Judith Adams (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

During the committee’s hearing, DOTARS explained that the new section would operate within the context of existing laws which define unlawful interference with aviation. This does not include lawful advocacy, protest, dissent or industrial action that does not result in or contribute to a security event. These amendments to the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 are intended to enhance the legal framework used to regulate and maintain security and safety within the Australian aviation industry.

The bill also contains two sets of amendments to the Civil Aviation Act 1988. Section 24 is amended to extend the offence of interfering with aircrew or endangering an aircraft or passengers to apply to a person who is outside an aircraft. As previously mentioned, there is concern in the aviation industry about the increasing incidence of lasers being used to interfere with an aircraft, particularly on approach to and on take-off from airports. The amendment to the Civil Aviation Act will mean that a person who threatens the safety of an aircraft, either by laser or by other means, will be committing an offence.

The second amendment creates a statutory framework that will permit the making of regulations for, and in relation to, the development, implementation and enforcement of drug and alcohol management plans and of drug and alcohol testing for persons who perform or are available to perform safety-sensitive aviation activities. The amendment also states that the results of drug and alcohol tests are not admissible in legal proceedings other than under the Civil Aviation Act and regulations or in other proceedings that could be prescribed in the regulations for this purpose. Under the new legislation, safety-sensitive personnel will include: flight crew; cabin crew; flight instructors; aircraft dispatchers; aircraft maintenance and repair personnel; aviation security personnel, including screeners; air traffic controllers; baggage handlers; ground refuellers; other personnel with airside access; and contractors. I believe that the aviation industry moving this way is a very strong message to contractors in other industries that they should get their acts together as well.

The new regime will consist of two components: industry and CASA. Industry participants may elect to randomly test their employees; however, it is not intended that such random testing be mandated by CASA. Rather, CASA will engage a contractor to undertake random testing on its behalf. I found it disappointing that some representatives of the aviation industry who were present at the committee hearing doubted that drug and alcohol problems were present in their industry. It is most unfortunate but it is now a reality that drugs have found their way into every section of society. No industry, group or sector is immune. After much debate and discussion, the representatives were ultimately supportive of the introduction of mandatory drug and alcohol testing throughout the Australian aviation sector, recognising that the absence of evidence does not necessarily mean there is not a problem.

After agreeing to the amendments, industry representatives made a number of comments about the practical implications of the new arrangements and the regulations which would govern the proposed regime. The Australian Federation of Air Pilots was particularly concerned with the location and timing of random tests. Testing in the aircraft, in the vicinity of the aircraft, in the gate lounge or on the tarmac would, of course, be unacceptable.

Through these amendments, the government is committed to ensuring that workers will benefit from a safer workplace knowing that their colleagues are not impaired by alcohol or drugs, and the public will benefit from a safer aviation industry. In the committee’s report to the Senate, the committee members stated that we anticipate that the drafting of regulations will be based on full consultation with all stakeholders. The successful implementation of the bill will depend largely on the extent to which concerns such as those raised by stakeholders during the inquiry are addressed. In conclusion, I would like to support the passage of this legislation, as aviation security is strengthened by these amendments without imposing significant additional costs and burdens upon the aviation industry.