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

by leave—In November last year the government established an independent review of Australia's aviation safety regulatory system to ensure that it is well positioned to meet Australia's future aviation demands. The review was conducted by an independent panel headed by Mr David Forsyth AM, a respected figure in Australian aviation through his previous senior managerial roles in Qantas and as Chair of Airservices Australia. Mr Forsyth was joined on the panel by two eminent overseas aviation safety experts—Mr Don Spruston from Canada and Mr Roger Whitefield from the United Kingdom. On 3 June 2014, I tabled the panel's Aviation safety regulation review report in parliament.

Since tabling the report, the government has given careful consideration to the 37 recommendations and other matters raised in the report. This consideration has been informed by close consultation with our aviation agencies and by 69 industry and public comments on the report. I am pleased today to be able to table the government's response to the report. The report confirms that Australia has an advanced aviation regulatory system in place and one of the safest regular public transport systems in the world. Australia also has sound safety governance arrangements which ensure that the regulatory, investigative and service provision roles of our key aviation agencies are properly separated.

However, given the speed with which the global and domestic aviation industry is changing, we need to look for continuous improvement in our aviation safety regulatory system. We need to update our system to reflect the growing diversity of our aviation industry. The report has identified areas where our present arrangements, structures and relationships can be improved to ensure that Australia remains a leading aviation state. The report made 37 recommendations, many relating to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, but others have implications for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Airservices Australia, my department and the Department of Defence. The government has fully agreed to or agreed to undertake a more detailed examination of 36 of the 37 recommendations.

Key aviation safety principles

In responding to the report the government has endorsed a number of key principles that should continue to underpin our future aviation safety system:

These principles and the actions which flow from them will be contained in an enhanced state safety program, an SSP. The SSP will outline short, medium and long term objectives for our aviation system including planned major regulatory, infrastructure and service changes. In addition, the respective policy, regulatory, investigative and service provision roles and coordination between government aviation agencies will continue to be clearly set out in the SSP and how they should work cooperatively on major initiatives. The government recognises that our agencies and industry are already operating to some extent in accordance with these principles but believes it is important that they be set out to help guide the future direction of our aviation safety system.

The r ole of the aviation safety regulator

CASA is a critical element in our aviation safety system. CASA is first and foremost the regulator for civil aviation with the increasingly challenging task of implementing and oversighting a range of aviation regulatory arrangements. Additionally CASA plays a key role in developing new regulations and amending existing regulations to take account of industry changes, emerging safety issues and meeting international standards and practices.

In establishing this review the government was conscious of complaints that it had received from industry about CASA's regulatory approach and the perceived insufficient regard to the impacts of regulatory actions or proposed new or amended regulations on industry operations. Problems with the implementation of new regulatory standards have also been raised by industry as an issue. The review panel has clearly received submissions that have raised similar concerns.

The role of the regulator is a difficult one. CASA serves not only the industry but the public more broadly. CASA is part of a system which is charged with protecting all passengers, their crew and the community. Members of the travelling public are not usually able to make their own individual assessments of all the safety issues and rely on the regulatory system for assurance.

Aviation services can be complex and expensive operations. The business environment in which aviation operates is a challenging and often highly competitive one with fluctuating market conditions. Even well-established and well-intentioned aviation operators can encounter problems. In such a complex environment the government expects the regulator to be firm but fair in how it conducts its role. The regulator also needs to be well-informed about the industry context, conscious of the impacts that its actions have on operators and open to approaches which achieve safety outcomes without unnecessary impacts on industry.

This approach calls for effective and ongoing engagement and communication with the industry, both at a strategic and working level. As the Aviation Safety Regulation Review recommends, we need to create an 'effective collaborative relationship [between CASA and the industry based] on a foundation of mutual understanding and respect'.

CASA Governance

As a key part of our aviation safety system, the government expects the CASA board to take an active role in setting directions for CASA and overseeing its functions. Critically the government also expects the board to maintain an effective dialogue with industry at a strategic level. The government has already moved to enhance the aviation skills and experience on the board, with amendments passed earlier this year to the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to expand the board to seven members.

The government has appointed Mr Jeff Boyd as Deputy Chairman of the board, who brings valuable experience in working with different parts of the diverse Australian aviation industry. Today I am pleased to announce the appointment of three more members to the CASA board to fill the current vacancies. The new members are: Anita Taylor, a chartered accountant, experienced company director and a long-term member of the sport-aviation industry who has been gliding since she was 16; Captain Murray Warfield, a former Qantas general manager of regulatory and industry affairs; and, finally, Mr Ian Smith, who has had a long and distinguished career in the aviation insurance industry and earlier this year was made a Member of the Order of Australia for his work in the promotion and development of aviation.

The government also welcomes the appointment of Air Vice Marshal (Retired) Mark Skidmore AM to the position of the Director of Aviation Safety. This appointment will bring a further wealth of aviation experience to the board.

The government will also be issuing a new Statement of Expectations (SOE) to the revamped board to give effect to the recommendations in the report. The board will appropriately have the opportunity to set out in an implementation plan their response to the new SOE. The government looks forward to working with the new board and director in the delivery of all of these recommendations. Consistent with the government's broader agenda in deregulation, the government also expects CASA to continue to look for ways to reduce regulatory costs on the industry without compromising safety.

ATSB Governance

The government fully supports the vital role of the ATSB. Independent investigation of accidents or incidents remains a crucial element of the safety system, helping us understand the causes and hence the sources of risks to safety. This helps to avoid future accidents. If the system is to work well, industry must cooperate in providing information during accident and incident investigations and in reporting incidents generally. The government will take a number of actions to give effect to this commitment including:

Yesterday the Canadian Transportation Safety Board released its independent report into the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. The ATSB tasked the Canadian TSB to undertake an independent review of their investigation methodologies and processes; how they are applied in specific cases and how this compared to international best practice standards. The TSB review looked in detail at three separate investigations, one of which was the Pel-Air inquiry—which, as members may recall, was the subject of a report by the Senate's Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee.

While the Canadian TSB found that ATSB investigation methodology and analysis tools represent best practice and have been shown to produce very good results, they found in the case of the Pel-Air investigation there were errors made. I am concerned that the TSB report raises some concerns about the application of ATSB methodologies in the investigation of the ditching of the Pel-Air aircraft off Norfolk Island in 2009. As a consequence I have asked the ATSB Commission to give serious consideration to re-opening the investigation.

On a related point, I have just announced that I will shortly be appointing a new commissioner for the ATSB with a specific background in aviation. This will fulfil an undertaking made by the coalition prior to the election and also one of the recommendations of the report. I have asked that a fresh review of the Pel-Air accident take into account the findings of the ATSB report.

Policy and Coordination Role of the Department

The government has carefully considered the policy and coordination role of the Department of Infrastr ucture and Regional Development in the future aviation safety system. The government expects the department as the chair of the Aviation Policy Group to lead work between agencies to ensure coordinated planning and action on the development of the aviation safety system.

While each agency has its own legislative charter and priorities, planning needs to be coordinated across agencies. The department and the three other members of the APG—CASA, Airservices and the Department of Defence—should use that forum to coordinate and steer improvements in our aviation safety system. APG should also take the lead in guiding the development, monitoring and maintenance of the SSP.

The government has also identified a number of important aviation safety policy issues which it believes the department is well placed, in close consultation with other aviation agencies, to progress final policy advice for the government ' s consideration. These policy issues cover aviation rescue and fire fighting se rvices and airspace protection.

Other Agencies and Departments

Airservices Australia and the Department of Defence play significant roles in our aviation safety system. The current OneSKY Australia program is aimed at establishing a nationally harmonised air traffic management system. The program represents an exciting opportunity for both civil and military aviation to receive a better, seamless national air traffic service in the future. It should also be acknowledged that increased civil aviation demand at several locations around Australia continues to place pressures on military aviation facilities and services. While not specifically highlighted in the report, the government also recognises the key role the Bureau of Meteorology plays in our aviation safety system, and this role will be reinforced in our state safety program.

Aviation Industry Role

The government expects all of our civil and military avi ation agencies to work together, and in close consultation with industry, to implement the government ' s response to the report. But it is just as important that industry works collaboratively with aviation safety agencies to produce the best safety outcomes. Successful implementation of these recommendations will need the active and constructive participation of our aviation industry, working openly and positively with our agencies. We are aware that relationships have not been as good as they need to be and there are diverse views even within the industry on some issues.

We also understand that industry commitment to work constructively with government agencies on aviation safety issues requires industry members to dedicate scarce time and resources. The government strongly urges industry representatives and aviation agencies to work together across the broad range of issues, including the development of future regulatory priorities.

I also acknowledge the bipartisan approach that has been adopted by governments on both sides in dealing with this issue. It has been a difficult industry for the previous minister and for this one and for all of our predecessors now for a very long period of time. There needs to be goodwill from all parties. I have no doubt that the government and opposition will be able to work constructively to develop a better atmosphere within the sector. But we certainly also need the industry to be willing to do what it can to make the aviation system work and work well. It is time to reset the relationship between industry and agencies and move onwards, recognising our strong aviation safety record and the potential improvements that can be made in line with the report's recommendations.

On the basis of the strong response to the review and the release of the review's report, the government is confident that industry and our regulatory agencies will positively take up these opportunities. I look forward to holding the first Aviation Industry Consultative Council meeting before the end of the year. This will provide a great opportunity to discuss matters of broader concern to the aviation industry and ensure that industry has a forum for putting forward their views.

Conclusion

Australia has worked hard to have one of the most respected aviation safety systems in the world, but like any system it should be subject to continuous improvement, and works best when all of those engaged in the system are working closely together. The report has offered us recommendations which will help with Australia's continuous commitment to improve our safety system. The government's response is clearly to set out aviation safety policies, principles and priorities to our agencies, and to the industry and the community to help with this process.

The government looks forward to working with our aviation agencies and industry in the implementation of the recommendation of the report. I commend the government's response to the Aviation Safety Regulation Review report to the parliament. I seek leave of the House to move a motion to enable the member for Grayndler to speak for 19 minutes.

Leave granted.

I move:

That so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Grayndler for speaking in reply to the minister's statement for a period not exceeding 19 minutes.

Question agreed to.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I begin by saying that it is good to see the Deputy Prime Minister back in the chamber. Everyone in the House wishes him well on the personal level, if not the political!

I have always said that aviation safety is an issue that is well above politics. I am pleased to say that for the many years that I have been first a shadow minister, then a minister, then back again as a shadow minister, the current Minister for Transport has had the same view. I respect that. That is as it should be.

If there is any area that is above politics it has to be this one, because the whole of the parliament has an interest in working towards ensuring that aviation safety remains an issue of which Australia can be rightly proud. Road accidents, of course, cause much more trauma to Australians, and there would not be a single member of the public who has not been touched by an incident on our roads. Fortunately, in this House I can say that Australia's record on aviation safety is the envy of the world; we need to make sure that that continues to be the case.

As elected representative we need to make sure that we have a considered and very precautionary approach to aviation safety. We cannot take it for granted, because if there ever were to be an incident, particularly an RPT incident, the consequences for the travelling public would be severe. But the consequences for the national economy would also be catastrophic.

The safety of travellers must be put above everything. When the minister announced the Aviation Safety Regulation Review conducted by David Forsyth, as well as Don Spruston from Canada and Roger Whitefield of the UK, the opposition welcomed it. We remain proud of our own record in government when it comes to aviation safety, but you can never be too careful. We must always be prepared to look, look and look again to ensure that our safety arrangements respond to changing circumstances. Indeed, I believe that an incoming minister responsible for aviation has a duty to satisfy himself or herself that existing safety arrangements are adequate. And that is why—even though the minister was returning to the portfolio, rather than being new to this issue—I believe it was appropriate for the minister to convene this review.

The review was finalised in May and it included 37 recommendations. Today's statement by the minister seems to indicate that our system was in good shape, but I welcome the government's announcements today that it will appoint three new members to the CASA board, and that it will issue Statements of Expectations to CASA and to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. I wish the best of luck to the new CASA board members, Anita Taylor, Murray Warfield, and Ian Smith, just as I welcome the appointment of former Air Vice Marshal Mark Skidmore to the position of Director of Aviation Safety.

I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to John McCormick. John McCormick did an outstanding job. He was someone who was recruited after an international search for the best person. He brought decades of experience, not just in the Australian aviation industry but also particularly in Hong Kong, for Cathay Pacific, and in the international sector. I think he provided a rigour that was needed at the time. When John McCormick made the decision to ground Tiger Airways, that decision to ground an RPT service for the first—and hopefully the last—time in Australia's history was not only a courageous step but one that was entirely appropriate and needed. When Mr McCormick had advised me of the decision, I remember speaking to Prime Minister Gillard and informing her of what was about to occur—because, by definition, you cannot make a decision that an airline is unsafe and then say, 'we will ground them in a couple of days' time'. What it meant by definition was that people got stranded. There was a real-world impact on the travelling public, particularly given the nature of Tiger; and on many families who were able to travel by air for the first time, because it was a budget airline. That was a courageous decision by John McCormick. The fact that Tiger has now been taken over by Virgin Australia and is now functioning in a way that satisfies all the safety concerns shows that that was not just a courageous decision but a correct decision.

In the report, the review panel expressed concern about relations between the industry and the regulator. It said this:

In recent years, the regulator has adopted an across the board hard-line philosophy, which in the Panel’s view, is not appropriate for an advanced aviation nation such as Australia. As a result, relationships between industry and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) have, in many cases, become adversarial.

It went on to recommend a new strategic direction for CASA, calling for a more 'collaborative relationship on a foundation of mutual trust and respect'. It is here that I would respectfully sound a note of caution to the minister. I certainly agree that it is important for a regulated industry, like aviation, to have constructive and respectful relations between the regulator and the industry; but I would be very concerned if the relationship between CASA and aviation operators became too close. I expressed this concern to David Forsyth, who the minister ensured—and I thank him for this—gave me a verbal review as well, and we were able to have a very constructive discussion about it. If I could, I would like to express some caution. I think that, by definition, a regulator must have a bit of tension with those people who it is regulating, particularly in aviation.

The term 'trainspotters' is pretty familiar to people; in aviation there are 'plane spotters'. They think that they know best, and they do not want to be told by any regulator that they do not know how to keep their plane safe. But the truth is that the incidents that have occurred in this country have occurred particularly with small planes, which are involved in incidents all too regularly. I think one of the worst parts of the job of being the aviation minister in this country is the fact that you get notified in real time. Except for the minister, people are probably unaware of that. I have had phone calls at all hours telling me that a plane with two or three people on board has gone missing. When the departmental head rang, or in the case of Mr McCormick there was often direct contact, you really did not want to receive that call.

If I could sound that cautious note, as I expressed to David Forsyth: the customers are not the people who own the planes; the customers of CASA and aviation safety are the people on the planes and the people who would be impacted if there were an incident. Planes fly over my house at far too regular intervals. My electorate is the second smallest geographically; Wentworth is the smallest. These areas have highly dense populations. If there were an incident in these most densely populated areas of Australia, it would have an impact not just on people on the planes but on people in the vicinity of an airport. If I could express that concern—that we must never sacrifice rigour for harmony.

I agree with the minister that the actions of the regulator must be firm, and they must also be fair. But the minister has a responsibility to hold the line against industry pressure. We must maintain the necessary tension between the regulator and the regulated to keep all parties on their toes. If they are on their toes then they are focused on what matters: the safety of the travelling public. If they were allowed to operate too closely and without appropriate distance, the public would be the loser. So, while doing all we can to promote professional dealings among all participants in the industry, our overriding responsibility is to make accident prevention and proper safety standards our primary concern. All other concerns must be further down the ladder.

I note the minister's comment that he is considering asking the ATSB to reopen the investigation into the Pel-Air incident of 2009. This follows the findings this week of the delayed report of the inquiry that I commissioned as the minister, which was conducted by the Canadian Transportation Safety Board. I note that the TSB found that the ATSB investigation methods were best practice, but I certainly welcome, as I previously said, the principle that, if there is any doubt at all, there is a need to take that precautionary principle into consideration.

I am concerned that the government has required aviation operators to cut about $12 million from their costs as part of its push to reduce so-called red tape. I also note that the government has made a similar demand of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority. You cannot have organisations like CASA and AMSA, which perform such an extraordinarily important role in this country, and continue to put pressure on them to cut costs. AMSA has a critical role to play, as we have seen with the issue of the Malaysia Airlines search and rescue. AMSA looks after about one-third of the world's surface, so it is an absolutely critical agency. I do believe that there is a real case for quarantining it from cuts for aviation safety.

I will conclude by indicating publicly, as I have privately to the minister, that the opposition is firmly committed to working in a constructive and bipartisan way on these issues. I note that the minister has been exemplary in ensuring appropriate briefings and in ensuring that this issue continues to be where it was when I was the minister and, previously, under the Howard government. It is absolutely critical that we deal with this. Given the short period that the opposition has had the government's response to the report, it is not for me today to comment specifically on the government's response to each of the 37 recommendations. I indicate to the minister that, should there be any concerns, I will express them to him directly, because we have just received the response to the report. I note that the government has accepted in whole or in part all of the recommendations, with one exception, but we reserve our right to comment further on those matters, based upon a proper, closer analysis and proper advice. I indicate that that should not be seen in any way as a suggestion that we will operate politically on this issue, because we will not. We will deal with these things on their merits. I thank the minister for his response and conclude where I began: it is good to see him back in the House.

Honourable members: Hear, hear!