Debate resumed, on motion by Mrs Moylan:

That the House:

(1)

notes that:

(a)

substantial changes to air flight paths were made by Airservices Australia in November 2008 in relation to Perth Airport;.

(b)

Airservices Australia is a corporation which receives income from airlines and other corporate clients, and that it has control over the location of and changes to flight paths;

(c)

although the Perth Airport Noise Management Committee was advised that a Western Australian Air Route Review had commenced, the committee members were not advised of the commencement of the changes or the selection of the final flight paths;

(d)

Airservices Australia stated that the rationale for the changes to flight paths related to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) Safety Review and were required due to the need to ‘maintain safety, reduce complexity and cope with the rapid and predicted continued increase in air traffic.’;

(e)

Perth Airport has already exceeded traffic levels not expected until 2015;

(f)

prior to the changes, the CASA Safety Review and the noise impact statements were not made available to the committee;

(g)

there is no evidence of an open, accountable and effective public consultation process by Airservices Australia prior to the changes occurring; and

(h)

there has been:

(i)

a high level of public disquiet about the changes that have been made and the lack of public consultation; and

(ii)

no revision of the Noise Abatement Procedures since 2004; and

(2)

calls on the Government to:

(a)

examine whether there is a conflict of interest in Airservices Australia’s roles that may impact on the public;

(b)

implement an inquiry into the legislative arrangements governing airports with particular reference to the establishment of an open and accountable public consultation process before changes are made to aircraft flight paths;

(c)

establish a nationally consistent approach to the management of increased air traffic and changes to air flight paths with reference to noise abatement issues; and

(d)

consider appointing an Airport Ombudsman to provide an independent agency to examine public grievances in the management of changes to airport operations and their effect on the public.

See this item in context