Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I recently received the latest Adelaide Airport curfew dispensation report from DOTARS covering the period 1 October to 31 December 2006. There have been a few teething problems with the administration of the curfew over time, not least of which was actually finding out whether it was being observed, breached with permission or even breached without permission or, as it is called, dispensation.

A number of ministers have reinforced the legislative argument for observing airport curfews through the issuing of strongly-worded press releases and increasing the fine for curfew breaches without dispensation. It has been argued that, as airline companies came to understand the curfew at Adelaide and Sydney and appreciated that it was no trifling matter, their compliance with the curfew improved. What this probably means is that their ability to work within the system and thus conduct their business without financial penalty has improved as well, but I question the extent to which the dispensation mechanism is currently seen as a rubber stamp for airlines which miss the 11 pm deadline. I question whether any airline planning their activities in preparation and support for a scheduled flight might factor dispensations into consideration, taking the easier option of blurring the time lines and taking off unnecessarily late.

DOTARS have designated curfew officers on call 24 hours a day to accept and decide on applications for curfew dispensations. In the most recent quarter, each of the five requests for dispensations was approved. The reason given in the dispensation report was that the delegate was satisfied that the circumstances met the dispensation guidelines criteria. The guidelines say, by and large: ‘Don’t worry about the 11 pm curfew commencement. Read it as 11.30.’ Worse than that, further down, they actually identify the commencement of the real curfew. They say, ‘Any application for operations after midnight, unless able to demonstrate exceptional circumstances, would expect to be refused.’ So, in effect, they are saying: ‘Before midnight, expect to be granted dispensation. After midnight, tell them we have a curfew in place.’ How much emphasis do DOTARS place on confirming the curfew’s purpose with the airlines—the 11 pm curfew? Do they actually impress upon airlines the need to observe the curfew? Rejecting a few dispensations would certainly do that.

Of course, weather and safety concerns need to be taken into serious consideration; no-one is arguing about that. I call on the Minister for Transport and Regional Services to emphatically confirm the expectation that the 11 o’clock curfew means no incoming or outgoing aircraft covered by the curfew between 11 pm and 6 am. To not do so, allowing airline compliance with only approximate curfew commencement and end times, seriously undermines the effectiveness of a very good measure which is generally appreciated by the local population.