Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, what we saw was those opposite driving down wages and conditions, wanting to remove Australian jobs and look after their mates, ensuring their mates' companies from Singapore were getting extra access to the main-city routes here in Australia. You'd think that every member of parliament would come into this place and stand up for Australian workers. You'd think they'd want to make sure that our people are employed, that they can pay their bills and feed their families. Instead, those opposite stood there saying, 'No, we shouldn't do that; we should look after those from other countries first.'

We know that those opposite spent four years knocking off the Qatar Airways application. The member for Riverina has admitted that. It took four years. That was part of the chaos and mess that we saw during the nine years of absolute destruction of the airline industry. How can we run a proper airline industry safety if we haven't got air traffic controllers? They're kind of important, the way they make sure planes land and take off properly and that there are no issues. But this is what they were doing. They were quite happy to get rid of Australian workers and put our airline industry at risk. They wanted to support Qatar Airways over Australian workers, over people who worked for Virgin, people who worked for Qantas and people who worked for dnata, who had to work shifts consisting of three hours on, three hours off and three hours on again. People were overworked and put in dangerous situations. As the member for Blair pointed out, the TWU were the first ones to stand up and say, 'Australian workers should be protected.' We need to make sure that we look after Australian workers and give them the opportunities that they deserve, not pull the rug out from under them so those opposite can look after a few of their mates from a Singapore based company. It's just wrong, and, on the day that we talk about fair work, closing loopholes and outlawing employment that is dangerous for Australian consumers and the Australian public, they bring this MPI in.

Really, they bring this MPI in for one reason only: they've got nothing. They have no policies. They have no answers. They have nothing. They want to defend their time in government. I would love to have been there to see what Senator McKenzie did when they talked about Qatar Airways. They would've had the three airlines there: Qantas, Virgin and Rex. They would have gone in and put a green line through Rex—we know they like their colour coded spreadsheets—tick, tick, tick; 300 million. Qantas would've got a yellow line: 'You'll get some, but don't worry if it's not impacting; your shareholders will still make their money.' For Virgin, they would've put a big red line through. Two and a half thousand people lost their jobs, and not one of those opposite has ever stood up for that.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Time's up!

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I get to make that call, thank you, but I will give the member for Dawson the call now.

Andrew Willcox (Dawson, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Here we are again: another Albanese Labor government decision and another industry in shambles. This time it's aviation. Well, I suppose we should all be grateful that at least those opposite are giving our primary industries a break, because they've certainly been thrashing them of late. We're living in a Labor-created cost-of-living crisis: mortgages are going up, fuel prices are going up, insurance is almost unaffordable, power prices are skyrocketing and grocery prices are unaffordable; people are making other choices and buying a cheaper product.

Everything is more expensive under Labor. But, when those opposite had a chance to do something to allow for cheaper aviation travel, what did they do? Nothing. When the Qatar deal was on the table, they said no. When will the penny drop for those opposite that we are in a cost-of-living crisis that was created by them? People are doing it tough. People cannot afford to fly because they can't find a cheap flight. We are not like the Deputy Prime Minister, who can just jump on a VIP flight and fly around the place willy-nilly wherever it suits him. People have to save, and for those people who have saved their money and want to take an overseas flight with all of this cost-of-living crisis, now it will be more expensive.

As a matter of fact, airline flights have gone up by over 50 per cent since pre-COVID levels, and yet the opportunities to have cheaper flights are being lost. And when more opportunities are lost, what about freight? We're talking about outbound here. In my electorate of Dawson we have companies like to Tassal, who grow tiger prawns. We also have the famous Bowen mangoes, another fantastic thing to export. And we have the wild-caught seafood industry. Wild caught fish include trout, live trout and frozen trout. We also have prawns and crabs, and all of this freight can go in the bellies of these aeroplanes.

Let's talk about inbound. Whit Sundays is right in the middle of my electorate of Dawson,. It's the No. 2 international destination in the world. It's famous for its Whitehaven Beach and its 74 beautiful islands. We are the heart of the Great Barrier Reef. Thanks to this very ordinary—actually bad—Albanese Labor government decision not to allow one million more visitors to Australia from Europe and the Middle East, we will be missing out. Why do you not like tourists? I do not get it. Dawson relies on backpackers to come and help pick our fruit. We rely on backpackers to look after our hospitality areas. We also rely on our tourists for our pubs and our clubs and to take our tours such as with Red Cat Adventures, for ocean rafting, and Explore Group, which allows tourists to do overnight tourism to explore the Great Barrier Reef. We have a very, very simple motto: when you've got people, you've got a chance; but when you've got no people, you haven't got a chance. When you have cheaper flights people can spend their money on the destination. They can come here and enjoy the Whitsundays and spend their money in the area.

What about our stakeholders? All other major Australian airlines are asking for the decision to be reversed. Even your mates in other states, including all the Labor states, are asking for the decision to be reversed. I ask: who would rob the tourism industry of $788 million? Who would rob Australians of a greater choice of airlines? I can tell you who: the Albanese Labor government. And they did it so easily too, with just one decision to reject the proposed increase in the number of Qatar Airline flights. It's a decision cloaked in secrecy and obscurity. I think we have a bit more of that coming out from before, and let's see how that works. Yes, I think there will be more, and people will get hold of that. I call on the Albanese Labor government to reverse this appalling decision. Do the right thing, even if it is just for once.

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The politicisation of this issue by those opposite over the past few weeks has been absolutely shameful. To be clear, as other speakers on this side of the House have said already, Qatar Airways are already able to fly more planes into Australia right now, today, because Qatar Airways are able to increase their capacity on their current flights. In this city, Canberra, which I represent, Qatar Airways operated flights between Doha and Canberra via Sydney for several years before the pandemic. When COVID hit, they stopped operating that route, and understandably so. But the pandemic is over now, and that route today is still available for them to operate. They could start flights as soon as they wanted, tomorrow even.

Canberra has a world-class airport with fantastic facilities, and I am sure that the almost half a million Canberrans and hundreds of thousands of people who live in the surrounding regions, including in the seat of Riverina, the electorate of the member who has moved this MPI today, would be very appreciative of the opportunity to access those flights from Canberra Airport. I have no doubt that the route will be commercially successful as well. That doesn't just extend to Qatar Airways. I'd love to see Qantas, our national airline, commence international flights out of our national capital.

But the problem isn't just Canberra. The same goes for flights into Adelaide, Darwin, Cairns and the Gold Coast. The sky is the limit for Qatar Airways. But they don't do this. On top of this, going into Sydney, Qatar Airways aren't operating their largest-capacity aircraft. Qatar Airways could change their operations tomorrow to use their bigger planes with more seats. So there are options for Qatar Airways to increase their services into Australia and they are not currently taking them.

What does surprise me, though, is that this matter of public importance is being brought by the former minister for transport, who should know better. The member for Riverina was, in fact, the decision-maker when the former government put the Qataris on ice as they sought further flights between Doha and Sydney. That was in 2018 and it lasted until 2022. Indeed, not only did they put that application from Qatar on hold but they also attached a safeguarding mechanism due to concerns over a potential abuse of market power, something that had never been done before. So the hypocrisy from those opposite is particularly galling.

I think there is a problem at the moment with the Flying Kangaroo losing the goodwill of the Australian people. Qantas and Virgin have a combined domestic market share of around 96 per cent, and two-thirds of that market share is owned by Qantas. That is an incredibly privileged position for any private company in any industry and in any country to have access to. This concentration of the market is a cause for concern. That is why our government is working towards our election commitment of an aviation white paper. First, we will deliver a green paper which will start a discussion around the productivity regulation, consumer protections and bilateral agreements in the aviation sector.

I am deeply concerned about Qantas's practice of flight cancellations at Canberra Airport, particularly for flights to Sydney. In July, Qantas cancelled 53 Canberra-to-Sydney flights. In June, they cancelled 58. In May, April and March, Qantas cancelled 51 flights each month. To put that in perspective, the cancellation rate for Qantas on this route is regularly around 12 per cent. On the same route, Virgin cancels around 2.5 per cent. I note that Qantas has 80 per cent of the market share on that particular route and that this is one of the routes that has actually not recovered as fast as others as we come out of the pandemic. My constituents are getting a dud deal with Qantas flying to Sydney, and when I questioned Qantas about this in the House economics committee they failed to take any responsibility. They blamed Airservices Australia and they blamed the weather. Last time I checked, Virgin also deals with Airservices Australia and they experience the same weather between Canberra and Sydney that Qantas does.

Qantas has also undertaken some seriously poor employment practices and sacked thousands of Australians and rehired them under sketchy labour hire contracts with lower pay and fewer entitlements. Qantas has also recently been accused by the ACCC of ripping off customers by selling tickets for flights that had already been cancelled. They are now facing a $600 million fine for those practices. From tomorrow, Qantas is under new management. I sincerely hope that through their actions they restore the goodwill they have lost from the Australian people. But we mustn't forget the actions of the former government when it comes to Qantas. (Time expired)

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to commend the member for Riverina for this MPI. It is a very important discussion that we are having and it's one that impacts on my community greatly. We have seen credible reports that this decision has stopped prices decreasing by 40 per cent for international flights. In the Yarra Valley we are lucky. We have a wonderful tourism industry. We have an agriculture industry that is thriving. But those industries also have challenges. The tourism industry is coming off the back of COVID. It's not back to where it was. It is the lifeblood of our industry—having tourists come from many countries around the world. So for that price to not drop by 40 per cent hurts my community greatly. People overseas are making decisions: Do I fly to Australia? Do I fly to the US? Do I go to Europe? Price is one of the key things that they look at. This decision by this government is hurting tourism businesses across the country and particularly in my electorate of Casey.

Trade and exports are another important part of my community. CherryHill is a wonderful business in my electorate, growing cherries. They rely on the tourism industry but also on trade. Being able to fly their cherries overseas is crucial because cherries don't last very long, so they can't afford to put them on ships. Every extra flight brings down that cost of freight. That means they can export more, they can sell more and, guess what, they can employ more Australians. That's why this MPI is so important.

Let's look at the actual MPI: the government's chaotic airport and aviation industry policy. Do we need a better example than the Prime Minister having to come back into this House with his tail between his legs, with the Leader of the House by his side, protecting him, to correct his answer from question time?

This Prime Minister and the transport minister are not talking; months later, they're not on the same page. They weren't talking when this significant decision was being made. Clearly, it's chaos over there. Look at what the Prime Minister said—what he had to do. Look at the minister. She had 10 minutes to outline in detail the reasons why she made this decision—10 minutes to defend her actions. I stayed. I wanted to listen. I was very interested. I wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt and hear from her. I kept time. For seven of those 10 minutes, 70 per cent of that time, the minister spoke about the former government. She even went back a decade, to the Prime Minister's work a decade ago. That was 70 per cent of her opportunity to defend her decision, to defend the government's policy, and she didn't do it. She spoke about the opposition and she spoke about the Prime Minister's decisions a decade ago. When she finally got to why she did it—I thought, this will be great; we'll get a bit of detail—it was 'national interest'. That was literally all we got from the minister: national interest—such a broad term it can mean anything.

If you listen to the Assistant Treasurer, we know that national interest is making sure that Qantas is profitable. It delivered a $2.5 billion profit. The member for Canberra did raise some significant concerns about Qantas that need to be addressed, I'll give her credit for that, but maybe she should also talk to the Assistant Treasurer, because it's in the national interest for Qantas to deliver a $2.5 billion profit.

We've seen the members opposite with the opportunity to talk about how this will impact their communities, but they haven't. They've spent the whole time talking about the former government;16 months into government and they're obsessed with the opposition. They're not able to articulate why this decision was made, who made it, when it was made, who was spoken to—the Virgin CEO; the now former Qantas CEO. The Prime Minister has to come and add to his answer, not just duck and weave, because there's no consistency.

It's staggering that the Prime Minister and the minister are not talking. What are they doing? At a time when prices are 50 per cent higher than pre COVID, and supply is down 25 per cent on pre COVID, this government is making decisions to keep prices higher and it doesn't have a plan to bring prices down.

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I get into my remarks, I'd like to preface them by saying that as a proud Transport Workers Union member and former union official I shed no tears seeing Alan Joyce's time as Qantas CEO end tomorrow. I'd echo sentiments similar to those in a media release issued by the Prime Minister back in 2015, when he commented on the announced retirement of the then chairman of the Sydney Airport Corporation—one word: 'Good'. I wish the incoming CEO, Vanessa Hudson, the best of luck at the helm, but only time will tell how smoothly she will fly through the turbulence left in Alan Joyce's wake—though, if you were to ask the Qatar Airways CEO, Akbar Al Baker, what his thoughts were on the matter, his comments at the International Air Transport Association meeting in 2018 might be indicative. He said an airline 'has to be led by a man because it is a very challenging position'. I'm sure he regrets saying that now.

The motion we have in front of us, moved by the member for Riverina, is about the state of Australia's airports and aviation industry. It is always interesting when a former minister moves a motion on something they were directly responsible for once upon a time. But the member for Riverina has always had a straight bat, so it's worth examining the coalition's form in this space. I'm sure we will find no surprises here.

With this in mind, it's worth returning our focus to Qantas, an airline that received billions of taxpayer dollars, provided to the company as a blank cheque, in fact—all of that money for no equity. The member for Riverina wouldn't get a guest spot on Dragons'Den, that's for sure. When Virgin collapsed, however, they didn't even bother to offer any assistance, leaving it up to foreign private equity to step in. By that time, were the cupboards bare? Was it about picking winners or losers? Or was it an indication that the former government, in their own perverse way, saw the national significance of Qantas, and the bailout was their way of saying they were acting in the national interest? If that was the case, their advocacy for Qatar Airways is a departure from that initial stance. How much of a departure? The member for Riverina should feel a bit of deja vu in the current situation because, after all, as the minister responsible back in 2018 when the ask was put on him by Qatar Airways for more air rights, he said—in the member for Riverina's own words:

… you can't have an airline coming in from overseas and just undercutting to the point where Australian jobs are at risk and Australian airlines are placed at a disadvantage.

We can't have an airline with very deep pockets undercut, undercut, undercut and … (then) people go to them as opposed to an airline that may be majority Australian-owned and unable to compete with this unfair undercutting of prices.

They were your words. With that in mind, the member for Riverina as the minister put the request on hold. Why would he do that? He claims it was because he was new. He had his training wheels on. Yet, when it was approved four years later, it was approved with multiple safeguards in place to prevent the abuse of market power—a unique set of safeguards, I might add.

In the present day, however, the commentary by other airlines such as Virgin and the comments made by Flight Centre are based solely on commercial considerations and not on what is best for Australia, what is in Australia's national interest, and, frankly, I can't fault them for that at all. But it is something governments must have at the forefront of their decision-making. In that same sense, Qatar Airways are fully entitled to act in their own commercial interests, despite the fact that they also act in a national interest.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm afraid that the one hour has now expired. The discussion has concluded.