Judi Moylan (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to have an opportunity to participate in this debate on the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009. These amendments make modest changes to substantial legislation that was passed in 2004, the Aviation Transport Security Act. It was introduced to implement a national framework for protecting Australia’s aviation industry, airports and, indeed, the travelling public. Earlier, the Howard government also introduced the Air Security Officer Program, which placed sky marshals on selected international and domestic flights.

We just heard the member for Dobell saying that many of us have experienced inconvenience at airport check-ins, but I think we are all pleased that we can be assured that there is good security in our airports and that we are reasonably protected from the kind of chilling events that we saw unfold in the United States in 2001—a terrorist act that changed security arrangements at major airports all over the world. So I do not think any of us really mind the inconvenience so much as long as we know that we are reasonably safe when we embark on air travel.

I think that, as operations have progressed, there has at times been a clearly seen need to make additional changes, and there have been amendments since the 2004 legislation was passed to incorporate various changes in the regime. I think that is understandable. Certainly the security we need has not been experienced at the level we have seen since that 2001 event. There have been reviews as well. There was the Wheeler review in 2005 and, in 2006, a report of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit on these security issues in the aviation industry.

As a result, I think, of the tightening of security worldwide, terrorist attacks on aircraft have been intercepted. Certainly the risks to the travelling public, thankfully, have been averted. Almost every country in the world has adopted very stringent security measures to protect the travelling public as well as to protect public and private infrastructure and those who work or live in it. However, government must continue to be vigilant in maintaining a high level of security at airports within their jurisdiction, making the safety of the travelling public of paramount importance.

Aviation is a vital industry responsible for connecting the towns and cities across our expansive country and ensuring fast transport to countries beyond our borders. Trade and industry, tourism and service delivery all rely on a modern, efficient air transport system, so it is really important that the public have confidence in how our airports are being administered in terms of security. In 2007 and 2008, for example, Australian domestic airlines carried in excess of 49 million passengers, and 23 million international passengers passed through Australian airports. Domestic air travel has experienced national growth of five per cent over the previous year of operation. It is therefore not surprising that a high priority has been given to security. Since 2001 over a billion dollars has been spent to boost security in Australia’s airports and aviation hubs.

Five years on, the commitment of the Howard government and the legislative framework for airport security is being further strengthened with the amendments contained in this bill. Air transport is a fast-growing industry and an essential element of Australia’s transport infrastructure. The industry contributes over $6 billion to the Australian economy annually and it directly supports 50,000 jobs, and 780 million tonnes of freight is carried by air. A significant proportion of operations are in regional areas, providing a significant boost to local economies. In fact, the increase in passenger numbers in regional areas was 11 per cent, up in 2007 on the previous figures.

Those of us who live in Western Australia—as in your state, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott—understand the importance of a strong air transport system because air travel means people and goods can be transported to the many outlying towns in Western Australia in a timely and efficient manner, ending the isolation and boosting local economies. Flights have become a part of a regular way of life for many people, whether they are commuters from Perth and the eastern state cities to the powerhouse mines in north Western Australia or businesspeople and tourists traversing the nation.

The Bureau of Infrastructure Transport and Regional Economics has forecast that there will be a four per cent increase each year for the next two decades in air passenger movements in Australian airports. Around the country there are approximately 180 security controlled airports. While some of these are major city hubs, many are in smaller regional airports and currently when an airport is designated as a security controlled airport it becomes subject to the same blanket regulations and requirements regardless of its size, location or capacity as other so classified airports.

This bill will introduce a classification system so that individual airports may be assigned more appropriate legislative requirements, depending on the need and relative risks associated with each of the airports. Other amendments arising out of this bill include the extension of aviation security inspectors’ power so that they can inspect security controlled premises outside the airport grounds without notice and can issue compliance control directions in a wide range of circumstances. The sanction regime is strengthened by the introduction of enforceable undertakings that are stronger than mere warnings but less severe than restricting the operation of an aviation industry participant. It is highly desirable that all Australian airports operate in a nationally consistent way and under a nationally consistent framework, and this legislation should deliver such an objective. It is my hope that further advancements will be made in this vein in the near future for strengthening of legislation and regulation concerning all other aspects of airport operations.

In Western Australia we have recently had first-hand experience with the consequence of what appears to be an inconsistent and inadequate approach to changes to air flight paths and remedies for members of the public who are subjected to the consequences of those changes. On the face of it, it appears that there is a lack of clear legislation and regulation governing these changes and the consequences that people face. Major changes to flight paths at Perth Airport have taken place without adequate community consultation. Not unreasonably, residents in affected areas are extremely upset, indeed angry, about this situation. Many people living in the suburbs of Glen Forrest, Bickley and Chidlow are experiencing flights on an hourly basis between midnight and six o’clock in the morning and the amenity and peaceful enjoyment of their homes has been dramatically impacted.

These are not new issues. Disaffection of the public about the way in which airport operations are managed and the inconsistencies from one capital city airport to another has long caused considerable angst. There is a long history of private members’ bills and motions in relation to problems with airport noise, changes to flight paths and lack of open and public accountability and consultation in this place, and often there has been considerable bipartisan support for changes to be made, as there is for this for this amendment bill before us today.

I take the opportunity in speaking to this bill to raise these issues because three weeks ago I sent a survey about the changes to air flight paths to 3,500 constituents in affected suburbs of Pearce. We have already had 466 returns and only 4.5 per cent of the respondents were aware of the changes before they were subjected to the constant noise that has had a profound impact on their quality of life; 95.5 per cent of respondents were not aware of the decision to change the flight paths and yet they are very directly and very profoundly affected by this event.

The member for Grayndler, who is now the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, actively represented his constituents affected by aircraft noise at Sydney Airport when in 1999 he presented a bill to establish an aviation noise watchdog or an ombudsman for aviation. When he spoke to the Aircraft Noise Levy Collection Amendment Bill 2001 he said:

The practical impact of aircraft noise on the people in the communities that I represent is much greater than suggested by the theoreticians, the forecasters who sit comfortably in offices in Canberra.

While I wholeheartedly agree with this observation—and it is for that reason that I support the extension of a uniform but flexible national framework not only for security issues but also for all aspects of airport operation and particularly for security as we are achieving in these amendments today—more recently, in 2007, the minister contributed to a debate on the Airports Amendment Bill 2006 and said:

We will revisit key issues in government in a broader review of the legislation to make sure that airports act in conjunction with local communities rather than disregarding them.

I say, ‘Hear, Hear!’ to that because it is exactly the experience of the people of Pearce and others in the Perth metropolitan area who going through that now, and they feel very aggrieved because they are disregarded in changes made to flight paths. The minister’s colleague the member for Melbourne, now Minister for Finance and Deregulation, said when speaking to the Adelaide Airport Curfew Bill in 1998:

We in the opposition say that everybody in Australia who lives in the immediate vicinity of a major airport should be entitled to insulation based on a small ticket tax on the basis that it is offered in Sydney. That should be done on the same basis of equality right across the country.

          …            …            …

There is no reason why you should not have equality of treatment across the country.

Now that the member for Grayndler is the responsible minister and the member for Melbourne is the finance minister, I call on them to implement these policy objectives with haste, not just for the people of Pearce and Grayndler but for the many thousands of Australians who have no opportunity to engage in any meaningful consultation on the aircraft noise that so affects their quality of life. The legislation before us is a timely reminder that it is the responsibility of the Australian parliament to act to ensure that there are nationally consistent frameworks for all aspects of operation of Australian airports, not just for matters of security but for those aspects of airport administration, such as flight path consultation and noise abatement measures, where there is a constant and invasive presence in people’s lives. There is a need for real bipartisan action to better manage the operation of air traffic. We need a consistent national approach to a contemporary issue that will continue to grow.

This is an issue that will not go away. Just as we need to constantly upgrade and consider the security issues for airports we also need to look at their operations as they grow and develop. For example, Perth Airport have already achieved their 2015 passenger movement targets. There is a master plan for an expansion program and there will be a greatly increased amount of traffic through that airport. So it is not just the security issues that need our full bipartisan attention. All issues in relation to operations of major city airports, in particular, need a bipartisan approach to give consistency and fairness right across the country, not just to people who live in one city but to people who live in all cities and people who are affected by the worst aspects of increasing aircraft movements.

Airports and the aviation industry generally are an integral aspect of Australia’s transport infrastructure. That is fully understood and it is appreciated. We can be very proud of our aviation industry and, with proper consultation and review processes, we can ensure that it is not a zero-sum game between those who are affected by aircraft noise and pollution and those who use the aircraft and those who run businesses which rely on air traffic. But, returning to the specifics of this bill, maintaining public confidence in the safety of air travel is a very high priority, and anything that can be done to further refine and expand the screening of passengers and checked baggage is welcome progress. Let us not forget that it was the coalition in government that strengthened the regulatory framework for aviation security, with the flexibility to respond as required, and took immediate action to put air marshals on both domestic and international flights.

The confidence of the public can be easily shattered, and that is why we in this place have a grave responsibility to make sure we are doing everything we can to maintain public confidence. We have seen unfold during this past week, and in recent times, events in Britain, so the public want to feel secure when they travel by air. It is highly commendable that the responsibility for managing security of Australia’s airports is being advanced today on a bipartisan basis. It demonstrates that, when there are grave matters of national interest, we can come together and pass sensible and vigorous legislation in this place to make sure that those aims are achieved. These are sensible amendments which will further strengthen the process of enhancing aviation security which originated in 2001.

We think of air transport in terms of tourism, trade and commerce, but it is also very important in delivering emergency services around this country. I am very proud of the fact that in Western Australia my great-uncle was responsible for the fledgling services that became the Flying Doctor Service and the bush nursing association in Western Australia. I think often about his contribution to health care, particularly in the regional and rural areas of the big state of Western Australia. Whether it is flying sick people to major city hospitals or fighting fires, today it is a fact of life that we are more and more reliant on air transport to achieve these objectives in the interests of public safety and public service. I pay tribute to all the men and women who carry out what is sometimes very dangerous work flying sick or injured people to major hospitals and to those who are involved in flying aircraft to prevent the spread of fire. They are dangerous occupations, and we have seen some great heroics in the recent terrible events in Victoria. This is an opportunity to say thank you to the many men and women throughout Australia who fly planes as a public service.

The next phase in airport management, I hope, is to extend a national framework to all aspects of airport operations to cover important issues such as airport noise abatement and the introduction of clear and consistent guidelines for community consultation to be undertaken by airports and Airservices Australia when flight paths are changed. We understand that there are times when changes are necessary in the public interest, due to safety issues. At a recent meeting that I attended in Perth, Airservices Australia made the point that they are no longer funded by government; they get their funds from the airlines and the airline industry. That is a conflict of interest, because it means that they do not feel any great need to consult the public about the changes. We are never quite sure. We understand that there probably are safety issues but we have not to date seen the evidence to demonstrate that the decisions to change the flight paths in Perth were made on the basis of safety. Some constituents who have expertise have done an extrapolation which appears to show that a lot of the flights have been taken away from the western suburbs and have been transferred to and concentrated over the eastern suburbs. The time has come for some independence and for the opportunity for the public to have a say about these kinds of changes before they actually occur and have a profound impact on their lives.

I commend this bill, which strengthens the security in all airports around Australia, to the House.

See this speech in context