Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Hansard source

I am happy to respond to the minister’s statement, which I only received about 20 minutes before question time. On reading the statement, I find it does not really contain anything by way of news. In fact, it is a repeat of an announcement made on 15 August about this project on the east-west runway at Sydney Airport, and the work is already underway. There is nothing breathtakingly new in the minister’s statement.

Nonetheless, it is a significant project and I know that it affects a lot of people who live in the Sydney basin. It has been the people living in the area who have, naturally, been particularly interested in how this project can be effectively managed in a way that does not unduly affect the amenity of the region. Since 2003, arrangements have been progressively implemented internationally to raise standards at airports by having a runway end safety area on all runways. Generally it has been a relatively inexpensive and easy-to-implement operation for airports. In fact, Sydney will require six of these runway end safety areas. Five have been constructed already, at a total cost of $3 million. However, this project, as the minister has said, will cost about $85 million, so this is an example of how these have generally been relatively easy to provide: five in total for $3 million, and now one is going to cost $85 million. It is because of its location. As the minister pointed out, there is very strategic infrastructure in the region, and the need to carry heavy loads, the need to protect the environment, and existing infrastructure in that area have made this an exceptionally difficult and costly process.

I take some issue with the belligerent tone of some of the minister’s opening remarks. When he said that the airport planned these works in late September 2007 he implied that the previous government was negligent in dealing with the issue. It is true that the previous government was notified of the proposal in September 2007. I understand that officials of the Department of Transport and Regional Services were alerted and then those officials informed the minister’s office. The minister’s office was concerned about the planned construction schedule and immediately sought advice from the department about what action could be taken to make sure that this project was undertaken in the best possible way. The election intervened and there was a hiatus. Of course, if the previous government had sought to intervene in those circumstances then they would have been rightfully condemned for having breached the caretaker provisions.

Nearly a year later, a satisfactory solution has been found to enable this project, which everyone agrees is required, to be conducted in the best possible way. This project does need to be done in a safe and efficient way. It will be difficult, as has been pointed out, to move cranes onto the end of a runway to lift very heavy concrete beams over an extended period of time while still enabling the airport to fulfil its responsibilities. To maintain a safe and readily available landing and take-off area will be a challenge.

The minister pointed out correctly that the Sydney Airport Community Forum has been involved in discussions about the process. I notice that he said in his statement that he had reinstated this body, but it has been in existence for many years. Under the previous government it continued under Senator Payne’s active leadership. It met as required to deal with issues. It comprises community representatives, local members of parliament, councils and the like. The current forum is very similar in style and structure to the one that has existed for many years. Mr Vic Smith, the Chair of the Sydney Airport Community Forum, provided a submission on the development of this proposal. Ironically, the forum includes a whole lot of members of parliament from both sides and has generally operated in a pretty bipartisan fashion. There was one dissenting report in this case and that came from the member for Barton, the Attorney-General, who had some concerns about some elements of the report. But, effectively, there was a bipartisan approach taken to developing the best way of dealing with this issue.

I think it also needs to be acknowledged that Sydney Airport have been constructive and have sought to find the best possible way forward. In a press release on 12 October they talked about the construction program. I will read two or three paragraphs because I think they emphasise some of the real challenges and the potential impact this project may have on people living in the area. The press release states:

While this is an essential safety upgrade, the construction program will mean that usage of the east-west runway will be restricted to take-offs to the east by some aircraft. This restriction will have two temporary operational impacts:

• High Cross-Winds: if there are high cross-winds while the runway safety area is under construction then, as sometimes happens when there is fog or thunderstorms, flights may be delayed or diverted. The construction program has been developed taking into account historical weather data about the likely occurrence of high cross-winds to minimise potential disruptions for passengers.
• Aircraft Noise: because there will be restrictions on the operation of the east-west runway while construction is underway the distribution of aircraft noise around the airport will be different. People living under the flight paths of the two north-south runways will experience an increase in the number of aircraft movements, while people living under the flight paths to the east-west runway will experience a decrease in the number of aircraft movements.

There will be no change to the airport curfew and cap of 80 aircraft movements per hour.

There will be some inconvenience associated with this construction project, like there is with almost every major infrastructure project during its construction phase. There will be some delays from time to time, though I think these will be fairly rare for passengers, and there will be some change to the noise pattern—some people will be better off, of course, while others will have to bear a slightly increased noise load.

We do have to do this. The airport is one of the most—and some would say the most—important single pieces of infrastructure in our nation. It needs to meet world standards. With very large aircraft with heavy loads now coming into Sydney the airport does need to be safe. We hope this $85 million investment will never be used. The likelihood is that it will never be used, but it is an additional safety feature and will help increase the confidence of people who arrive at and depart from Sydney Airport that they are using a facility that is of world standard and that is genuinely safe.

This is an important project. Those arriving at and departing from Sydney Airport may notice this project, although in some ways it will not be as spectacular as the new terminal buildings and other infrastructure that are currently underway at Sydney Airport. It is an important safety element. There is no doubt that the project deserves the support of the parliament. We commend Sydney Airport and the people of the Sydney basin for their willingness to work together to find the best possible way in which to undertake this project that will cause minimum inconvenience. We wish the construction project well. We hope it can be completed on schedule and that the detailed plans that have been prepared to deliver this project will be successful.

See this speech in context