Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Energy and Resources) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to speak this evening on the Transport Security Amendment (2008 Measures No. 1) Bill 2008. This is an important bill because it continues Australia’s strong record of maritime and aviation security, clarifying regulatory arrangements for maritime safety at Australia’s most important access points and giving greater flexibility and certainty to industry players in their own security arrangements. The bill provides a consistent regulatory security framework for the maritime and offshore industries. As we have heard, this bill amends both the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003, better known as MTOFSA, and the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004, ATSA, in response to a 2007 review by the Office of Transport Security, to enhance security procedures at our ports, airports and offshore facilities. The measures provided for in this bill have significant practical effect and make for a more cohesive regulatory framework. When we talk about the security of our borders, the Australian people and our infrastructure, nothing is more important. The world changed after September 11, 2001. New threats emerged which required, and will continue to require, vigilance, determination, responsiveness and foresight.

In government, the coalition responded swiftly. Following September 11 2001, the international community had to implement systems to protect the maritime transport sector and the aviation sector against the threat of terrorism. In response to the new threats, the International Maritime Organisation developed the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code, providing that all security regulated ports, port facilities, offshore facilities, port and offshore service providers and ships were required to implement security plans and to undergo security risk assessments.

In Australia, the coalition government did not hesitate to meet these international best practice standards. It introduced the Maritime Transport Security Act 2003, which implemented that code. In the following year, it was amended to include offshore facilities and renamed the Maritime Transport Security and Offshore Facilities Act. Similarly, the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004, ATSA, requires aviation industry participants to have approved transport security plans and implements Australia’s obligations under the convention on international aviation, the Chicago convention.

This bill before us today proposes amendments to security regulations for maritime participants, including offshore bodies, and aviation participants. It is vital for national security and safety that maritime and aviation industry participants have security plans and programs in place detailing security measures and procedures—which they already do. These measures are designed to be preventative. Following extensive risk assessments, the security plans lodged by those participants must detail safeguards against unlawful interference. The legislation operates on the premise that those in the industry are best positioned to know their own weaknesses and what security measures are required to protect their facilities, people and resources. This is done through their own risk assessments and security planning.

As I have mentioned, existing legislation requires certain industry participants to have security plans or programs which have been approved by the Secretary of the Department of Transport and Infrastructure. However, as currently drafted, there is ambiguity in both MTOFSA and ATSA as to whether industry participants may legally hold multiple approved plans at any one time. This is obviously of great practical significance in both the maritime and aviation industry given that participants may operate more than one operation at several different locations around Australia.

Amendments in schedule 1 of this bill will enable the department secretary to approve both aviation and maritime industry participants to hold multiple security programs or plans at once. Also, the amendment validates those participants who operated with multiple plans prior to the commencement of this act. This makes sense and gives legal certainty to participants. There are a number of industry participants who have a number of operations throughout this country as well as offshore. It is simply not practical or indeed possible to have one security plan applicable to several sites. For example, an offshore drilling facility will likely have facilities at another offshore location or possibly even in port. The security needs will be different at the different sites.

Regarding amendments to the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2004 specifically in relation to the maritime and offshore participants, the bill includes an amendment to change the definition of ‘Australia’ to include its external territories. As the act presently stands, it is unclear whether a foreign regulated ship visiting an external Australian territory would be obligated to comply with the requirements of the MTOFSA. There is no doubt that ships visiting Norfolk Island, Christmas Island or Cocos Island should have to comply with the same security measures and reporting information as those destined for mainland Australia.

Furthermore, this legislation will allow maritime, ship and offshore security plans to be operative for up to five years. The act presently stipulates that security plans can be approved by the department secretary for a period of five years only. The change will mean that they can be approved for up to five years as opposed to only five years. The amendment will allow security plans to last anywhere between one and five years. This means that Australia’s maritime security systems can respond appropriately to changes in our security environment within a five-year period and more readily adapt to the operational requirements of industry stakeholders. Since September 11, we are more aware that we have to have the capacity and the flexibility to respond appropriately to emerging threats and to make improvements in counterterrorism technology. This amendment provides for that flexibility.

One of the major amendments to the existing legislation creates a consistency in mapping standards. This is important for maritime and offshore participants. Currently, there is a lot of variation between the format, quality and accuracy of maps that must be submitted during the approval process of a security plan. Through the introduction of nationally consistent mapping standards, the accuracy and integrity of Australia’s maritime security plans will be vastly improved. The bill provided for regulations to be made prescribing appropriate mapping standards for maritime security zones and security regulated port boundaries. This amendment will improve clarity and consistency in security plans across Australia and will improve the overall operation of the act.

Strong economic management meant that over recent years there was more to invest in national security and better infrastructure. In government, the coalition showed its commitment to making sure that threats to security were met before they reached the shores, quarantining Defence cuts from the budget. Following 9/11, to better secure Australia at home, the coalition invested more than $10 billion in improving security capabilities, including intelligence and the protection of vital infrastructure. No-one can disagree that maritime and aviation security is paramount. Our economy relies heavily on trade—imports and exports—and as such protection of these important assets is vital. In fact, Australia, in terms of tonnes of cargo shipped and kilometres travelled, is the world’s fifth largest shipping nation.

We must be vigilant in meeting internationally recognised standards. Every threat must be considered and planned for. The International Maritime Organisation reports that maritime security experts believe potential threats to security could come in the form of hijacking located oil tankers and grounding them in environmentally significant areas or using tankers to cause chaos at ports and large anchorage areas. With regard to aviation security, there is no question that security has improved tenfold over recent years. Airline passenger traffic is constantly rising. For example, airport passenger traffic for the year ended July 2008 was 23.4 million people, which is a 5.2 per cent increase on the year ended July 2007. We cannot afford to be haphazard in approaching national security. Procedures for access, screening, checking in and baggage handling must all be detailed in security plans.

This bill makes practical changes to existing legislation, enabling operators to better streamline existing security measures and administrative requirements. Consultation with the industry, including the Australian Shipowners Association, Shipping Australia Ltd and the Association of Australian Ports and Marine Authorities have seen full support for these legislative changes as they are conforming to existing industry practices. With a large number of security plans and programs up for renewal in July 2009, this legislation is timely.

We are obliged to make sure Australia’s transport system is as safe as possible. Since 2001 Australia’s counterterrorism framework has improved. The Office of Transport Security plays a vital role, acting as a regulator for the aviation and maritime industry. An efficient and safe transport system is the key to our country’s prosperity.

The coalition supports this bill’s amendments to existing legislation and is proud of our track record on matters of national security. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context