THE Port of Darwin was back in the headlines this week.

Like dragonflies at the start of the dry season, the controversy over the lease of our port to Chinese company Landbridge still manages to make headlines on at least an annual basis.

These stories are always driven by a federal politician looking for some low-hanging fruit.

This time it was Federal Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese.

With the Federal Government proposing new legislation that would allow it to veto deals made between the states and territories with foreign governments, Albanese said it should follow that Australia should take back the Darwin Port.

“In terms of the national interest, the Port of Darwin is critical,” he said.

Albanese has now joined Liberal Senator Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, South Australian Labor MP Nick Champion, Bob Katter and Nick Xenophon in a growing list of federal politicians who have suddenly become remarkably interested in a piece of Northern Territory infrastructure.

MORE MATT CUNNINGHAM OPINION

NT politics now just a bidding war for the votes of well-off public servants

It’s time NT politicians were upfront that our renewable energy targets are just pie in the sky

There is no place for politics in the middle of a pandemic

Time for our politicians to get on with governing instead of chasing power

Which begs the question, if our port is such an important strategic asset, why was it allowed to be neglected for so long?

When the deal was done to lease the port in 2015, it was literally sinking.

Requests from successive NT Governments to the Commonwealth for financial support to save this asset had fallen on deaf ears.

And so the CLP Government of the day went looking for a private operator to take over.

While the deal to lease the port to Landbridge created controversy at the time, politicians on both sides now agree it was a good deal for the Territory.

In 2018, Chief Minister Michael Gunner described the port deal as a great example of how Chinese investment can work in Australia.

“Landbridge have increased the refrigerated container capacity fourfold since taking over,” he told a One Belt One Road conference in Darwin.

“They’ve developed close to two extra hectares of hardstand laydown area.

“Construction will begin soon on the 34-hectare site for the Darwin Industry and Logistics Park, and in the next couple of weeks we’ll have the port expansion 30-year masterplan.”

MORE MATT CUNNINGHAM OPINION

NT election shaping up to be a three-horse race

Who do you trust in an election campaign? Certainly not the pollies

Palmerston will be crucial in deciding this year’s Territory election result

Labor’s election hopes made brighter by opposition division

The Landbridge lease has not just driven this new investment, it’s also saved the NT Government millions in the upkeep of an ailing piece of infrastructure.

Little wonder Gunner shot down Albanese’s plan to take it back.

“It wouldn’t come for free,” he said, before arguing that if the Federal Government had $500 million it wanted to invest in the NT he could find better places to invest it.

As tensions rise with China, many cite security concerns as the reason for their objection to the port deal.

But few can actually articulate what those concerns are.

One suspects if a fleet of Chinese warships decides to sail into Darwin harbour we will know about it before they arrive at the port.

MORE MATT CUNNINGHAM OPINION

We can’t delay long overdue public service cuts any longer

If you don’t pay for news, you’ll be left with the ABC

Gunner Government’s refusal to open its books goes against its own promise

NT Govt’s suddenly new ‘how can we help you?’ attitude needs to be a permanent change

It should also be remembered that the Landbridge lease included a clause that 20 per cent remained in Australian hands. Right now that 20 per cent sits with the Northern Territory Government and Gunner has made it clear it will stay that way.

This is also a commercial deal, not one between the NT and Chinese governments, and if tensions were to escalate to a war footing there is a clause that allows us to take the port back.

As Defence secretary Dennis Richardson told a Senate inquiry in 2015, the idea the lease would somehow give the Chinese Navy access to Darwin is absurd.

“It does not,” he said. “It is not factually based.”

OFFER EXTENDED: Subscribe to the NT News for just $1

A better argument might be that China is trying to exert some soft power. But if this is the concern, why is it just the Darwin Port that is singled out?

In 2016 the Melbourne Port was sold for $9.7 billion to a consortium of global and domestic funds, backed by investors including China Investment Group. And Chinese companies have a large stake in many state electricity networks.

Yet for some reason the southern politicians never mention these deals when trying to score their cheap political points.