Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document


Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

Notice given 15 August 2006

Senator O’Brien: To ask the Ministers listed below (Question Nos 2376-2377)—With reference to Australian Design Rule (ADR) 81/01-Fuel Consumption Labelling for Light Vehicles:

(1) As part of the testing process, are the fuel consumption figures as displayed on new car fuel consumption labels achieved in normal driving at any time.

(2) Is there a built in tolerance between the listed consumption figure and the actual consumption that could be experienced by an average driver; if so, what is that tolerance.

(3) Has the department received complaints from consumers, car manufacturers and/or motoring organisations about the accuracy of the fuel consumption labelling; if so: (a) how many complaints were received in the financial years 2004-05 and 2005-06; and (b) what, if any, action has been taken as a result of the complaints.

(4) If ADR 81/01 has been in harmony with the regulation of United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, how does the ADR reflect Australia’s unique and diverse road conditions and environment.

(5) When is ADR 81/01 scheduled to be reviewed.

2376 Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services

2377 Minister for the Environment and Heritage

2378  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the answer to House of Representatives question on notice no. 2116 (House of Representatives Hansard, 29 May 2006, p. 156) concerning the development of land at Badgerys Creek, in which the Minister advised ‘The Government also previously said that it would retain the land at Badgerys Creek in Commonwealth ownership and protect the site from incompatible development in surrounding areas’.

(1) What type of development is defined as ‘incompatible development’.

 

 (2) What type of development is defined as ‘compatible development’.

(3) Given that the site is to be protected from incompatible development, what does the Government intend to do with this site.

(4) If the Government has no plans for the site at present, when will a final decision be taken on this site.

(5) Does the Minister intend to allow development on the land that is exempt from state and local government planning regimes.

2379  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the closure of runway 18/36 at Bankstown Airport:

(1) What consultations were undertaken before the decision by Bankstown Airport Limited to close runway 18/36.

(2) Was the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) consulted on the closure of runway 18/36.

(3) Did CASA commission a report on the impact of the closure either internally or externally; if so, when and who provided the report.

(4) Do weather conditions affecting runway 11/29 ever result in closure of this runway to air traffic.

(5) Do weather conditions ever make runway 11/29 unsuitable for landings by any type of aircraft; if so: (a) can details be provided of any such occurrences; and (b) what alternative arrangements have been made to ensure that the safety of aircraft operating out of Bankstown Airport will not be compromised.

(6) Will the proposed closure in 2008 of Hoxton Park Airport impact on any alternative arrangements for aircraft operating from Bankstown Airport.

(7) Following the closure of Hoxton Park Airport, other than Sydney Airport, what alternative arrangements have been made for a north/south runway in the Sydney basin; if no arrangements, other than Sydney Airport, exist or are planned, what impact are landings at Sydney Airport likely to have on the operation of that airport.

2380  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence—With reference to the open day at Canberra International Airport in 2006:

(1) Given that more than 7 500 people attending the open day had access to the runway extension, what arrangements were made to ensure the security of Defence facilities co-located at Canberra International Airport and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) aircraft either on the tarmac or in a hanger.

(2) Was the RAAF or the department consulted.

2381  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the open day at Canberra International Airport in 2006:

(1) What approval procedures are necessary to conduct an open day at an international airport.

(2) What involvement, if any, did the department or any of its agencies have in the open day.

 

 (3) Given that more than 7 500 people attending the open day had access to the runway extension, what arrangements were made to ensure: (a) the security of the airport and aircraft on the tarmac; and (b) the safety of the public attending the open day.

2382  Senator O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the answer to question on notice no. 1817 (Senate Hansard , 9 August 2006, p. 108) regarding Civil Aviation Safety Regulation (CASR) Part 139:

(1) In relation to emergency plan testing at Canberra, Sydney, Melbourne, Darwin, Bankstown and Launceston airports: (a) what was the nature of the exercises at these airports; (b) how were the exercises assessed; (c) what were the outcomes; and (d) what agencies were involved in the exercises.

(2) In relation to the auditing of aerodrome operating procedures: (a) how often are aerodrome operating procedures audited; and (b) for each of the financial years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 which airports have been identified as having an overdue aerodrome emergency exercise.

2383  Senator Parry: To ask the Minister representing the Attorney-General—With reference to the 1987 trial of Ryker (Faulkner) vs The Commonwealth and Flint :

(1) Is the Minister aware of: (a) the documents contained in the Department of Defence’s response of 15 May 1996 to Freedom of Information request 61/94/95 which includes: (i) an interview conducted with Brigadier Flint in 1973 by Inspector Jack Davis, (ii) Brigadier Flint’s two page response to the Inspector provided on 9 January 1973, (iii) Brigadier Flint’s response to a notice to show cause dated 1 March 1973, (iv) Brigadier Flint’s complaint to the Defence Force Ombudsman of 26 September 1975, (v) Military Board minute no. 103/1973, (vi) the minute of Brigadier Ewing of 28 March 1973, (vii) the request by Brigadier Flint to retain his appointment to London, (viii) the determinations of the Military Board which allowed Brigadier Flint to resign within 7 days and retain his pension; and (b) a report by Lieutenant Colonel DG Osborne, Chief Instructor, School of Military Engineering, dated 30 April 1968.

(2) Did the documents in part 1(a) relate to investigations into the conduct of Brigadier Flint in dealing with the Faulkners and/or Trisal Engineering, and other instances and allegations of misconduct by Brigadier Flint in his capacity as Engineer in Chief of the Australian Army.

(3) For each of the above documents: (a) was it discoverable for the 1987 trial; and (b) was it discovered; if not, was this a deliberate decision, a case of negligence or accident.

2384  Senator Bishop: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence—

(1) Following the announcement by the former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence on 29 February 2004 to establish a National Aviation Museum Trust for the Point Cook Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Facility in Victoria and the forming of a Trust Establishment Group (the Group): (a) how many positions on the Group were created; (b) who was invited to join the Group; (c) what was the basis for their selection; (d) who made the selection for those invited to join the Group; and (e) what was the charter of the Group.

(2) (a) When did the Group first meet; (b) who attended the meeting; (c) what was the agenda for the meeting; (d) what was the outcome of the meeting; and (e) can copies of the minutes be provided.

 

 (3) (a) On what dates did the Group meet; (b) who attended each meeting; (c) what was the outcome of each meeting; and (d) can copies of the minutes be provided.

(4) When was the decision taken to disband the Group.

(5) Who made the decision to disband the Group.

(6) On what basis was the decision made to disband the Group.

(7) (a) When was the decision taken to create the RAAF Heritage Advisory Council; (b) who determined the composition of the Council; (c) what was the basis for selection to the Council; (d) how long is an appointment to the Council; and (e) when will the first term expire.

(8) (a) How often has the RAAF Heritage Advisory Council met since its inception; (b) where were the meetings held; (c) on what dates were meetings held; and (d) can copies of the minutes of the meeting be provided.

(9) (a) When was a detailed Heritage Management Plan for Point Cook completed as per (press release dated 3 November 2005); (b) which consultants to the department were responsible for the development of the plan; (c) what were their recommendations; (d) which recommendations were accepted and which rejected; and (e) who received a copy of the plan.

(10) When did the RAAF Heritage Advisory Council meet with consultants to review and implement the recommendations.

(11) On Friday 11 August 2006, it was reported in the Herald Sun that a number of civilian users and businesses at Point Cook had been given notice to quit their premises by 12 September 2006: (a) which civilian users and businesses were given notice to quit; (b) why was notice to quit given to these groups; (c) what arrangements have been made to assist the civilian users in this process; (d) what advice has been given to groups on the future development of business facilities at Point Cook; and (e) what is the long-term plan for civilian users and businesses of Point Cook RAAF base.

(12) Will any work be carried out on the Bellman hangars which are considered to be ‘no longer safe’; if so: (a) who will finance the maintenance of the hangars; (b) when will work commence on the hangars; and (c) when will the work be completed.

(13) What decision has been made on the future use of the hangars at the site.

(14) Will the Point Cook RAAF Base be ‘retained in public ownership with the airfield and majority of the land’; if not, what are the current plans for the site.