Senator MACKAY (1:41 PM) —The Airports Amendment Bill 1999 makes five changes to the Airports Act 1996. The opposition is relaxed about four of the changes proposed. However, we have an amendment to the fifth change that we understand the government will not oppose. There are some matters that do need to be put on the record, and I will be as brief as possible.

The first change I wish to mention extends the regulatory mechanism for activities around airports to include non-structural activities that may intrude into airport operations. The existing mechanism is designed to ensure that developments around airports do not affect safety, efficiency or the regularity of aviation operations.

The amendment provided by this bill will broaden the definition of controlled activities to include non-structural activities such as operating lights that are capable of interfering with aviation or operating equipment, or a facility which reflects light that may interfere with aviation; any activity resulting in air turbulence that could affect normal flight; and any activity emitting smoke, dust or gas that affects the ability of an aircraft operating under visual flight rules. The bill does not interfere with ordinary or domestic activities. It also gives the Commonwealth the power to make regulations setting out the standards for activities covered by the broadened definition.

The second change I will cover, and which the Labor Party supports, clarifies the situation regarding the excision of land from an airport site. If excision takes place there will be no requirement to surrender the entire airport lease. Airport owners, we understand, have requested this amendment in order to allow the acquisition of minor parcels of land or the disposal of land on the boundaries of airports.

The third change clarifies the act to make it clear that it does not apply to military air operations at airports that are jointly used by civil and military operators. The fourth change that Labor supports makes it clear that the granting of rights to use land on a leased property, such as an easement, does not constitute an acquisition of an airport lease. Thus, the first amendment is a sensible broadening of the scope of the application of the act to ensure the maintenance of safety in aviation, and the next three are designed to clarify issues in the principal act.

The fifth change relates to an extension of time for phase 2 airport owners to have access undertakings to airport services approved by the ACCC. The current act gives airport owners 12 months to negotiate access arrangements with airport users. The following services are covered: firstly, services that are necessary for the purposes of operating and/or maintaining civil aviation services at the airport; secondly, services provided by means of significant facilities at the airport, being facilities that cannot be economically duplicated.

The ACCC has identified the following groups of services that meet both these criteria. They are: airport facilities, including aircraft movement, areas such as runways, taxiways, aircraft parking areas, safety devices, lighting and vehicle access to these facilities; passenger processing areas, including departure and holding lounges, immigration and customs service areas, check-in desks and baggage handling; sites for providing refuelling facilities; ground service and freight equipment storage sites; light and emergency maintenance facilities; and land side vehicle access but not car rental facilities or car parks. The ACCC said it was unlikely the following services met both criteria: administrative office space; flight catering facilities; commercial and retail facilities; cargo terminal facilities; waste disposal facilities; and heavy and planned maintenance facilities.

Airport operators can submit access undertakings for qualifying services to the ACCC. This must specify the terms on which airport services will be made available to airlines and other users of airport services, or the undertaking must establish a process for negotiation of terms and conditions to access including dispute resolution procedures. The ACCC is required to conduct public consultation before the undertakings for access are approved.

The aim of this mechanism is apparently to:

provide a means by which the owner or operator of a facility can obtain certainty about access arrangements before a third party seeks access.

That is from the second reading speech accompanying the Competition Policy Reform Bill 1995. If the ACCC has not approved an undertaking within the time period of 12 months, a ministerial determination is made that subsection 192(2) of the Airports Act applies at the airport. When the act is declared to apply, any airport service for which an access undertaking has not been approved by the ACCC will be declared for the purposes of part IIIA of the Trade Practices Act 1974. The latter act provides a comprehensive access regime.

Under the Trade Practices Act, current airport users and potential airport users have the right to negotiate terms and conditions of access with the airport operator first and, if negotiations prove to be unsuccessful, there is the opportunity for the matter to be arbitrated by the ACCC. Aircraft owners prefer access undertakings to declared services because undertakings set out the `generic' basis for provision of services, whereas declared services give airport users the right to request and negotiate specific terms and conditions of access and have disputes arbitrated by the ACCC. As I indicated, the current act gives airport owners the time period of 12 months. In the bill we have before us, it is proposed that this time be extended to 24 months.

The opposition does not agree to the government's original proposal to grant all airport owners a 12-month extension. Therefore, we oppose schedule 1, item 1, page 3, lines 5 and 6, and schedule 1, item 17, page 7, lines 6 and 7. We also propose that at schedule 1, item 18, lines 8 and 9 be omitted and the words as circulated in the chamber be substituted. The effect of this amendment will be that airport owners can seek a one-off 12-month extension of the period during which an access undertaking may be lodged with the ACCC by applying to the ACCC for such an extension. This is a more satisfactory method, in our view, of dealing with the issues before us. We believe that airport owners should apply and justify their application rather than simply benefit from a blanket extension. The amendment is a reasonable compromise for the interests of both owners and users.

I would like to thank the government and the other parties for their support of this amendment and for recognising that the blanket extension was not the best path to go down. I commend the amendments to the Senate and, given my understanding that they will be passed, I commend the amended bill to the Senate.