Tom French (Moore, Australian Labor Party) | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Aviation Consumer Protection Bill 2026 and the related bills. At its heart, this package is about a simple standard. Australians who pay for air travel should be treated fairly, told clearly what is happening and given a proper pathway when things go wrong. That should not be controversial. In a country like Australia, aviation is not just another service; it is part of how our nation functions.

I represent Moore in Western Australia. We live on the other side of the continent from this parliament and Western Australians understand distance in a very practical way. When a flight is delayed or cancelled in Perth, the alternative is rarely simple. You cannot just jump in the car after work and be in Canberra, Sydney or Brisbane the next morning. I have family across the country, as many Australians do. Air travel is how families stay connected. It is how people get to weddings, funerals, medical appointments, work commitments and holidays saved for over many months I worked as an electrician, including as a FIFO electrician, and, for FIFO workers, flights are not an optional extra. They are how people get to site and how they get home. A delayed flight home after a long swing is not just a line on the departures board. It can mean missing dinner with kids, missing a school event or leaving a partner carrying the load for another night.

Air travel connects workers to jobs, families to each other, regions to services and Australia to the world. Australians are reasonable people. They know that aviation is complex. Weather changes, aircraft require maintenance, crews have safety requirements, and global events can disrupt fuel markets and flight paths. Most people do not expect perfection. What they do expect is honesty, clear information, practical assistance and a complaint process that works. Too often that has not been the experience.

Over recent years, Australians have dealt with cancelled flights, delays, missing baggage, damaged mobile aids, confusing travel credits, poor communication and a complaint system that leaves the passenger doing all the work. COVID-19 placed enormous strain on the aviation system. Families were separated, trips were cancelled, refunds were delayed, and many consumers were left unclear about their rights. The pandemic was extraordinary, but it exposed weaknesses that had been developing for some time. Since then, airline performance has improved in some areas, but the underlying problem has not disappeared. The current system has relied too heavily on the industry policing itself. That has not produced the standard Australians are entitled to expect.

The conflict in the Middle East has again reminded us global disruption can affect Australian travellers quickly. Flight routes can change, fuel supply chains can tighten, and international uncertainty can flow through domestic fares and services. Travellers should not be left at the gate trying to work out whether they are entitled to a refund, rebooking, accommodation, transport or basic information. People should not need to become amateur lawyers while standing in an airport queue. This bill package replaces uncertainty with clearer standards, weak complaint handling with independent dispute resolution and voluntary arrangements with proper oversight. It is the most significant aviation consumer protection reform ever introduced by an Australian government.

The Aviation Consumer Protection Bill 2026 establishes the legal foundation for a new aviation consumer protection framework. It enables the creation of the Aviation Consumer Protections Charter. That charter will set minimum standards for airline services, airport services and airport accessibility services. The detail of those standards will be developed through subordinate legislation following consultation. That is a sensible way to proceed. Aviation is operationally complex. The standards must protect consumers while still being practical for the sector to implement. The charter will deal with the minimum treatment consumers can expect from airlines and airports. That includes delays, cancellations, communication, complaint handling, booking information, baggage and accessibility. This is a necessary shift. Consumers should know what they are entitled to when a flight is disrupted. A right nobody understands is not much of a right at all.

The bill also establishes the Aviation Consumer Protection Authority as a regulatory function within the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts. The authority will be responsible for systematic monitoring, compliance and enforcement. Individual complaints need to be resolved, but sector-wide patterns also need to be identified. If an airline repeatedly fails to communicate properly with passengers, that is not a series of random inconveniences. It is systematic failure. If accessibility services are repeatedly not delivered, that is not just poor customer service; it is a barrier to equal participation. The authority will be able to look across the sector, monitor compliance and take enforcement action where required.

The bill also enables the authorisation of an independent external dispute resolution scheme known as the Aviation Consumer Ombuds Scheme. At present, too many passengers must pursue complaints through pathways that are confusing, slow and seen by many consumers as too close to the industry itself, and that does not build confidence. The Aviation Consumer Ombudsperson will provide an aviation-specific pathway for passengers whose complaints have not been resolved directly by the airline or airport. The ombudsperson will be able to assist through investigation, conciliation and determinations. Where a regulated entity has not acted fairly and reasonably, the ombudsperson will be able to require action. That gives consumers somewhere credible to go. It also gives industry a clearer process for resolving disputes.

The package also establishes the Aircraft Noise Ombudsperson as a function within the department, independent of Airservices Australia and the Department of Defence. Aircraft noise is a serious concern for affected communities. For people living under flight paths, aircraft noise can affect sleep, amenity and wellbeing. Communities need confidence that complaints are reviewed independently. The levy bills support the framework by allowing the imposition and collection of levies to recover the administrative costs associated with the Aviation Consumer Protection Authority. It is appropriate that the cost of this framework be borne by the industry that has generated the need for regulation provided those costs are kept reasonable and proportionate.

Nobody should pretend aviation is an easy sector to regulate. Airlines operate in a difficult commercial environment. Airports vary widely in size, capacity and ownership. Regional aviation faces different pressures. Fuel prices, international conflict, weather, workforce shortages and infrastructure constraints all affect operations, and that is why the package includes flexibility. The minister will have powers to exempt individual entities or classes of entities from parts of the framework, including the charter, specified standards, levies or membership fees. The government has indicated that airports with fewer than one million passengers per year are intended to be exempt. That means the framework will apply to the largest airports while recognising the different position of smaller airports. Many smaller airports are council owned. They are critical community infrastructure. They often operate with limited resources and serve regional, rural and remote communities. It would make little sense to impose the same regulatory burden on a small regional airport as on a major capital city airport. Fairness cuts both ways. The objective is clear: protect consumers where the risk and volume justify regulation while avoiding unnecessary burdens on smaller operators that are that are essential to regional connectivity.

This package should also be seen within the broader context of competition and consumer protection in aviation. The Albanese Labor government released the Aviation white paper, passed new laws to improve competition at Sydney airport, released the draft passenger charter of rights and reinstated ACCC monitoring of airlines. ACCC scrutiny is important because aviation is a concentrated market. Where there are fewer competitors. Consumers have fewer alternatives when prices rise or service drops. That is especially important during periods of global instability. The conflict in the Middle East has already prompted discussion about fuel supply chains and disruption. Australians should not be exposed to unreasonable price increases or any competitive conduct hidden behind international uncertainty.

Airlines are entitled to recover legitimate costs. They are not entitled to use disruption as a general permission slip to treat passengers poorly. The ACCC will continue to deal with competition and Australian consumer law concerns, including misleading or deceptive conduct. The Aviation Consumer Protection Authority will focus on this aviation-specific framework. Those roles are complementary.

A large part of this reform is about setting expectations in advance. When a flight is cancelled, passengers should know whether they can get a refund or a rebooking. They should know whether they are entitled to meals, transport or accommodation, and they should know what information the airline must provide and when. Where a cancellation or significant delay is within the airline's control, consumers should not be pushed into accepting a travel credit when they are entitled to their money back, unless they prefer a credit. (Quorum formed)

See this speech in context