Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I started my contribution to the debate on the Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024 with a case study about regional Australians because, when we see flights cancelled and flights excessively delayed, the impact on regional Australians is often not thought of. People think, 'You get to the airport. It's inconvenient, but no worries,' but, if you've driven for two or three hours to get to the airport, the inconvenience is exacerbated. This bill, while it's not a silver bullet and while there may still be delays, will make airlines accountable. It will actually put the focus back on consumers.

I remember when I was growing up that, if you were in retail or in any sort of customer service industry, the mantra was 'The customer is always right.' That has been forgotten in this day and age, particularly when you look at industries like the airline industry, which is serviced by the duopoly of Qantas and Virgin and, to a lesser extent, Rex. They are so big, and competition is so lacking, that no-one is holding them accountable for their actions. We hear anecdotally all the time that airlines take bookings for flights, and, when they see that that flight isn't necessarily full, they just cancel it: 'They can catch the next flight.' It doesn't always work. When we're talking about people in regional areas who are going from A to B via C on separate airlines because one airline doesn't service that route and another airline doesn't service that route, the inconvenience and the cost to the consumer is not fair; it's not justified.

This bill will establish minimum standards, which is not too much to ask. This bill will have standards for how passengers should be treated when they experience delays, cancellations and sometimes denial of boarding because of the airlines. It's not because of the fog, not because of safety issues, but because the airlines are treating customers as fools. I commend this bill to the Senate. I implore my colleagues to support this bill, hold the airlines to account and put customers first. It is good customer service and it is good common courtesy.

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Multicultural Engagement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to rise in support of this private senators' bill, the Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024. I do congratulate my good friends and colleagues Senator McKenzie and Senator Smith, who have been heavily involved in this bill. I also commend them both, especially Senator McKenzie for her passionate pursuit of fairness in the aviation sector for the Australian public.

It might be a private senators' bill, but it's a public cause. It is seeking fairness for the millions of Australians every year who fly around our beautiful country and who are required to fly. This isn't a luxury in our country. It's not a luxury; it's a requirement—for family obligations, to catch up with friends, to attend material events or to go to urgent medical appointments. Flying is required in a country such as ours. This bill needs to be seen in that context.

It also needs to be seen in the context of the rate of flight cancellations in this country, which is absolutely appalling. In January 2024, passengers endured 3.1 per cent of flights being cancelled, and the long-term average of cancellations has blown out to 2.2 per cent. But in January it was 3.1 per cent. How are we going to rectify this unless there is an economic impact upon the service provider and unless the service provider is held to account through legislation such as this?

We just saw Qantas get hit with a $100 million penalty and having to do a $20 million remediation program in relation to its conduct. Qantas is going to have to pay a total of $120 million, subject to Federal Court approval, as a result of its conduct in relation to flights. That means 86,000 customers are going to participate in a $20 million remediation program, and there is going to be a $100 million civil penalty—$120 million.

The Australian public should not have to wait for the ACCC to take action in order to get compensation for services which are not provided on time or to their satisfaction. Those 86,000 customers shouldn't have to wait for the ACCC to take action. They should be able to take action under the contract they have with the airline. They shouldn't have to wait for the ACCC to take action, and that goes to the crux, to the heart, of this legislation.

The Senate aviation inquiry which was held last year was fiercely resisted by the Labor government. I think we've seen now, with the $120 million hit Qantas is taking and with this private senators' bill, how wrong the Albanese Labor government was to resist that aviation inquiry. Again, I congratulate my good friend and colleague Senator McKenzie for her passionate advocacy in this space. It has made a difference.

What this bill will do is actually restore the balance between the supplier and the customer. Services in this country are monopolistic—at least, not an oligopoly but tending towards a monopoly. It will also make the Australian market consistent with our international competitors. Why is it that consumers have the benefit of these sorts of rights in Canada, but we don't have them in Australia? Why do consumers in the United States have these rights, but we don't have them in Australia? Why do they have them in Europe, but we don't have them in Australia? Why do they have them in the UK, but we don't have them in Australia? There are no answers to these questions from the government, and that's why the coalition has been forced to put forward this private senators' bill.

The other important point on this bill is that it involves heavy consultation on a number of its key components, including the minimum standards that consumers have a right to expect with respect to accommodation, meals and, potentially, monetary compensation. An aviation code of conduct would be required to be established within 12 months, and 12 months is long enough. Consumers have been putting up with this for far longer than 12 months. This needs to be done, and it needs to be done quickly.

The consumers of aviation services in Senator Bilyk's home state of Tasmania deserve this bill. They deserve to be compensated when their flights are cancelled and they're inconvenienced. The consumers of airline services in Minister Farrell's home state of South Australia deserve to be compensated when they're faced with monetary cost when their flights are cancelled, as do people from my home state of Queensland when they go to fly to South Australia to visit the great vineyards and their flights are cancelled. How do you compensate someone for that loss of opportunity? It's very hard to compensate, in fact. Consumers across this whole country deserve to be treated fairly when their flights are cancelled.

There are a number of really good provisions in this bill. I don't have time to talk about all of them; there's so much good stuff. There's a rhetorical embarrassment of riches in this bill, so I have to keep to the main points.

Firstly, in relation to protection of minors, there's a very important point that requires rules to be made to ensure that minors under the age of 14 are seated next to their guardian at no extra cost. That really should be a no-brainer. It's hard to think of any circumstance where a minor shouldn't be able to be seated next to their guardian at no extra cost. As the movers of this bill said, 'This provision is crucial for ensuring the safety and wellbeing of young passengers and providing peace of mind to families and caregivers.' A lot of the bill is common sense! I do not understand why the government is resisting this private senators' bill. You should really reflect on it, because I think this is good work that's been done by this Senate and the senators involved, and it should be adopted by the government. It should be supported by the Greens and the crossbench, and it should be adopted because it will make a real difference to families in Australia.

Secondly, the bill would require the transport minister to make rules to establish minimum standards of treatment for passengers who experience delays, cancellations or denial of boarding. It shouldn't be done on an ad hoc basis. It shouldn't be a lucky dip. There should be standard minimum rules that apply—standard minimum rules of treatment, in this case—across the board. Each Australian should be treated fairly, and a component of that fairness should be consistency of treatment in terms of minimum standards. That would include the payment of compensation for significant delays, cancellations or denial of boarding.

Thirdly, there needs to be compensation for lost or damaged baggage. Again, there should be rules applied on a fair basis, consistently, across the whole industry. Again, it shouldn't be a lucky dip. The same rules should apply, so passengers know what to expect in that situation. Refunds should be provided in a timely manner, as should other compensation owed. You shouldn't have to wrangle with the airlines in relation to whether or not they're going to give you some offset for future travel or they're going to give you this or that. There should be clear rules about the payment of compensation when the service which you have paid for has not been delivered. It should be clear, it should be consistent and it should be fair.

On ground delays: in the case of tarmac delays lasting over three hours, the bill requires rules for carriers, including the obligation to provide timely information and assistance to passengers as well as the minimum standards of treatment of passengers that the carrier is required to meet. This closes any loophole through which a carrier could board a flight to avoid penalties, knowing the aircraft cannot depart within a specified time. We know; we've all been in this position. I've certainly been in that position. I've had family members in this position where they've boarded a flight and sat on it for hour after hour, and it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter, at the end of the day, whether or not you're sitting in the aircraft or the lounge when your flight is delayed. The end result is the same. Your flight is delayed. Therefore, the treatment should be the same. It doesn't matter where you're sitting during the course of the delay. Again, this is common sense. And this bill is replete with common sense.

On information: the carriers should be required to provide timely information in language that is simple, clear and concise. This includes any information regarding recourse against the carrier under the carrier's obligations. This is an important point. The rights of consumers to compensation in these circumstances should be clear and accessible. You shouldn't have to go digging through pages and pages of terms and conditions in small type to find your rights. It should be absolutely clear what your rights are, and the carriers should advise you of your rights in terms of compensation.

On an aviation code of conduct: the requirement should be to establish an airline code of conduct in direct response to the ongoing concerns of the ACCC—as evidenced by this $120 million hit imposed on Qantas—and other consumer advocacy groups regarding carriers' pricing strategies, inconsistent fare types and the experiences of third-party purchasers of airfares. The purpose of the code should be to ensure the fair and proper treatment of passengers and that passengers reach their intended destination as booked.

Finally, the government would also be required under the code to ensure transparency in pricing through a consistent definition of a 'ticket of carriage' in the terms and conditions of carriage, preventing hidden fees and charges and ensuring consumers are fully informed at the point of purchase. We should be making it as easy as possible for consumers to understand what their rights are, the terms and conditions of their contract of carriage and their rights to seek compensation.

We have a major issue here. Just reflect. Following the ACCC's action against Qantas, 86,000 passengers of Qantas are going to receive compensation for the way they were treated by Qantas under their contract.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What did you have to say, then? What did you do when you were in government?

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Multicultural Engagement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Eighty-six thousand passengers are going to receive remediation payments, Senator Bilyk, as a result of the ACCC's action. But those 86,000 passengers should not have had to wait for the ACCC action. This bill proposes a system to protect consumers, protect their rights, give them a pathway to compensation as easily and quickly as possible and ensure they don't have to wait for the regulator to step in and take action. It's so that the people across our great land who rely on airline travel not as a luxury but as a necessity are able to get compensation in circumstances where the supplier has not delivered to the consumer what the consumer has paid for.

In light of all that and the fact that consumers in the United States, the UK, Europe and Canada have these rights, give the people of Australia these rights and protections—these rights to compensation when their flights are cancelled and delayed and when they bear the costs of our airlines, including Qantas, not delivering what they say they are going to deliver.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024. Firstly, I want to congratulate Senator McKenzie on this excellent private senator's bill. This is a profound demonstration of the work that the opposition is doing because the government won't stand up for airline passengers. The government won't do the work that Australians deserve, and this bill brings justice to airline passengers who have been systematically ripped off by airlines, particularly by Qantas. But there's a long and sordid history to this. It is disgraceful when you consider the background, because it's clear why the government won't support this bill, this excellent bill, which I'll discuss shortly. The government won't support this bill because the government has been doing dirty deals with Qantas.

This is payday for Qantas. This is payday in the form of hundreds of thousands of dollars—in fact, it is probably more than that; it's probably many millions of dollars—as a result of the blocking of flights from Qatar and as a result of the dirty deal over the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, where Qantas delivered hundreds of thousands of dollars in free flights, flying campaigners around this country, with no regard for the many Indigenous Australians who did not support the Voice, who did not support the overreach, who did not support a change in our Constitution which would have profoundly divided Australia. The Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, has been more concerned with swanning around on the red carpet with Alan Joyce, pumping up his personal and political relationship, than in standing up for Australians. Frankly, Australians have had a gutful. They've had a gutful of the elites. They've had a gutful of the special deals.

Catherine King is not saying to the Prime Minister: 'Prime Minister, this is not appropriate. We've got to stand up for airline passengers. We've got to do the right thing.' She hasn't had the courage to say to the Prime Minister, her factional ally, 'Prime Minister, we can't keep doing these dirty deals with Qantas.' We know that Catherine King is a weak infrastructure minister. You only have to look at the budget last night, and you only have to look at what she has delivered for the people of Ballarat, her local electorate. Shame on Catherine King. In going through the budget papers last night, looking at the local investments for the people of Ballarat, there was zero. Regional Victorians have been betrayed by the Albanese government on Catherine King's watch, and, for the third budget in a row, there is nothing of any note—

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Urquhart, on a point of order?

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask that the senator refer to those in the other place by their appropriate titles, and I also ask that the senator not reflect on those in the other place in a manner that is not parliamentary.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Henderson, bear that in mind as you continue your contribution. Please go on.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much. I mean, that's a ridiculous point of order.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don't debate the point of order. Please continue the second reading.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms King, the member for Ballarat, has profoundly betrayed the people of Ballarat—not one single new project, no investment. No wonder she's so weak on this bill. No wonder she has betrayed airline passengers across this country. I will not be silenced in standing up for Victorians, I will not be silenced in standing up for airline passengers, and I will not be silenced in commending the work of Senator McKenzie, who is saying enough is enough. Enough is enough. So thank you for firing me up, because, I tell you what, I as a regional Victorian am disgusted—not one new project in Geelong, in Ballarat, in Bendigo or in Wodonga. The current member for Corangamite tries to say that $6 million for a basketball stadium is a new commitment. What a load of rubbish! It was taken out of the funding round and then had to be shoved back in, but it will never be built because there's not enough money. So, frankly, when it comes to infrastructure, this government is a disgrace. Contrast that with what we did under our government and you can all hang your heads in shame.

The Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill is a great reflection of how we are standing up for Australians. For many Australians, plane travel is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity, with hundreds of thousands of people travelling across Australia every day for medical appointments, business trips or leisure, and often under very dire circumstances—after the loss of loved ones, attending funerals. When you purchase a plane ticket, you expect to leave on time and arrive on time, and often there are very serious consequences if you don't. If you don't, airlines need to be held to account, as they are in so many other parts of the world.

And it's getting worse. The red-carpet swanning around between Anthony Albanese, the Prime Minister, and Alan Joyce has taken Australians backwards. The long-term average rate of flight cancellations prior to COVID was 1.5 per cent. In January 2024, passengers endured 3.1 per cent of flights being cancelled, and the long-term average rate of cancellations has blown out to 2.2 per cent. What a disgrace! What a disgrace—the ghost flights. The ACCC has now stepped in and fined Qantas. We're not just talking about a slap on the wrist. It's an $80 million fine for grossly misleading Australians, and $20 million in compensation. What a disgrace! And what does it say about the values and ethics of this company? It's about not just the gouging, the delays, the lack of consideration and the lack of care but also the grossly misleading conduct and negligent conduct, where, of course, they've been caught out and they've copped a very significant fine.

I want to just go through this bill because there are some important provisions in it. The bill includes the protection of minors. Recognising the vulnerability of minors, the bill would require the transport minister to make rules which mandate that minors under the age of 14 are seated next to their guardian or their parent at no extra cost. Can you imagine an airline charging extra so a child can sit next to their parent or their guardian? This provision is crucial for ensuring the safety and wellbeing of young passengers and providing peace of mind for families and caregivers.

The bill also provides minimum standards of treatment. The bill would require the transport minister to make rules which establish minimum standards of treatment for passengers who experience delays, cancellations or denial of boarding, which can often happen when a flight is overbooked. These standards are intended to ensure that passengers are provided with essential amenities such as food, water and accommodation during such disruptions, which, of course, would mitigate the inconvenience and this discomfort. The minimum standards may also set compensation for significant delays, cancellations or denial of boarding.

The bill also provides for compensation for lost or damaged baggage. This would require the minister to make rules which introduce provisions for passengers to seek compensation. It is absolutely unacceptable for passengers to suffer severe financial losses due to mishandling of their baggage, and so this bill establishes a framework for them to seek compensation for the loss or damage of their baggage. And, of course, it holds airlines to account for property entrusted to their care.

There are also obligations for refunds to be provided in a timely manner—no kicking the can down the road. In the case of tarmac delays of over three hours, the bill provides for rules for carriers, including the obligation to provide timely information and assistance to passengers, as well as providing for minimum standards of treatment of passengers that the carrier is required to meet. This closes any loophole that allows a carrier to board a flight to avoid penalties, knowing that the aircraft cannot depart within a specified time.

The carrier will also be required to provide timely information in language that is simple, clear and concise. This includes any information regarding recourse against the carrier in terms of the carrier's obligations. Also in the bill is a requirement to establish an airline code of conduct in direct response to the ongoing concerns by the ACCC and other consumer advocacy groups regarding the carrier's pricing strategies, which include inconsistent fare types and the experiences of third-party purchasers of airfares. So the purpose of the code is to ensure the fair and proper treatment of passengers and that passengers reach their intended destination as booked.

This bill includes some very, very important provisions. The code that I just mentioned will ensure transparency in pricing by ensuring a consistent definition of 'a ticket of carriage' and the terms and conditions of carriage, preventing hidden fees and charges and ensuring that consumers are fully informed at the point of purchase. I think we've all had the experience of trying to book an airline ticket thinking it's a certain price, only to find that we are pushed into a certain direction on the website and required to take on extra packages or elements of the ticket, only to find that the ticket price increases very substantially. This bill addresses the poor performance of the aviation sector, which has a very significant flow-on impact on the Australian economy. I think it's fair to say that Australians are sick of being gouged by the airlines due to a lack of competition. Australians are sick of being taken for granted. Australians are sick of sitting on the tarmac or in a terminal in distress because they can't get to where they need to go, with no accountability by the airline.

I really have to say, in seeing this bill put forward and hoping that the government will have a change of heart, that I feel for the hardworking flight attendants, pilots and ground staff of Qantas and Virgin because they often cop the brunt of passenger grief, and they are doing their very best. We salute those workers because they are working extremely hard, often under very difficult circumstances. Why should employees of Qantas or Virgin have to cop grief from passengers because Qantas or Virgin don't do the right thing or—let's cut to the chase here—because the government doesn't do the right thing? The Prime Minister is more concerned about swanning around on the red carpet with Alan Joyce and squandering millions of dollars on the Voice. Let's not forget that, for the first 18 months of this parliament, all we spoke about was the Voice. The Prime Minister had absolutely no regard for the cost-of-living pressures that Australians are facing. He talked about bringing Australians together, but all he did was divide Australia, and we paid a very, very high price—in excess of $460 million.

I want to reference the very good Senate inquiry last year, which was of course fiercely resisted by the Albanese government at every turn. We're still waiting for Alan Joyce to appear. Why is the government running a protection racket for Alan Joyce? He has questions to answer. He has treated this parliament with contempt. This is the pinnacle of our democracy here in this parliament. Everyone must comply with the law and everyone is accountable under our democracy. It is a shocking reflection on this government that they keep voting to protect Alan Joyce from appearing before the Senate inquiry and answering very important questions.

I commend this bill. I commend what it would do for Australian airline passengers and for competition in the airline market and I again plead with the government to have a change of heart and to stop worrying about its deals with mates and start standing up for the Australian people.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024. It is really very, very, very refreshing to see that, after almost a decade in government, the coalition have finally discovered the need to protect the consumer interests of airline passengers. We on this side of the chamber are certainly well aware that the market power and anticompetitive practices of the major airlines have not been serving Australians well, and I'm glad to see that those opposite have now come to the same realisation.

But let us compare this new-found enthusiasm.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You didn't have any of this enthusiasm for the 10 years you were in government. Let's compare the coalition's new-found enthusiasm for protecting airline consumers with their actual record when they were in government. During their time in government, there were no fewer than 12—I repeat: 12—reports from the ACCC which outlined problems with declining customer service standards, higher prices, record cancellations and record delays. Yet, for almost a decade in government, those opposite did absolutely nothing to tackle the power of the big airlines, increase competition or improve consumer protections. You weren't worried about it when you were in government, were you? We know from a June 2023 ACCC report that pricing is not the only barrier to entry for smaller airlines. Another major barrier is airport take-off and landing sites at Sydney airport. Yet those opposite failed to address this in government. They didn't do a thing.

During the pandemic, Qantas received $2.7 billion in taxpayer funded government assistance from those on that side, including $900 million in JobKeeper payments. Of course this assistance was necessary to keep the airline afloat during the pandemic. But I'll tell you what is outrageous. What is outrageous is that they were not required to pay any of this money back despite making a whopping $2.5 billion profit last financial year. So they got money from the government, there was absolutely nothing that said they had to pay it back and then they made a profit of $2.5 billion. Although they received money for JobKeeper, let's not forget that, while they were receiving all that money, Qantas was shamelessly outsourcing the jobs of the thousands of baggage handlers, catering workers and flight attendants that the other side now seem to feel some compassion for. You didn't care about it then, and we know you don't really care about it now. Qantas was shamelessly outsourcing those jobs.

I remember coming into this place time and time again to plead for Dnata workers who were stood down without any payment. You didn't care about them then. Where has this new-found love come from, I wonder? As I said, I came in here time and time again to ensure Qantas were made accountable for looking after their workforce in return for the taxpayer assistance they were receiving. Now we all know that the coalition always sides with big business over workers, so it's probably no surprise to anyone that coalition frontbenchers referred to the illegal sacking of 1,700 workers by Qantas as 'a good model'. Today they've found some compassion for these workers. Today they want you to think that they've always cared for these workers. Well, do not be misled. They also said, if I remember correctly, that it was in the best interests of the company for these workers to be sacked.

The bill that's currently before the Senate is the latest thought bubble from an opposition that's bereft of any real ideas or any real plan for the future. They come in here, they put up these little stunts, they have their rants and they get worked up by a simple request to be respectful and start yelling—situation normal. As the saying goes, though, never look a gift horse in the mouth. I guess if the opposition are willing to go in to bat for airline consumers after a decade of neglect then we should really welcome their change in attitude.

The other reason I appreciate the opposition bringing this bill on for debate is that it gives me an opportunity to compare the previous government's lacklustre record to what a government does when it is serious about improving airline competition and consumer protection. Whether it's providing regular public audits to improve transparency, growing access for new entrants or improving regional access, the Albanese Labor government's record stands in stark contrast to that of the previous government. We've also taken the important step of reforming the slot system at Sydney Airport for the first time in over 27 years.

I accept that Australians have been paying too much for travel. I have, too, often faced delays and cancellations. You really want to try living in Tasmania. The thing is we know there's still much more to be done. A stunt bill doesn't solve all the problems, and your new-found love for Qantas—or for the airlines and the workers—does not solve all the problems. There's an aviation white paper due to be released mid this year in accordance with our election commitment. Following a comprehensive process including industry round tables, a green paper and further public consultation, the white paper will outline the government's policy in relation to the safety, competitiveness, sustainability and efficiency of the aviation sector.

A reform of the kind proposed in the bill may happen, but, through the white paper process, various policy approaches are being carefully considered and compared and well designed, taking into account the extensive feedback of stakeholders. For the sake of airline competition and the true interests of the travelling public, we want to engage in genuine reform, not just stunts.

Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's really interesting to hear the different perspectives on this.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The reality!

Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, it's my turn to speak. Thank you. The Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024 is a bill for an act to require the transport minister to make rules prescribing carriers' obligations and for related purposes. I'm going to read the outline from the explanatory memorandum so we have an understanding of what this is actually about.

The purpose of this Bill is to require the Minister for Transport to make rules to prescribe certain obligations to passengers for airline carriers operating in Australian airspace.

That's pretty reasonable.

The obligations would be designed to protect passengers who experience a delay, cancellation or denial of boarding.

Again, that's pretty reasonable.

The Bill also requires the Minister to establish an airline code of conduct that provides for the protection of passengers and third parties from improper conduct by carriers.

I can't see anything wrong with that.

The Bill is in response to the increasing level of consumer complaints lodged against airlines in Australia. The latest ACCC airline monitoring report confirms once again that the sector is not where it should be—

so this is the ACCC airline monitoring report; it is not an opposition report. It is the latest airline monitoring report—

as does that fact complaints to the ACCC concerning aviation have risen by nearly 200% since 2018.

With around 93% of market share, Qantas and Virgin have a tighter grip on domestic air travel than another notable duopoly—Coles and Woolworths—do on the supermarket industry. The reality is that domestic airlines have been held largely unaccountable for their poor performance because Australian consumers have not had the option of choosing other operators.

In the international sector, airlines operating in Australia are already subject to similar requirements in other jurisdictions, such as the European Union, United Kingdom and Canada. The new rules would ensure foreign carriers operating in Australia are subject to the same consumer obligations as domestic carriers.

That all sounds pretty reasonable.

For me, in a nutshell, this is about three things. This is about fairness, transparency and communication. It's requiring carriers in Australian airspace to be fair and transparent and to properly communicate with their customers. I can't see anything wrong with that.

As my colleague Senator Henderson pointed out, plane travel isn't a luxury. It's not something that you always go and do just because you can. For many, many Australians, it is a necessity. The scale and geography of our country require people to fly to places. We can't always drive there and we can't always get a train there. We have to fly. That could be for medical appointments, medical treatment, a business trip or—if it is, in fact, a special luxury for a family—a family holiday, or, as Senator Henderson noted, it could be for a sad reason. It could be for a funeral. It could be for something you don't want to go and do but you need to go and do.

When you buy that ticket, when you pay that money—particularly in the current cost-of-living crisis if your family has saved to go on a holiday or has pooled what resources it has to go see a family member who is unwell—you have certain expectations. Those expectations are that you are actually going to get to the place that you have booked the ticket to go to, that you are going to get there in a reasonable time and that your bags are also going to be there when you get there. Those are not unreasonable expectations when you hand over a lot of money to purchase your airline ticket. But the failings of our major airlines over recent years have left many Australians frustrated, distressed, inconvenienced and out of pocket as a result of poor service and poor outcomes. There is no question that we are currently navigating an extraordinary cost-of-living crisis. The last thing that Australians need when they make the decision to travel, whether out of necessity or because they have scrimped and saved for a holiday for themselves or their family, is to lose some of that money as a result of poor service from our airlines.

Those service standards are significantly lower today than they were prior to the disruptions caused by the COVID pandemic. The long-term average of flight cancellations prior to COVID was 1½ per cent. In January this year, it became 3.1 per cent. But the on-time performance is something that has more impact. That's the delay in flights, being late. On-time performance is much, much worse now than it was prior to COVID. In January this year, 26.6 per cent of flights were delayed. That means you had a one-in-four chance of your flight being delayed. That is a lot of delayed flights. The pre-pandemic long-term average rate of delayed flights was 17.8 per cent, so less than one in five.

I know that many Australians have faced delayed flights over the last couple of years. If it happens once in a while, you understand that this can happen. And it is not always the airline's fault. There can be weather issues and there can be technical issues. If there is a technical issue with a plane, none of us have a problem with that being communicated to us or with understanding that. We all accept that, for the safety of passengers, we want things like that to be resolved.

But this is where the airlines need to lift their game: they need to communicate this to us—to tell us. We shouldn't be sitting on a flight on the tarmac for an hour or an hour and a half with little knowledge of what is going on, with an inability to communicate to family or to work colleagues who might be waiting for us at the other end because we actually don't know what's happening. That is not okay. This is where I talk about the fairness and the transparency and the communication. We have purchased a ticket—we've paid the money for that ticket—and we have a reasonable expectation that that service be delivered to us in the way it has been described.

Deteriorating and persistent poor performance by domestic airlines has exposed these inadequate protections for customers under Australian law, with millions of dollars in flight credits still owed nearly four years on from the outbreak of the pandemic. So many of us became confused as to whether we had flight credits, whether we had the passes, what they were, how and when we could use them, what flights we could use them for, whether or not they expired and, if they had expired, when they had. That's not fair. That's not transparent. And that's not good communication.

This state of affairs has persisted because there haven't been consequences, because of a lack of competition. We don't have a lot of choice. We don't have other airlines to go to.

The Senate aviation inquiry last year, which was fiercely resisted by this government at pretty much every juncture, exposed that the government does not have a plan to address lack of competition and poor performance within the aviation industry. This inquiry recommended better protections for consumers across Australia. That isn't a radical recommendation. That's a fair and reasonable recommendation: better protections for consumers across Australia.

This isn't a coffee or a muffin or something that you've bought for lunch; this is a significant expense, with impacts to individuals if their flights are cancelled or not on time. People miss significant personal and family events. People can miss connecting flights. People who are travelling could miss the beginning of a cruise or another trip that they have planned that's connected to it. People who travel who have paid for hotels and accommodation and are delayed may miss a concert that they've decided to go to. People who travel may miss important business meetings, so small businesses may have the cost of airline travel for their staff who actually weren't able to complete the purpose of their trip. That is unacceptable.

The recommendation for better protections for consumers across Australia is a reasonable one. But the recommendations were met with silence from the government, and everything was pushed off into a review.

Again, the coalition has been forced to act in this space because Labor won't. I commend my colleagues Senators McKenzie and Smith for putting this bill forward. This bill will tilt the balance from market giants to everyday Australians by protecting the rights of passengers in circumstances where delays, cancellations or denial of boarding occur. This bill instructs the minister to create rules for airlines within 12 months to ensure that passengers are compensated and treated fairly when they experience disruptions and delays. That's not unreasonable. These rules would be similar to protections already enjoyed by passengers in Canada, the United Kingdom, Europe and the United States. It's not clear to me why Australian passengers—Australian consumers—shouldn't be afforded those same protections.

The minister is required to consult widely on the rules to ensure that all views are taken into account in determining what the minimum standards should be, including in relation to meals, hotels, refunds and, potentially, monetary compensation, and that's fair and reasonable as well. It also instructs the minister to create a clear definition of an 'airfare' in direct response to the defence being lodged by Qantas in the ACCC lawsuit. The bill would require an aviation code of conduct to be established within 12 months to protect passengers and travel agents from improper conduct by carriers. There are codes in the retail sector, in banking and in telecommunications. Why should aviation be any different? A transport sector as vital as aviation in a country like Australia, where so many of us rely on air travel, should be subject to the same frameworks that protect consumers in other industries.

There are a few key provisions in the rules required by the bill, and one that I want to talk about in particular is the protection of minors—children. Recognising the vulnerability of children, this bill would require the transport minister to make rules which mandate that minors under the age of 14 are seated next to their guardian at no extra costs. This means that parents get to sit next to their children on the plane without having to pay extra. Who else do you want your children to sit next to in order to ensure their safety? That's common sense. A parent or guardian should not have to pay extra to have their children seated with them. This provision is crucial for ensuring the safety and wellbeing of young passengers and for providing peace of mind to families and caregivers. (Time expired)

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to be able to stand here today and talk about the Airline Passenger Protections (Pay on Delay) Bill 2024, but it's really sad that we have to be here. You would have thought the corporate responsibility of Australia's two major airlines, particularly our national carrier, would have been sufficient for us not to need to have such a bill. But, sadly, we do, and that's why we're here.

I'm very pleased to be standing here in support the bill. In supporting this bill, we are supporting many, many Australians who use air services—not just those who use airlines to go on a holiday, which we all love and enjoy, but many Australians who have to use air services for everything that goes on in their everyday lives. There are so many examples of non-leisure travel that has been disproportionately impacted over the last few years by the shoddy behaviour and the lack of competition which is driving inefficiency in our airline system. We have seen a significant decline in airline efficiency and capability since COVID, and it's really quite inexcusable. Of course we all understood during COVID that there were going to be significant implications, and Australian aviation suffered during that time, as did many, many other businesses. Most of that is behind us now, yet the performance of our major airlines in Australia has remained at a dismally low level.

As I said, while airlines are often seen as things that people use because they're going on a holiday, which is absolutely great, there are a lot of other reasons people use airlines. For instance, if you live in rural, regional or remote Australia, often the only way that you're able to access specialist treatment is by using an airline. As another example, just about every one of us in this place, apart from those that are members for the Canberra district, arrive here on an aeroplane. For our work, we have to fly on a plane. Many other businesses around the country also rely on air travel to enable them to do their business, get to their meetings and make sure that they're serving their customers.

Our elite sporting teams also rely on airlines. These are the sporting teams that play around the country every weekend, and during the week, in some instances, that, hopefully, inspire young Australians to be active and healthy, because they're going out there and cheering on their favourite team. Think about a team like the North Queensland Cowboys, as an example, all the way up in Townsville. The implications of delayed and cancelled flights on a team like them, who are often so far away from where they're playing on a weekend, can be very, very significant. There are many, many people from many places that are impacted by the shoddy performance of our airline sector.

The reality is, if you purchase a ticket on a plane, you have every reason to expect that it's going to leave on time and arrive where you actually booked the ticket for—that the destination you booked for is the destination your plane lands at. You also should have a reasonable expectation that the luggage that you've checked in actually arrives at that destination on the same plane that you do. But so often that is not the case.

Over recent years, we have seen major frustration for and inconvenience to Australians because of the significantly lower service standards that we are seeing from our airlines. We managed, before COVID, to have a pretty efficient and effective system where, went you went to the airport, you usually didn't worry about whether your plane was going to be delayed or possibly cancelled. It happened on occasion. Of course, everybody understands that, in the interest of safety—if there's a technical issue or bad weather—there are reasons why a plane may have to be delayed, and we all understood that prior to COVID. But the number of delays and cancellations that have happened since COVID would suggest that we are certainly not in a position where we can blame every delay on the weather or a technical issue with the safety of the aircraft—there seem to be way too many for that.

If you look at the change in the percentage of flights that are cancelled, before COVID it was about 1.5 per cent. One would suggest that 1.5 per cent probably correlates with the issues in relation to weather and technical safety. In January 2024 that figure was 3.1 per cent. It's more than double. There has to be some sort of explanation as to why that is the case. Similarly on performance, in relation to delays, prior to COVID about 17. 8 per cent of flights were delayed. Post COVID, we're seeing that rate, in January this year, at 26.6 per cent, so that's a significant increase in the number of planes that are being delayed.

The poor performance of airlines—whilst we acknowledge the inconvenience to and frustration of the many passengers around Australia who are suffering as a result of this poor performance—also has a significant impact on the performance of our economy. As an example, previously, if you went to catch a plane for a business visit or meeting in another destination, you would usually factor in a certain amount of time for travel to get to that meeting. You can no longer do that with any sense of confidence. In fact, I know many people in the business community who now will fly the day before because they're worried about delays or cancellations of planes which can mean that, by the time they get to their destination, they may have missed the reason for them being there. So people are factoring into their day hours and hours of additional, totally non-productive time that they didn't previously have to factor in, simply because of the unreliability of our airline system, in order to ensure they do get to their destination on time and are able to meet the purpose of their business travel. This is so unproductive for the Australian economy.

It also exposes the inadequacy of the compensation that is provided to the people who are inconvenienced. We certainly know that millions and millions of dollars in flight credits are still owed to Australians. This just shouldn't have happened. It also brings into question the competitive nature of our aviation sector. Clearly it is not working, because the competitive tension that should be in place isn't, because we've seen both airlines doing the exact same thing. Equally concerning is that, despite this lower performance and despite the fact that their planes are all full—I certainly know personally that I haven't been on a plane recently that hasn't been full, so the airlines aren't flying around the skies with half empty planes—we are still being inconvenienced. Why on earth are our prices still as high as they are? The planes are full, so we should see prices being reduced.

We also mustn't forget that these companies are the ones that took billions of dollars of support from Australian taxpayers during the pandemic. Of course we understood the devastating impact that COVID had on the aviation sector, and it had to be maintained during that time. But the fact that we have not seen an aviation sector who have thought that it was urgent or important enough to actually get back to pre-COVID efficiency levels suggests to me there is something wrong in the psyche of the airlines, because they're clearly making a lot of money. Last year, the Senate aviation inquiry—an inquiry that was fiercely resisted by those opposite, a government that doesn't seem to have a plan to address this poor performance, I might say—found that there was so much need for better protections for consumers, who have been hurt by airlines over and over again in recent years.

This is not the first example of the coalition having to come into this parliament and actually take up the role of protecting, supporting or delivering outcomes for Australian consumers because the government just isn't doing its job. This is a government that doesn't seem to understand that the job of a government is to govern. The job of a government is to protect Australian citizens and, in this instance, people who are flying from a substandard performance by our airline sector, which is leaving Australians significantly out of pocket and creating great productivity declines for our nation.

I commend the coalition senators who have sponsored this bill to try and address this issue because the government wasn't prepared to do it. What will happen now is we'll see that consumers actually have some power back in the negotiation with airlines. I hope that those in this place will actually see the merit of this particular bill. It begs the question why anybody would want to vote against something that protects Australian consumers from the poor performance of very, very large businesses. We've got two corporate giants at the head of our aviation sector in Australia, and we're saying that consumers should have a little bit more power and a better balance in that negotiation than they currently have, which has absolutely been evidenced by the way that passengers and consumers have been treated over the last few years.

The bill puts in place a number of very sensible provisions that will make sure that our consumers are better protected. Protecting minors by making sure that their safety and their wellbeing when they're on aircraft is maximised is an eminently sensible thing for us to be requiring the airlines to do. We also need to make sure that there is a minimum standard required of airlines so people actually know what their rights are: minimum standards of treatment for people who were delayed and minimum standards for those that have their flights cancelled or have been denied boarding, whether that be the provision of food and drink or accommodation if they require an overnight stay. It seems pretty reasonable that you should be compensated if your bag goes missing or is significantly damaged. We need to make sure that airlines are held to account for ensuring not only that your baggage gets to your destination on the same plane as you do but also that it's not damaged in the process. We need to make sure that refunds for cancelled flights that aren't able to be taken are done in a timely fashion. We need to make sure when a plane is on the ground and there are delays that that information is provided to the passengers in a timely fashion so that they can make the necessary decisions about their own circumstances to deal with the inconvenience of the delay. We also need to address the loophole where, if you board a flight, you're not covered by the same conditions or rules as if the flight hadn't been boarded, and make sure that there's consistency whether you're on the plane or off the plane if you're delayed. We also need to make sure that the airlines are required to provide that information to consumers in an easy-to-understand format and in an appropriate and timely fashion. That also includes making sure that those consumers that are impacted know what recourse is available to them should it occur, because right now there is a lack of information that's being provided to consumers about what their rights are if their flight is cancelled or delayed.

By establishing an aviation code of conduct we can make sure that, via this mechanism, carriers have to provide pricing strategies that are transparent. It will hopefully avoid inconsistent fare types, ensure fair and proper treatment of passengers and make sure that passengers reach their intended destination as booked. The government—and we'd like to think that, given the importance of and the level of reliance on the aviation sector, particularly in a country the size of Australia, the government would take it seriously—needs to ensure that under the code we have transparency in pricing, consistent definitions around ticket of carriage and the prevention of hidden fees and charges.

Sadly, once again we've seen that it was another organisation that had to get the government—or Qantas in this instance—kicking and screaming, to address this issue. We know that 86,000 Qantas customers will now be compensated because of the ACCC's intervention on this issue, because the government wasn't prepared to do anything. They're going to cop a whopping $80 million fine, which would have been better used to make sure that Australians were getting fair treatment when it came to—

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ruston, the time for the debate has now expired. The Senate will now proceed to the consideration of government business.