Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 2009 and the Transport Safety Investigation Amendment Bill 2009. These bills implement the government’s national aviation policy green paper commitment to establishing a Civil Aviation Safety Authority board and to enhancing CASA’s ability to take necessary safety action. With respect to that, I note that the primary functions of the board will be: deciding on the objectives, strategies and policies to be followed by CASA; ensuring CASA performs its functions efficiently and effectively; and ensuring CASA complies with directions given by the minister under section 12B.

Enhanced safety will be achieved through this legislation by implementing four specific actions. Firstly, an offence will be created for the negligent carriage of dangerous goods on board aircraft; secondly, CASA’s powers will be extended to regulate foreign operators; thirdly, the automatic stay provisions in relation to CASA’s power to prevent an unsafe operator from flying will be amended; and, fourthly, CASA’s investigative powers will be brought into alignment with the Criminal Code.

Whilst Australia’s aviation industry has a very good safety record, the government needs to maintain a watchful eye on the existing legislation relating to the aviation industry in Australia. It is an industry that employs roughly 55,000 people across the nation. Last year, according to the latest figures I was able to obtain, there were some 48.8 million passenger movements within Australia. There were also 23.5 million international passenger movements at airports in the major city and regional airports in Australia. That is a lot of people using aircraft services. Interestingly, last year 38 people died in aviation accidents in this country, and the year before the figure was 23. It might be coincidental that the number has increased and, when one looks at the number of people killed or injured in aircraft accidents compared to, perhaps, those killed in road accidents, the number is pretty low. But, for people who fly, there is always that concern. The loss of any life is huge, and if it can be avoided then so it should be.

Also interestingly, in the year 2003, there were 4,856 incidents reported that related to the aviation industry. In 2008, the figure was 7,833—a fairly substantial increase. Likewise, when it comes to serious incidents, in 2003 there were six reported and in 2008 there were 64. I acknowledge that that may well be a result of the better reporting procedures put in place in 2003.It does not necessarily imply that there was a dramatic increase in the number of incidents and serious incidents—it may well be that the reporting arrangements are much better and that, as a result, we are therefore able to better track what is happening. It may be that; but I do not know for certain, and I do not think that anyone else does either—it may also be the case that there has, in fact, been an increase in the number of incidents that have been investigated by the relevant authorities.

In recent times, hardly a week has gone by when we do not hear or read about an aircraft incident in some part of the world. Regrettably, when a serious accident does occur, the number of lives lost is often substantial. Even more regrettable is that most of those accidents might have been avoided if additional safety precautions had been taken. Any action, therefore, that can be taken to ensure a greater level of safety for aviation passengers should be implemented. Aviation travel has become a necessary and frequently used mode of travel by commuters, and we are likely to see aviation passenger numbers increase in the years ahead. I heard the member for Port Adelaide make a reference to that in his address earlier on, and I believe he is absolutely right when he talks about the trends in the aviation industry worldwide.

Simultaneously, many of those carriers are likely to be foreign owned airlines, as the airline industry becomes more globalised and more competitive. While competition provides passengers with cheaper prices—and we have seen a substantial reduction in some airfares—it also inevitably leads to cost-cutting by the carriers. That cost-cutting can sometimes jeopardise the safety standards that are expected of the aviation industry. With the global financial recession, one can only expect that the aviation industry will also face additional financial pressures and, in turn, that those will lead to further cost-cutting. That cost-cutting may well lead to cost-cutting in areas relating to safety. For example, the screening of goods—and, in particular, dangerous goods—that are taken on board aircraft has not always been as thorough as it should have been. I suspect—and I do not have any particular evidence of this—that there would be many examples of products taken on board aircraft where, had the authorities been aware that those goods were being taken on board the aircraft, they would never have been allowed.

Under this bill, negligence by the carriers in allowing dangerous goods on board an aircraft will become an offence, thereby creating a greater level of responsibility by the carriers. In other words, in the future, negligence will no longer be a defence from prosecution. Importantly, under this bill, CASA’s powers will be extended to include foreign operators. This is a critical change the CASA’s authority, because, presently, there is little control over the maintenance and safety standards applied by foreign airlines—yet they fly into Australia and carry Australian passengers. We have absolutely no control, really, with respect to those airline services’ maintenance standards in the countries in which they are based. I note that this provision is consistent with actions taken in the European Union and in North America with respect to these issues. Of course, the ideal situation would be that uniform aircraft safety legislation would apply across the world. If that legislation was in place, there would be an obligation on all countries and on all governments to enforce the provisions of that legislation.

I also very much welcome the provisions in this bill which bring CASA’s investigative powers in line with the Criminal Code. Investigating the cause of aircraft incidents can be a very difficult task. Therefore, providing CASA with both the investigative tools required and appropriate penalties to impose where breaches are established can only improve compliance by the carriers and improve safety for passengers. I point out that that particular provision of the bill contains a number of changes to CASA’s investigative powers and search and seizure procedures to bring them into line with current Commonwealth criminal justice procedures and practices. It will also extend powers to allow CASA to use search and seizure powers under chapter 7 of the Criminal Code. I welcome the introduction of those provisions.

Parafield Airport is a general aviation airport located adjacent to the electorate of Makin, which I represent. It is located just north of the city of Adelaide and was established almost 80 years ago. I am very familiar with the airport and with the safety concerns that have been raised with me by residents living in the area surrounding the airport over many years—because, prior to being a member of this place, I was the Mayor of the City of Salisbury, which has jurisdiction over the area in which Parafield Airport is located. Over the years, it would be fair to say that I have received numerous—probably hundreds—of representations from residents about aircraft safety issues relating to Parafield Airport. Those concerns arise because of two specific factors. Firstly, over the years, the residential development has encroached on land in very close proximity to the airport. While the airport was always there, and while the new homeowners were aware of the proximity of the airport to their homes, the fear of a mishap and of an aircraft crashing into a residential area is always there among some homeowners. Added to that is the fact that there has been a substantial level of commercial and industrial development on the airport land itself in recent years, bringing aircraft activities—particularly take-offs and landings—much closer to where people work or shop.

The second concern is that much of the airport activity—and I am referring to the flying activity at the airport—is related to a flying school, where, logically, many of the aircraft are being flown by trainee pilots. The safety record of the airport and of the training school is very, very good, and I believe that the safety concerns raised may not be warranted. But, whether they are warranted or not, they are nevertheless real in the minds of many of the residents who have raised them with me. Therefore, any additional action that we can take as a parliament to improve aviation safety will put their minds at ease and will certainly be welcomed by those residents. If those residents know that the provisions relating to airport safety have been strengthened, they will then at least have some peace of mind and will know that every possible precaution is being taken to ensure that a mishap does not occur and that their safety is not being placed at any risk.

In respect of flight safety and accidents, I refer to a comment I made when we were debating the Safe Work Australia Bill. One of the matters that I believe is sometimes overlooked is that many of the people who work in the airline industry—and I referred to some 55,000 earlier on—are obviously onboard these planes. Ensuring that we have the right regulations in place to ensure their utmost safety is also an issue of safe work practices. For them it is a work safety issue because they are employees and their livelihoods depend on working within the aviation industry, whether it is onboard the plane or at the airport itself, where many of the accidents occur. If for no other reason, there is certainly a good argument to ensure that we protect those who work within the industry and that we do whatever is possible to ensure their safety.

These amendments complement other legislative changes to aviation safety that have already been introduced by the Rudd government and bring additional peace of mind to aircraft passengers, to airline staff and to the broader community. I commend both of these bills to the House.

See this speech in context