Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Hansard source

Today, along with Senator Smith, I am moving the Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024 to step in where the Albanese Labor government and particularly the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, Catherine King, have failed. When I was chosen to take on this portfolio as shadow minister, I determined that, if the government was not going to do their job, the opposition would make sure that we stepped up and did the right thing by everyday Australians. Airlines around the world are on notice. Consumers are absolutely fed up with higher airfares, coupled with declining service standards and increasing interruptions. The ACCC's latest airline report showed service reliability remains below long-term industry averages, as flight cancellations and delays remain higher than they should be. Nearly 30 per cent of flights were either cancelled or delayed across the January holiday period, showing there has been no improvement in the on-time performance over the past 12 months. That's according to data released by the Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics.

Despite the Prime Minister's claim that Australia has the most competitive airline market in the world bar none—a claim contradicted by his own ministers and government's green paper—Australia has stumbled into a situation where the domestic aviation market is dominated by two airlines. More than 93 per cent of the domestic market is owned or managed by Qantas and Virgin. When this is coupled with the dominance of the two airlines' international codeshare arrangements and frequent flyer programs, the picture becomes very clear: there is an imbalance in consumer choice. The Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill seeks to ensure that consumer choice, convenience and reliability are being prioritised over big business. This issue transcends mere inconvenience. It is a matter of fairness, transparency and respect for Australian consumers.

The global airline industry has witnessed significant changes over the past decade, with jurisdictions around the world bolstering consumer protections to ensure that passengers are treated fairly. For instance, in the EU, the UK and Canada, common rules of compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding, flight cancellations or long delays have been established. This comprehensive framework sets a benchmark, ensuring that passengers are not left stranded or out of pocket due to disruptions within the control of airlines. In contrast, Australia's approach to consumer protections in the airline industry, while robust in theory, have often fallen short in practice. The Airline Customer Advocate's annual report highlights a trend of increasing complaints, with issues ranging from flight cancellations and delays to mishandled baggage and disputes over refunds. This trend underscores a growing disconnect between consumer expectations and the services delivered by our airlines.

A case in point is the recent actions by the self-styled national carrier, Qantas. Once a symbol of reliability and national pride, Qantas has been at the centre of escalating consumer complaints. Issues have ranged from significant delays and inexplicable cancellations to allegations of misleading consumers about their rights to refunds or compensations, and I could go on. Indeed, it took the intervention of this Senate through the cost-of-living inquiry last year to shame the former Qantas CEO Alan Joyce into honouring or refunding nearly half a billion dollars in flight credits beyond December 2023. I thank Senators Dean Smith, Matt Canavan and Jane Hume for their work to ensure that former Qantas CEO Alan Joyce fronted that inquiry. Unfortunately Labor, the Greens and Senator Pocock have continued to block any further scrutiny of Mr Joyce by voting down any attempt for this Senate to force him to account for his time as leader of the nation's largest carrier and the part that he played in the flight credit debacle, the serious allegations around ghost flights raised by the ACCC and his involvement in the illegal sacking of thousands of baggage handlers. These issues, coupled with the increasing number of unexplainable cancelled flights, severe delays and frequent situations where you'd fly to one destination and your bags would fly to somewhere else, have led to the general public coining the term, 'You've been Joyced.'

In a landmark move underscoring the gravity of these issues, the ACCC launched legal proceedings against Qantas. This lawsuit, centred on allegations of misleading conduct regarding consumer rights to refunds for cancelled or significantly altered flights, marks a pivotal moment in our pursuit of stronger consumer protections. The ACCC's actions send a clear message: no entity, irrespective of its heritage, its position or its mates in positions of power, stands above the law.

The challenges faced by consumers extend beyond Qantas, reflecting a broader systemic issue within the aviation industry, and these challenges highlight the need for a comprehensive review and overhaul of consumer protections in the airline sector. Australian consumers deserve clear, enforceable rights that ensure fairness and transparency. Drawing lessons from jurisdictions with robust consumer protection frameworks, it's clear that Australia must evolve its approach, and this evolution involves not only adopting best practices from around the world but also innovating to address unique challenges faced by Australian consumers. Our vast geography and reliance on air travel for domestic connectivity amplify the impact of airline service disruptions, making strong consumer protections not just beneficial but essential. I'm sure you'll hear many contributions as we debate this bill that go to that fact. Ensuring fairness and equity in transport is of paramount importance to every individual who relies on air travel. It's an issue that resonates deeply with our values in the National Party. As champions of the regions, we understand better than anyone the lifeline that airline travel represents for connecting our communities, supporting our local economies and bridging the distance that separates us from our cities, our families, our business interests and indeed from health and education services, as is often the case.

It is with this understanding and commitment to serving the people of regional Australia that we recognise the urgent need for enhanced consumer protections in the aviation sector. The Harris review's recommendations for reforming the Sydney Airport Demand Management Act also play a crucial role in our vision for a more reliable and efficient aviation industry. The review's recommendations focus on introducing more dynamic and responsive management practices that can adapt to evolving operational realities whilst minimising environmental and community impacts.

By embracing these recommendations, we can unlock Sydney airport's potential to deliver more reliable services, thereby reducing the frequency of disruptions that so deeply affect passengers—and not just into Sydney airport. This approach not only benefits consumers but also enhances the operational efficiency of airlines and the broader economy. Addressing the operational constraints at Sydney airport presents a golden opportunity to enhance efficiency and reduce passenger disruptions. Unfortunately, after months of sitting on her hands, the transport minister has finally announced the government's response to that review in February. The response can only be described as underwhelming, but it is almost emblematic of this particular minister's work in this space. Only minor tweaks have been made to a system that needs wholesale reform.

The coalition will continue to advocate for greater transparency in slot allocations and for ways to increase competition to ensure that consumers are not the ones being penalised for an airport that is being constrained by government intervention and legislation. In government, we introduced a grocery code of conduct. We are always on the side of Australian consumers, and this bill allows us to once again demonstrate that there is one political movement within the Senate that is absolutely going to stand up for Australian consumers against big corporations, and that is the Liberal and the National parties.

The bill requires the transport minister to introduce an airline code of conduct and a series of obligations to protect passengers that find themselves at the mercy of airlines during significant disruptions. The code would be a significant series of reforms that enhance consumer protections. It is clear and necessary. The time for action is now. We must work together—government, industry and consumers—to improve standards and safeguards. Every single person in Australia has a story of missing significant family events, business meetings or health services as a result of the aviation sector's failure.

Within 12 months of the commencement of this act, the transport minister must make rules prescribing carriers' obligations in relation to flights to and from Australia and within Australia, including connecting flights. This includes an airline code of conduct to provide greater protections for passengers of all carriers, regardless of the type of service. The purpose of the aviation industry code of conduct is to ensure the fair and proper treatment of passengers and that passengers reach their intended destination as booked.

We remember when Qantas was trying to argue that flights weren't from a specific place to a specific destination at a particular time. That's what Australian consumers thought they were buying when they purchased a ticket—but not if you were buying it from Alan Joyce's Qantas. This bill would actually deal with that issue. It would also supplement the Australian Consumer Law and extend those protections to all carriers operating to and within Australia. The code must also make provision for the recourse or intervention available to passengers in the event of improper conduct by carriers, and would strengthen the role of the Airline Customer Advocate and the ACCC in dealing with complaints.

The code requirements for a consistent definition of a ticket of carriage would apply to all tickets of carriage issued by the carriers, including the minimum rights which passengers and third parties are guaranteed when they purchase a ticket of carriage from a carrier. The minister would also be required to address the most significant issues that affect passengers, including delays, cancellations, denial of boarding, lost or damaged baggage and seating allocations of minors.

Drawing inspiration from other jurisdictions that have already enhanced their consumer protections, the bill would require the implementation of a minimum standard of treatment framework for passengers affected by cancellations, significant disruptions or denial of boarding, both domestic and international. The bill requires the minister to specify the standard of treatment in the event of a range of scenarios within the carrier's control. It also addresses situations where there are safety issues, mechanical failure, and natural disaster or security events. This ensures that passengers and airlines have clear obligations in place when unforeseen events occur. These obligations would also ensure clearer communication of entitlement for travel options in the event of disruption and any recourse available against a carrier. Airlines should be required to clearly inform passengers of their entitlements in cases of delays, cancellations, and other service disruptions. This includes straightforward information regarding entitlements to refunds, compensation and accommodation.

You shouldn't have to email senators in this chamber to get action from airlines, which is what occurred following the aviation inquiry last year. Australian consumers, being so frustrated with the aviation industry's pushback on getting simple refunds, had to go through their local MP, and that is absolutely untenable and what this bill seeks to address. There should be clear information and clear recourse, and consumers should have a clear understanding of their rights when they purchase their ticket. We should look at the legal case between Qantas and the ACCC as a warning and ensure that carriers cannot weasel their way out of obligations that our consumer laws are actually designed to protect.

The obligations would also address an issue that affects many passengers travelling with children, by ensuring that children under the age of 14 are seated in close proximity to a parent, guardian or tutor at no additional cost. This provides peace of mind for parents and guardians: they will not be separated from their children by computers randomly assigning them seats far away from their children next to strangers in what is often crowded seating.

The minister has failed on multiple counts. It has been this chamber and the opposition that have had to drag her kicking and screaming to address the obvious failures within our aviation sector. The ACCC cancellation and delays reporting has been reinstated thanks to the work of the opposition. In the evidence to the aviation inquiry last year it was clear: Qantas and Virgin operate under consumer protections when they're flying internationally. Why shouldn't their customers onshore here in Australia be protected by a similar framework? If the minister's not going to step up and do the job, we're very happy to do it for her. We're looking forward to hopefully sending this to an inquiry for further expansion of the issues.