Rod Kemp (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Hansard source

I thank my colleague Senator Ian Macdonald for his remarks on the Aviation Transport Security Amendment Bill 2006, particularly for drawing to the attention of the Senate issues relating to Palm Island and, I regret to say, the broken promises of Premier Beattie. I thank you for the interest that you are taking in this issue, Senator Macdonald.

Senator Scullion commented on security issues which were raised in a very unfortunate manner by Senator Kerry O’Brien. Senator Scullion was able to put on record the very important initiatives that this government has taken. Senator O’Brien never fails to disappoint, unfortunately. He is an intelligent senator; he is one who I think does work. But often his speeches are marked by low-grade politics. If Senator O’Brien is unhappy with the position of the Australian government on security issues, the obvious question is: what is the Labor Party position?

I listened in vain, Madam Acting Deputy President Crossin—I am not sure that you will fully agree with my remarks—for a constructive comment by Senator O’Brien on these matters. These are serious issues and they deserve to be treated in a very serious fashion. If senators are unhappy with the government position, it is perfectly appropriate for them to stand up and attack that position; but one would then listen carefully to see what the alternative Labor Party position is. I regret to say that often we wait in vain for that position. The truth is that the Labor Party has not developed a position on this.

We are going back to old-style Labor. You criticise, criticise and criticise but you have nothing to put up instead. All I can say is that that is not the way to win elections. That is my view: it is not the way to win elections. The Labor Party have now lost four on the trot. One would have thought that they would have learned that they have to put up some real alternatives. It is not good enough to come into this chamber, take a few cheap shots at the government and then scurry off. It is just not good enough. I draw that to the attention of the Senate.

Normally I like to thank senators for their comments. My briefing notes always say, ‘I would like to thank senators for their comments.’ But I really cannot thank Senator O’Brien for his comments, I regret to say.

It is well known that the aviation industry forms a critical part of the Australian economy. Let me just state for the record that the government has been and will continue to be uncompromising in its commitment to high levels of aviation security—both to protect the travelling public and to safeguard the broader national interest served by a secure, functioning aviation industry.

Australia’s aviation industry is as complex as it is important. This is the first bill to amend the Aviation Transport Security Act; it is an important step in the never-ending task of finetuning the legal requirements for aviation security, with the complex and ever-changing operations of aviation businesses. All the amendments in this bill were developed in consultation with Australia’s aviation industry. This is a government which consults; it is a government which listens. The government gets out and talks to people. We take into account people’s views. We saw that in relation to Senator Macdonald’s comments this evening. We are out there; we are talking to people.

This bill will enhance Australia’s aviation security regime by amending the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 in three ways. Firstly, it will enable airport operators to manage security risks within airports when hosting unusual events. Secondly, it will deliver more robust regulation of air cargo. Thirdly, it will allow aviation industry participants to make simple alterations to their transport security programs.

The government believes that the amendments will increase Australia’s high level of aviation security—this point was very well made by Senator Nigel Scullion in his remarks—will further enhance national and international confidence in Australia’s regime for handling air cargo; and, importantly, will provide a flexible and targeted mechanism for airport operators to manage special events and temporary, non-routine activities that can be contained within a specified area of an airport.

In the area of air cargo, the proposed amendments will maintain the broad scope of the cargo security scheme while introducing a legal framework for regulations to provide a more flexible and appropriately modulated approach to security at each step through the transport chain. Australia’s airports are used for much more than just regular passenger services. Major international airports have to be able to host receptions for the arrival or departure of VIPs. Our regional airports are core community infrastructure. Their facilities are used for a wide range of low-risk community based activities, including such things as air shows, drag racing and vintage car shows. The special event amendments will enable airport operators to effectively manage the security of the events and activities that are appropriately held at airports but that are outside the airport’s core business. My advice is that this will allow airports to tailor special event zones to suit the type of event they are hosting and the assessed risk that is associated with each particular event.

The government has paid careful attention to the many issues that the Australian aviation industry has raised in our two regular industry consultative forums, the Aviation Security Advisory Forum and the Regional Industry Consultative Meeting. This bill is a response to some of those concerns.

The Australian government—let me underline this—is committed to working with the aviation industry in the never-ending task of protecting Australia’s travelling public and air commerce. The bill is an important one, and it is important that it now has speedy passage through the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.