Geoff Lyons (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise on this occasion to add my comments on the Aviation Crimes and Policing Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 [2011]. May I say from the outset that the government is strongly committed to strengthening aviation security in Australia. This commitment is the driver for these amendments. They come after a comprehensive review by the Attorney-General’s Department. The purpose of the bill is to strengthen the existing legislative framework surrounding Australia’s international and domestic aviation security regime. The government has enhanced the Australian Federal Police’s role at Australia’s 11 major airports, provided significant funding for a range of aviation security related initiatives and worked closely with the states and territories, other countries and the aviation sector. The government has also consulted with key stakeholders to make sure we get this right.

In the federal budget, the government provided $759.4 million over the next four years for policing at Australian airports. The funding supports the AFP presence at Australia’s 11 major airports, its intelligence gathering and investigation capability as well as its Regional Rapid Deployment Team capacity and Air Security Officer Program. On 9 February 2010 the Prime Minister announced a series of measures to strengthen international and domestic aviation security totalling $200 million. These measures include $17.8 million to increase the number of firearms and explosive detection dogs at major international airports by 50 per cent; $12.3 million for 2010-11 to maintain the AFP presence at major airports; and $24.9 million for Customs and Border Protection to undertake a further phase of the Enhanced Passenger Assessment and Clearance Program. This demonstrates the Labor government’s commitment to aviation security. These are measures that can give Australians peace of mind.

Looking at the specifics of this legislation, the amendments in this bill include three new offences to be inserted in the act. The first new offence is assaulting a crew member, which will carry a maximum penalty of 10 years. The second, reckless endangerment of the safety of an aircraft, is an action likely to endanger life or cause serious harm. The third offence is directed against having dangerous goods onboard an aircraft that are likely to endanger life or cause serious harm. This will carry a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment to reflect the seriousness of this offence.

The internal review by the Attorney-General’s Department indicated that there are a number of penalties in the act as it stands that do not reflect the seriousness of these offences. For example, under the Criminal Code a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment could apply to a person who is found guilty of making threats to contaminate goods. In comparison, under the existing provisions of the Crimes (Aviation) Act, a person who makes a bomb threat could only be imprisoned for a maximum of two years. This is a very low penalty given the very serious disruption and potential danger that such a hoax could create—for example, if a flight is redirected as a result or if an airport has to be evacuated. The revised penalties are a very important factor in this bill and address the inconsistencies we currently face.

The penalties in the act have four distinct tiers ranging from life imprisonment for serious offences such as hijacking or destroying an aircraft in flight to tier 4, which includes general offences and much shorter imprisonment terms. Attacks and threats put lives at risk, cause great distress and impose unnecessary burdens on our aviation industry. This is why these arrangements are so important. These crimes not only cause great distress and inconvenience but can also compromise public safety. The Australian Federal Police, other agencies and the aviation sector continue to meet the complex challenges and threats, but they need to be supported by up-to-date laws with penalties that provide a deterrent and that recognise the seriousness of aviation related crimes. The AFP also need to be able to use their powers in the airport environment. As Minister Brendan O’Connor said in his second reading speech on these amendments:

The Australian Federal Police and other agencies continue to meet complex challenges and threats within the aviation environment. To do their work effectively, the AFP need to be supported by appropriate laws that provide deterrence and recognise the gravity of aviation-related crimes.

These changes do exactly that. This bill proposes a number of changes to the penalty provisions of the Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991. The proposed increases to the penalty provisions in the Crimes (Aviation) Act will ensure that the maximum penalties that could be applied to aviation related offences are consistent with the current criminal law benchmarks. They also ensure that the penalties that apply reflect the serious nature of the crimes. The new offences are designed to cover gaps in the coverage of the existing offences under the Crimes (Aviation) Act. These offences were widely supported by the aviation sector during the consultation process. These are important changes that should not be delayed.

On 18 December 2009 the Minister for Home Affairs announced the government’s decision to accept the federal audit of police capabilities. The Beale review recommended a move to an ‘all-in’ policing model at Australia’s 11 major airports. Under the new arrangements, the AFP will become responsible for policing and security at these airports. This new model will be implemented over a period of three to five years in close consultation with the states and territories. The proposals in this bill relating to AFP powers are designed to support the move to an all-in policing and security model by ensuring that the AFP have access to a full range of their powers when investigating offences committed at certain airports.

To put all of this into perspective, our airports are busy places. In 2009, 33 million passengers moved through Sydney airport and more than 24 million passed through Tullamarine airport. We need to ensure the safety of workers and the people who pass through these airports. Clear, effective and strong laws are a key element in airport security. This amending legislation is crucial for Australian aviation security. The government’s highest priority is the safety and security of Australians. It is vital that we remain vigilant and take the steps that are necessary to protect Australian citizens and Australian interests. I commend the bill to the House and encourage those opposite to do the same.

See this speech in context