Port plans ‘stall’

Kim Waters
Portarlington residents fear plans for a $56 million harbour redevelopment and a commuter ferry have stalled, according to community representatives.
They have urged Parks Victoria to reveal how it will fund the harbour project and to release the results of a $60,000 survey into the proposed ferry service between Portarlington and Melbourne.
Parks Victoria released the harbour plan in 2009 and began the ferry survey last year. The Independent revealed last year that Parks Victoria was considering whether to fund the harbour development with public or private money or a mix of both.
A Friends of the Bellarine Hills spokesperson had “no doubt” the harbour redevelopment would a public/private arrangement but said the project had “disappeared”.
“It’s as though the proposal just does not exist anymore,” the spokesperson said.
“Residents are startled and shocked that nothing has been done.
“Honestly, I think that there hasn’t been any private interest, so the plans have just stalled or it’s because State Government doesn’t want to stir up trouble before the election.”
Marine Farmers Group chairman Lance Wiffen said the delay in the harbour redevelopment was “surprising”.
“I’ve seen the draft plans but haven’t heard much since,” Mr Wiffen said.
“There’s a limited lifespan on the existing facilities and it won’t take long before it has to be shut or is of no use to us.
“For us, the upgrades are crucial.”
Mr Wiffen feared a push for private funding would price marine farmers out of the harbour.
“Following the experience at Queenscliff where seemingly professional fisherman were priced out because of berthing fees and other issues, we’re hoping the commercial side of things at Portarlington could be left in the public purse.”
Liberal candidate Kurt Reider labelled the stalled projects a “political strategy”.
Bellarine MP Lisa Neville said she had requested a briefing on the survey results.
“Work is still continuing on the safe harbour plan, including funding arrangements.”
Parks Victoria did not return the Independent’s call for comment before the paper went to press.