House debates

Wednesday, 21 June 2006

Aviation Transport Security Amendment Bill 2006

Second Reading

12:08 pm

Photo of Warren TrussWarren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Minister for Transport and Regional Services) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, I thank honourable members for their contribution to the debate on the Aviation Transport Security Amendment Bill 2006. Some were constructive, some less so. Let me say that I was particularly disappointed with some of the personal insults and criticism by the honourable member for Swan of the previous minister. That is not the way he normally addresses issues. Unfortunately, it must have been a relief speechwriter that produced that effort, because the criticism in many instances I think was unfair and inappropriate—and, I might add, in some instances inaccurate.

The honourable member for Brisbane, who led off for the opposition, usually gets his lines from the trade unions; again, from his contribution today, that is clearly where his remarks came from. But usually, when you get your lines from the trade unions, the facts are wrong. That did not get in the way of the honourable member for Brisbane’s criticisms, but it would have been more constructive if a few of his facts had been right.

It is simply beyond dispute, in spite of the criticism by some members opposite, that this government has done more to upgrade security at our nation’s airports and in the aviation industry than any in our history. Since the Wheeler report alone, the government has announced another $644 million worth of budget expenditure to upgrade security. That includes significant expenditure for counter-terrorism first response teams, money for the Joint Airport Intelligence Group, funding for community policing, significant funding for CCTV and also funding for air cargo security. Indeed, the government has committed a total $1.1 billion in aviation security initiatives since September 11, 2001, so when the opposition are critical of the government’s commitment in this regard they would not want to compare our record with their own. Clearly, little was done. I accept that the environment was different in that time, and people were not as conscious or aware of the importance of security as they are today, but in reality Labor did nothing to anticipate the growing terrorism threat across the nation and then to ensure that there was a capacity within Australia to respond. That has all been left to this government, and I think we have responded in a very powerful and effective way.

I will also deal with a couple of the other comments that were made during the debate and respond to them specifically. The honourable member for Brisbane claimed that there had only been 10,000 aviation security cards issued. In fact, there have been well over 100,000 cards issued to workers in all sectors of the aviation industry. He may perhaps have confused that with the issue of ASICs to the general aviation sector, but even there his figure is wrong. There are something like 14,000 ASICs issued to pilots by CASA alone. Maybe that is where his confusion occurred. He also was critical in making claims that Sydney airport has not met its targets for checked baggage screening. I am pleased to report to the Committee that Sydney airport is achieving 100 per cent compliance with the aviation transport security regulations and is using inline multiview X-ray checked baggage screening systems to screen 100 per cent of international baggage. So the shadow minister’s claims in that regard are also incorrect.

He made some criticism as well, and I have also heard other members opposite being critical, of security at regional airports—again, not acknowledging the very substantial expenditure that this government has provided for security programs at regional airports, particularly to deal with issues like fencing, lighting, secure locks, gates, alarm systems and CCTV. I also remind the Committee that a significant program is being completed to ensure that there are now bullet-proof doors on the cockpits of all of the major aircraft operating around Australia and, of course, a whole range of other security measures which are making our aviation system very much safer than it has ever been.

However, it is true to say that security measures really have to be risk based. No-one can remove risk entirely, but we concentrate our expenditure on the areas where we consider the risks are greatest. Clearly, the larger the aircraft, the larger the airport, the greater potential there is for some kind of a security incident. A small aircraft at a remote airport is unlikely to be the centre of a major security incident. So our layering of security initiatives is designed to take greatest effect in places where the risk is highest. That is the reason we have a layered security system which puts in place additional depths of security in places where the risks are considered greater. The honourable member for Swan in his remarks referred to incidents, some of which he acknowledged were quite ancient and would have been before current security measures were put in place. That, I think, is an example of how the multilayered system of security actually works: if somebody has breached the first layer, then there is another layer, then another layer and then another layer after that before any incident can actually become serious.

So I think it is important that we look at these sorts of issues in perspective. No government will ever be able to guarantee a regime that is absolutely risk free, but we are seeking to minimise the potential for an incident to occur in Australia. Let me say that I am thankful that those measures have been successful to date and Australia has been spared the incidents and appalling acts of violence that have occurred in other parts of the world.

Turning specifically to this legislation, let me acknowledge that the Australian aviation industry is complex; therefore, dealing with all of the various elements of having a secure system is indeed a difficult task. This is the first bill to amend the Aviation Transport Security Act, so it is an important step in the never-ending task of finetuning the legal requirements of aviation security with the changing operations of aviation businesses. All the amendments in this bill were developed in consultation with the industry.

The bill will enhance Australia’s security regime by amending the Aviation Transport Security Act in three ways. Firstly, it will enable airport operators to manage security risks within airports when hosting unusual events. Reference has been made to air shows, VIP arrivals and things of that nature. I know the honourable member for Hinkler, who is in the chamber, has been particularly interested in these sections of the act because of important fly-ins and the like that are held at Bundaberg Airport. I am confident that these new arrangements will meet the honourable member for Hinkler’s concerns and ensure that events in that city are able to proceed.

This legislation also delivers more robust regulation of air cargo and allows aviation industry participants to make simple alterations to their transport security programs. We believe that these amendments will increase our high level of aviation security, will enhance national and international confidence in Australia’s regime for handling air cargo, and will provide a flexible and targeted mechanism for airport operators to manage special events and temporary, non-routine activities that can be contained in a specific area of the airport.

In the area of air cargo, the proposed amendments will maintain the broad scope of the cargo security scheme while introducing a legal framework for regulations to provide a more flexible and appropriately modulated approach to security at each step of the transport chain. Australia’s airports are used for much more than just regular passenger services. Major international airports have to be able to host receptions for the arrival and departure of VIPs. Our regional airports are a core community infrastructure and their facilities are used for a wide range of low-risk, community based activities, including air shows and even drag racing and vintage car shows. These special event amendments will enable airport operators to effectively manage the security of the events and activities that are appropriately held at airports but which are outside the airport’s core business. This will allow airports to tailor special event zones to suit the type of event they are hosting and the assessed risk that is associated with each particular event.

The government has paid careful attention to the many issues that Australian aviation has raised in our two regular industry consultative forums: the Aviation Security Advisory Forum and the Regional Industry Consultative Meeting. This bill is a response to some of the concerns that have been raised through those processes. Let me assure the committee that the Australian government is committed to working with the aviation industry in the never-ending task of protecting Australia’s travelling public and air commerce. Whilst security is primarily a matter for the industry—the airlines and the airports—the Australian government is demonstrating its willingness to work with the industry to achieve the highest possible levels of air security in this country. I commend the bill to the House.

Comments

No comments