The six-month extension again required for the completion of the problem-plagued $4.4 billion Oakajee port and rail project in Western Australia adds up to the mounting woes of the proposed deepwater port, following numerous delays in the past.

First conceived for almost three decades now, both the federal and state governments have already allocated close to $700 million for the realisation of the ambitious undertaking, which would mostly cover for the facility's shipping channel, breakwater, turning basin and administration offices.

Analyst said that once completed, the Oakajee facility would serve as the gateway for more iron ore investments in Western Australia and give the lead for the eventual establishment of an industrial hub in the region that could reshape the landscape of Australia's Midwest territories.

Yet funding has always been the project's perennial concern as private sector finances seemed hard to come by and even foreign investments, which were anticipated to pour down the bulk of the financial requirements of the undertaking.

The viability of the Oakajee project has always been put to test despite the unflinching support of WA Premier Colin Barnett, a backing that dates back to his role then as the state's Resources Development Minister in the 1990s.

That Labor government of Richard Court spent $20 million to acquire and clear the proposed site of the Oakajee port and rail facilities and with the mining boom that engulfed the Australian economy in the following decade, a greater port and rail network plan for the region was conceived with specific focus on Oakajee.

By the third quarter of 2010, Mitsubishi Corporation of Japan was reported to have considered crashing out of a joint venture project in the area which was regarded as significant for the project's future but that was resolved and the program moved on.

However, the new delay spawned another onslaught of doubts but Oakajee Port and Rail chief executive John Langoulant dismissed the suggestions of pessimism on the project by pointing out that Oakajee's complexity should be taken as a challenge not as a hurdle.

Mr Langoulant argued that the daunting task of completing the Oakajee project should naturally meet glitches and delays and at this stage, he asserted that "a six month extension in a project of this scale, and with its projected 50 year life, is minor."