 03/05/2021, 7:13 pm

    It is heartening to see the Commonwealth has given itself the power to overturn State and Territory agreements with foreign powers, but the situation should never have arisen in the first place.

    Leasing critical infrastructure to even friendly aliens should have been unthinkable, let alone to unfriendly aliens. Who in their right mind does that?

Leave a Comment