Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Parafield Airport, located 18 kilometres north of the Adelaide CBD and a major landmark in the Makin electorate, is the principal general aviation and pilot training airport in South Australia. Established in 1927 and occupying 437 hectares, it was Adelaide's main airport until the opening of Adelaide Airport in 1955. The airport has four runways, varying in length between 992 and 1,350 metres. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Adelaide Airport Ltd, which in 1998 leased both Adelaide and Parafield airports for 50 years with a further 49-year option.

Over recent decades, both Parafield Airport and the surrounding area have substantially changed. Originally located well outside of Adelaide's residential suburbs, today the airport is almost entirely surrounded by homes. Airport activities have also changed, with flight training, including helicopter flight training, dominating aviation use. Much of the airport land has now been sold off for housing or leased to commercial and retail businesses. Another section is used for water harvesting and recycling by the City of Salisbury. On average, the airport manages around 4,000 aircraft movements, mostly flight training, every week. It has a reported yearly capacity of around 450,000 movements, more than double the current usage.

Not surprisingly, flight training with noisy aircraft circulating above houses—or, even worse, the chuntering of helicopters—has over the years caused considerable angst amongst residents. For shift workers, young mothers with newborns, people recovering from illness or families hoping for a quiet sleep-in on a public holiday or weekend, the relentless droning of aircraft flying at relatively low altitudes overhead can be incredibly disruptive and stressful. The airport's Fly Friendly policy is not obligatory, merely a guide which operators are simply encouraged to adhere to. Nor do complaints to airport management or Airservices Australia reflect the extent of community angst that I detect as I speak with residents. It seems that many people grudgingly put up with the disruption, knowing that their complaints will be ignored. Furthermore, being on federal government land, the airport is exempt from SA Environment Protection Authority noise controls, which place greater restrictions on other noise-emitting industries in the area than the voluntary Fly Friendly airport code places on aircraft.

Whilst I don't have access to the figures, I expect that the airport's income and estimate of economic value to the region is derived overwhelmingly from the retail businesses which continue to expand into airport land. Those businesses are not the problem, and they are here to stay. In summary, over the years, the airport has changed from being a general aviation airport to a commercial business precinct, with flight training—predominantly for overseas students, who I understand account for around 90 per cent of student flight training—now left as its primary aviation use. That raises the question as to whether the economic benefits of flight training for overseas students justify the social disruption that thousands of local residents live with daily and the impact on house values.

The periodical review of the airport master plan is now underway and, I understand, must be submitted by 18 June 2024. I also note that an aviation white paper is being developed for the minister. I believe that the time has come for the long-term future of Parafield Airport to be considered. In particular, could the international flight training school be relocated to another general aviation airport? Alternatively, what measures, including the use of electric planes, could be taken to reduce noise impacts on residents? It has also been suggested that the entire airport could be relocated. If it were, what options for future land use that preserved the open-space nature of the airport might be possible, and how would existing airport aviation businesses be supported?

The airport lease is halfway through it's initial term, and the reliance on overseas students provides no long-term security. The current masterplan that's being reviewed should therefore consider all options about the long-term future of the airport, and they should all be explored.