Mr CADMAN (10:46 AM) —In debating the Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2000 I wish also to pursue the topic of airports, and nothing has been more topical in Sydney for many years than Sydney's airport needs. I vaguely remember, perhaps 30-odd years ago, a very big debate reported in the press where the then Prime Minister, Billy McMahon, and other members of the parliament were proposing various sites for Sydney's airport needs, and sites in Western Sydney—strongly opposed at that time by the Australian Labor Party—and Taren Point were mentioned. No decision was made. Then with the election of the Whitlam government the most notable thing I remember was the then Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, saying to the people of Galston that they would get Galston. That produced a very interesting political fallout for the Australian Labor Party in my local area. In fact, it resulted in a by-election which bought Philip Ruddock, the now Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Minister for Reconciliation and Aboriginal Affairs, into this parliament and eventually a change from the Labor Party in 1974 in Mitchell.

Sydney's airport needs has been a vexed question for all political parties, and there have been shifts in attitudes. Whilst I intend to be critical of my opponents, because I think that there have been double standards from the Australian Labor Party, anybody would be foolish to suggest that this is not a difficult decision. There is the built-up conurbation of Sydney, the appropriate selection of the site—if the decision is to build a second airport—the future development of Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport, and the demand by international travellers that Sydney must be the gateway to their entry to Australia, which may rankle with those citizens of other states but is just a physical factor and a demand factor that is driven by the market and the requirements of international travellers that Sydney be their first point of entry. I guess there is Sydney Harbour and the Opera House—a whole series of reasons why that may be.

The airport demands and the aircraft movements in Sydney have grown significantly ahead of those in other states. One of the first things Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser did at the time was to raise these issues with the then Premier of New South Wales, Neville Wran. And the Commonwealth instigated a study called `The Major Airport Needs of Sydney', the MANS study, which resulted in a report—from which the state withdrew part way through, by the way—that concluded that an extra parallel close-spaced runway should be built at Mascot and land reserved for a second airport, and the preferred site was Badgerys Creek.

Mr Wran was of the opinion that it was not within the state's interest to build the close-spaced parallel runway at Mascot but preferred to opt for Badgerys Creek. I remember Peter Morris, the then Minister for Transport, announced in 1983 that the Australian Labor Party would abandon the close-spaced parallel runway and would identify a spot for a second major airport. That was basically the position of both parties, except the coalition said that as an interim measure the close-spaced parallel runway needed to be built and that would take the pressure off the need for immediate action on a very expensive second international airport somewhere in Western Sydney, probably at Badgerys Creek. In 1982 the Hon. Wal Fife, the then Minister for Aviation, formally announced that that was the coalition's intention.

Over time the then minister, Peter Morris, and the cabinet adopted the decision that a close-spaced parallel runway should be built, and in March 1989 that resulted in the resignation of Gary Punch, who was Minister for Telecommunications and Aviation Support. Mr Punch could not accept the cabinet decision and his statement in the House—and I rely on the Parliamentary Library here—accused the environmental impact study consultants of a predetermined result on the close-spaced parallel runway.

I know that my friend and colleague at the table the current member for Barton will remember these issues with great clarity. I have enjoyed a similar relationship with both the current member and with Gary Punch—it was a very friendly relationship. There were political differences, of course, but there was goodwill with the differences.

On 13 November 1991, the cabinet gave the go-ahead to the construction of the third runway and, at the same time, increased funding for the purchase of land at Badgerys Creek. That brings us basically to the time of the election of the current government in 1996. Before passing on to the period since that, I seek leave of the House to table a summary of these chronological events produced by the Parliamentary Library.

Leave granted.

Mr CADMAN —I am very happy with that decision and the cooperation of the House. In 1996, John Sharp, as Minister for Transport and Regional Development, announced that the government of the day would fulfil its obligations and that Sydney and Sydney west would be withdrawn from the airport leasing process until there was a solution to aircraft noise issues there. The east-west runway would be opened and a full environmental impact study would be undertaken on Sydney west airport—Badgerys Creek. The coalition felt that it had been some time since an EIS had been done on Western Sydney and that it was needed. It was a commitment prior to the election. The decision to build Sydney's third runway produced some unexpected opposition after 1996. We saw members of the Labor Party who had previously endorsed a government position to build the east-west runway suddenly deciding that they would take the opportunity to change their minds and oppose it. A similar thing happened in Western Sydney, with the member for Chifley and others withdrawing support for a second airport at Badgerys Creek—a job creator, a benefit to the people of Western Sydney, a substitute for the cuts that had taken place to establishments like HMAS Nirimba and other government establishments which were really important to employment creation in Western Sydney. Those members of the Australian Labor Party suddenly decided that with the election of a new government they would oppose the building of an airport at Badgerys Creek.

That change in attitude created chaos in local government through the WESROC organisation and amongst community groups. It has been my view that the people in Western Sydney have consistently felt—for all the time that I have known them, which is some time as a member of parliament but before that as well; I guess the period ranges over 30 years—that they do not want an airport dumped on their doorstep by any government. It did not matter whether it was in the days of Les Irwin and John Armitage or whether it was when Paul Keating was at Bankstown and we did not hold the seats of Western Sydney—it has been a consistent view. But somehow or other during the 1980s and early 1990s, the Australian Labor Party were able to convince their members and the local government authorities they controlled in Western Sydney that an airport in Western Sydney would be good for the people of Western Sydney. They reverted to their true views with the election of a coalition government.

The coalition has had to confront some difficult issues with regard to the airport. First of all, they were historically committed to a runway, which the Australian Labor Party ultimately built at some political cost. They were also committed then to study again the need to build a second airport at Badgerys Creek, while still being committed to solving the problems of the airport needs of Sydney, a commitment originally made by Malcolm Fraser and Wal Fife. This continued as a theme right through opposition and into government in 1996. So what do we have? First we have a minister for aviation, the Hon. John Sharp, introducing a bill called the Airports Transitional Bill 1996 which opened the east-west runway, giving Sydney Kingsford Smith the use of three runways, with a full EIS undertaken on Sydney west airport. The result of that decision was to produce a report which was released finally by John Anderson as Minister for Transport and Regional Development on 30 June 1999. That is the full report and the environmental impact statement for the proposed second Sydney airport at Badgerys Creek. First of all, a site was identified from various competing sites and Badgerys Creek was settled upon as being the most suitable option for a second Sydney airport. There were a number of configurations for runways and some slight variations on site in Badgerys Creek. The EIS was finally produced in June 1999. The government was then confronted with a decision as to what they would do about the airport needs of Sydney. The minister at that time, John Anderson, said

This EIS did not satisfy the people of Western Sydney or the councils. I pay tribute to and draw attention to people such as Allan Ezzy from Holroyd City Council, who was mayor at that time and has followed this issue strongly. Mrs Kay Vella is another name I remember. They consistently opposed the construction of an airport in Western Sydney, despite the hypocrisy of the Australian Labor Party. It can be called nothing else because members representing Western Sydney led their constituents to believe that they were opposed to construction of an airport. Suddenly, with the election of an Australian Labor Party government, they were in favour of an airport in Western Sydney. With the election of a coalition government, again they were against an airport. So it is no wonder that the people of Western Sydney were confused and rejected this opportunism.

The decision announced recently by the current government was made after assessment of all of the environmental impact statements, the future needs of Sydney and the difficulty of constructing an airport so far from the major airport in Sydney, Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport. The prospect of transporting people through Sydney traffic from one major airport to another, trying to encourage people to use Badgerys Creek, whether they be people from the regions or international travellers, the complexity of building infrastructure for road and rail transport, the provision of water services and the impact of the Western Sydney orbital have all been considered by the government. I point out to the House the consistent application of coalition governments to this difficult problem and their ability, point by point, to produce solutions. Going back as far as I can remember in political terms to the early 1970s and right through the 1980s, coalition governments have displayed a consistent application of purpose and the need for a result for Sydney which took the views of the people of Western Sydney into careful consideration.

It is not the purpose of this government to construct an airport at Badgerys Creek. That decision has been made. I know that while some residents of Blacktown, Penrith, Windsor, Richmond, the Blue Mountains, Campbelltown and further south may have favoured it, generally the view was that the government should not construct an airport at Badgerys Creek, for a number of reasons. Some reasons were environmental, with additional smog and deterioration of air quality—CSIRO reports from years ago were verified by the environmental impact statement. It would not be aircraft causing a smog problem but the increase in motor vehicle traffic which would result around an airport, in an area where there are air inversion currents which would produce the sort of continuous, year-round smog typical of Los Angeles. Another reason was the disruption to their lifestyle and the noise that an airport would create. Residents realised that most of the jobs would not be created for locals, that people would have to be brought into the area and that there would be only menial jobs for local people. They were wise enough and shrewd enough to know that, on balance, no real advantages would come from an airport at Badgerys Creek.

There are a number of arguments against the construction of Badgerys Creek, some environmental, some economic and some sheer commonsense transport infrastructure management decisions. The decision of this government is to maximise the use of Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport. The Sydney Olympic Games indicated what our personal best at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport could be. Despite massive increases in air movements, Australia handled twice the number of passengers through Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport that we have attempted to handle ever before, without chaos and without difficulty. Before the Olympic Games, Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport had not been tested to its maximum and there is reserve capacity which can be called on. The capacity for people of Sydney to be serviced by Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport continues without breaching the curfew or creating difficulties for people living in the immediate vicinity.

Down the track, perhaps there will need to be some changes. As those changes occur, the government's decision is to upgrade Bankstown airport, providing better passenger facilities and links between Bankstown airport and the CBD, upgrading Bankstown airport's links into the main road, rail and air transport grids. I am very pleased with this decision. I think it was the only commonsense decision that could be arrived at which will meet the future needs of Sydney for a predictably long time. The figures I have seen on the growth in air movements and passenger numbers through Sydney indicate that the government's decision should see a satisfactory movement of passengers, retaining Sydney as the number one gateway for Australia well into the 2020s. I congratulate the government. This has been a hard passage and was a difficult decision, but it is a good one. (Time expired)