A recommendation from the Ports and Maritime Administration Act 1995 Independent Review Options Paper which suggests a standardised train length of 600 metres could have massive ramifications for regional exporters.
Option D23 of the paper suggests that as part of improving coordination between supply chain participants and functions, they should 'examine the benefits of a 600 metre standard length for port shuttles - consider adopting a common train standard for port rail operations.'
The options paper suggests moving from current train lengths of up to 1200 metres to a standardised 600 metre train length for port rail operations could increase more disciplined rail operations and allow optimisation of current infrastructure and assets.
The paper said it could reduce splitting and shunting of trains, enabling trains to be turned around more quickly.
This recommendation was met with opposition at the NSW Farmers Association conference and saw an emergency motion moved - UM04 - that NSW Farmers does not support changes to the delivery models for future rail operations into Port Botany including the enforcement of standard length of trains unless regional exporters are not disadvantaged and are compensated accordingly.
ALSO READ: Dubbo PTIC females sell to $3000
Speaking at the conference, NSW Farmers vice president Rebecca Reardon said a move to 600 metre trains would have a negative impact on regional exporters.
"In itself, this is not a bad recommendation, but when you read the details one of the things they are pushing for is to reduce train length to 600 metres for port shuttle which suits the import side, not the regional exporter," she said.
"Regional exporter trains are from 900 metres to 1200 metres long.
"There is a reason for that and it is because they travel large distances and they are looking to get the economy for that freight.
"By forcing them to change the shuttles to 600 metres, potentially, may have a very negative effect on our regional exporters.
"We are open to looking at these things but we can't be disadvantaged by it given they are going to be looking at it from an importing point of view.
"If we're not careful, they will forget about us because we are only a small percentage of the total traffic through the port.
"I suspect at the end of the day, we are only a small percentage of the total containers on rail going through the port.
"If they are going to force these changes on us to suit importers, one of the answers may be they will just have to compensate regional exporters."
In seconding the motion, Bruce Reynolds said that the port cannot forget about agriculture.
