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

I again rise to speak on behalf of the thousands of stakeholders living and working within the electorate of Hindmarsh. That includes the Netley residents group; the Southern Lockleys residents group; the Adelaide Airport Action Group, within Brooklyn Park, Cowandilla, Mile End and those areas; the residents association of West Beach; the Glenelg Residents Association; and the Henley and Grange Residents Association. Their purpose is the introduction of a mechanism by which people can have their complaints regarding airport development and noise heard by a person or body separate from the airports themselves and the federal Minister for Transport and Regional Services.

I have been campaigning with fellow residents on Adelaide Airport issues within Adelaide’s western suburbs for many years now, since way before I was elected. In fact, I was chair of the Adelaide Airport Action Group back in the early nineties through to the late nineties. At this point in our ongoing campaign, may I again say how grateful I am to the electors of Hindmarsh for entrusting me with the role of introducing our private member’s bill in the House of Representatives—something they have been advocating for a long time. The bill was to establish an airport development and aviation noise ombudsman. I was pleased to present that bill earlier on this year.

The nature of the private member’s bill is accountability. The bill’s purpose is to provide a power for complaints concerning federal airports and flights to be referred to and investigated by a totally independent umpire. These complaints comprise all manner of concerns of residents and workers within the proximity of large metropolitan regional airports to do with flight paths, noise development, the use of airport land and caps on hourly movements and curfews.

We have in Australia an ombudsman for banking and financial services. We have an ombudsman for insurance. We have an ombudsman for telecommunications and others concerned with federal operations. We also have many ombudsmen operating at a state level, such as the Energy Industry Ombudsman of South Australia.

Australians now expect there to be an office detached from both industry players and the official machinery of state to which they can take their negative experiences, their complaints, within almost any given area of activity, and have them assessed fairly and impartially by a totally independent body. It is a system that people obviously have faith in, as shown by their preparedness to engage it. So should it be with this area of federal responsibility.

Adelaide Airport is smack bang in the middle of the federal division of Hindmarsh. It is like an island detached from the rest of the electorate. It is floating above and separate from the local and state government laws that apply to the rest of us. In this respect, it is separated from each and every person that lives in its vicinity and whose lives are affected by it on a daily—should I say hourly—basis, if not minute by minute, as planes fly over. Beyond the corporation which runs the airport, it is the federal Minister for Transport and Regional Services who guides what happens on airport land through the signing off of a five-year master plan. This determines what takes place at the airport in terms of development.

With this system, locals, including local councillors and state political representatives, are quite powerless, as the pen used to tick off any draft master plan is in the hands of the federal transport minister. Residents expect more than this. If you do not like what is proposed on a neighbour’s property, for example, you can object to your local council. If the decision does not satisfy you, you can then appeal it. There are mechanisms where you can appeal these decisions within local government and state planning areas. You can also object, as I said, through the state planning bodies. But that is not so with the airport and development on airport land. This is an inconsistency that needs to be addressed.

The best way I can help my constituents is to promote the introduction of a system for the resolution of complaints that the residents of Hindmarsh will find sympathetic, helpful and, most importantly, impartial and above reproach. A little fairness goes a long way and most Australians do not have a problem with it. Even Adelaide Airport Ltd have spoken in favour of the proposed airport ombudsman’s bill. So I call on the Minister for Transport and Regional Services to be upfront on this issue and to be seen to do the right thing for the people it affects most—constituents around the country in very similar circumstances to those in Hindmarsh. We need to keep the Adelaide curfew intact, ensure it is honoured and give residents a voice and some muscle within the system through an airport ombudsman’s office. Ultimately, whether or not the bill I introduced in this place earlier this year is prioritised by the government and irrespective of whether another private member’s bill is advanced in my bill’s place, even if the government does what may be the smartest thing and gets the Department of Transport and Regional Services to put their expertise behind the creation of an independent position, I call on the minister to support the— (Time expired)

See this speech in context