1. Home
  2. Hansard & Papers
  3. Legislative Assembly
  4. 7 May 2002
Contact Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

Hoxton Park Airport

Printing Tips | Print selected text | Full Day Hansard Transcript         « Prior Item | Item 24 of 43 | Next Item »

About this Item
Speakers - Lynch Mr Paul; Debnam Mr Peter; Megarrity Ms Alison
Business - Matter of Public Importance


    HOXTON PARK AIRPORT

Page: 1608
    Matter of Public Importance

    Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [4.41 p.m.]: I ask the House to note as a matter of public importance Hoxton Park Airport and the surrounding suburbs. Hoxton Park Airport is located within my electorate and it is the subject of considerable controversy. Both in terms of the safety of residents living around it and in the amenity of their neighbourhoods, a substantial number of people have been calling for the airport's closure. The suburbs surrounding the airport include Cecil Hills, Green Valley, Hinchinbrook, Hoxton Park and West Hoxton. I have called for the closure of the airport on previous occasions, and I restate that call today. I have raised this matter on a number of occasions in this House. Indeed, I debated an urgent motion on the matter in 1999. It is appropriate to raise the matter again today because only several weeks ago there was a further accident at the airport.

    Hoxton Park Airport is a general aviation airport. It covers 85 hectares and has one sealed runway that is 1,098 metres in length. It is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. However, circuit training is restricted to between 6.00 a.m. and 11.00 p.m. on Mondays to Fridays, 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 6.00 a.m. to one hour after last light on Sundays. It caters to both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft, that is, planes and helicopters. It is usually busier on weekends than on weekdays, which says something about the people who are using the airport to train. As I understand the evidence, an average of about six or seven planes are in the air around the vicinity of the airport at any given time.

    The airport was originally constructed in about 1942 as part of a group of airfields to be used as aircraft dispersal fields in anticipation of a Japanese air attack. Others included Menangle, Bargo, the Oaks, Wallgrove, Fleurs, St Marys, Castlereagh, Pitt Town and Ettalong. Interestingly enough, none of those airfields is currently operating as an airport. RAAF pilots also used Hoxton Park Airport for training purposes and the like. After the war the airport was leased to the Hardy Rubber Company for use as a tyre test track. Eventually its use as an airport was resumed, but its current use is very different to what it was then. It is now used overwhelmingly for training purposes.

    Training schools, which are private businesses operated for profit, predominate the airport's current usage. Some 90 per cent of its air traffic is training aircraft. This has a number of consequences. One is that much of the use of the airport is for circuit training, that is, planes and helicopters often fly around the same course continually and repetitively. Another consequence is that a significant proportion of the planes are flown by inexperienced people. As a matter of commonsense, that must dramatically increase the likelihood of things going wrong. After all, if all the pilots were perfectly experienced and perfectly capable, why would they need to train?

    The amount of air traffic involved is significant. Indeed, Hoxton Park airport is the busiest airport in Australia without a control tower or radar. It is the busiest uncontrolled airport in the country. There seems to be no likelihood that a control tower will be installed, despite my calls for one. A control tower was constructed temporarily for the Olympics. As I have had occasion to say before, it is extraordinary that the aviation industry and authorities were prepared to provide a control tower for the Olympics but display such contempt for the people who live in my electorate that they will not have one for non-Olympic periods. Another interesting aspect is that the aviation industry itself—those who use the airfield—want the airport to remain uncontrolled. That is their preference; they oppose the installation of a control tower.

    There has been a series of accidents and incidents at Hoxton Park Airport. I am aware of a number of them which have been reported in the media, and I understand that a number of other incidents have not been reported publicly, which obviously makes the situation more severe. The most tragic events have been those in which life has been lost. In recent times there have been two of these accidents, resulting in three fatalities. The first accident occurred on 6 June 1998 and involved a mid-air collision between two aircraft. One of the aircraft, a single engine Piper Tomahawk, left Bankstown Airport to go to Hoxton Park to do some training. Two people were in that plane. Another plane, a Piper Archer, left Hoxton Park for a private flight by way of Camden and Bankstown and return to Hoxton Park. At about 11.05 a.m. on Saturday 6 June 1998 the two aircraft collided.

    As a result of the collision the Tomahawk lost a wing and plummeted to the ground, crashing into a house in Arnold Avenue, Green Valley. Tragically, the two people in the Tomahawk were killed. Thankfully, the house into which they crashed was unoccupied at the time. Also thankfully, the plane did not catch on fire, as that may also have potentially increased the number of injuries. Deputy State Coroner Stevenson, in her judgment at the inquest on 22 June 2000, ascribed the cause of the collision to human error. She was unable to positively ascribe blame to one pilot or the other. However, in the judgment she went on to refer to the "eternal problem with the uncontrolled airport at Hoxton Park". She noted that there was no tower controlling the airport and that it was the busiest uncontrolled airfield in Australia. She described the fact that the airport was near residential areas as "of grave concern". She observed that houses were very close to the airport and went on to say:
        It is of grave concern that this has occurred without there being some better control, or better objective control, of the airfield than there is at present.
    I can only agree with the Coroner. Obviously the proximity of the houses to the airport means that there is a great potential for things to go wrong through human error. The Coroner went on to say:
        I do not really think in this day and age that it is suitable to rely purely on human nature.
    The second fatal accident occurred on Wednesday 10 March 1999. This also involved a collision. One of the two planes was a bright yellow Pitts biplane used for aerobatic exercises which had been flown from Bankstown to Hoxton Park. The other plane was a light plane flown by a 70-year-old student pilot. The biplane came in to land at Hoxton Park and collided with the other plane as it was taking off. The pilot of the plane taking off was killed. At the inquest there was some discussion as to whether nearby trees obscured the view of the pilot of the biplane. I cannot understand how there could be an uncontrolled airport where there is the slightest possibility of trees obscuring the view of a pilot landing.

    The Coroner did not regard the trees as a cause of the accident. She was unable to definitively pinpoint the cause of the accident, although it obviously could have included inexperience or human error. However, the Coroner made some stinging comments about Air Services Australia. It changed the radio frequency for aircraft at Hoxton Park for the first time in 40 years. The Coroner said that she was "utterly concerned" about the role of Air Services Australia. She referred to incorrect advice about what the frequency was, and described the way in which the change in frequency after 40 years had been communicated as "bizarre, absolutely bizarre".

    Those two accidents are the most notorious in recent years at Hoxton Park. However, there have been other accidents that emphasise the seriousness of the situation. On Monday 13 March 2000 a twin-engine Beechcraft plane crashed into a paddock near Washington Way, Cecil Park. The pilot suffered head and facial injuries, and was rushed to Liverpool Hospital. This was described as a severe crash. Witnesses were reported as saying that they saw the plane flying low through a cloud before it hit the side of a hill. Luckily it did not hit nearby houses.

    Another incident occurred on Monday 28 August 2000. A 1947 Nord single-engine aircraft left Bankstown Airport with one pilot and one passenger. After about six minutes the plane started to lose power. The pilot tried to reach Hoxton Park Airport but was forced to make an emergency landing. The plane came down at Horsley Park inside the Olympic equestrian centre. The plane had 150 litres of aviation fuel on board. Thankfully, no-one was injured and the fuel did not ignite. However, as one witness was reported as saying, if the plane had been forced down 300 metres more to the east, it would have hit houses.

    The most recent accident occurred literally only weeks ago. At approximately 11.45 a.m. on Wednesday 10 April an amateur-built, privately operated Stod-Ham Glastar aircraft crashed at Hoxton Park. Thankfully, the 73-year-old pilot escaped without injury. Apparently the pilot makes planes as a hobby and was taking his plane for a test flight when the engine cut out and he was forced to make a crash landing. The plane came down less than one kilometre from houses. There is an overriding sense that a much more serious event was avoided more by good luck than good management. In that case there is another additional disturbing aspect. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau [ATSB] has indicated it has no interest in investigating the accident. Its decision, and the basis for it, is quite concerning. In a letter to me dated 23 April the Executive Director of the ATSB said in part:
        Under the Air Navigation Act 1920, the ATSB independently investigates aircraft accidents, incidents and safety difficulties. From among more than 6,000 such occurrences reported to us each year we investigate about 100 that are likely to have the most significance for future safety, with the safety of fare paying passengers a priority. The ATSB does not have the financial or personnel resources to attend every accident.
    In my view the litany of accidents at Hoxton Park necessitates a somewhat sterner response than that. Moreover, the ATSB approach is biased against the safety of residents living in my area to the benefit of passenger airlines. The safety of the paying passengers is obviously important, but so is the safety of residents of southwest Sydney. As the Minister for Public Works and Services interjects, maybe the ATSB should actually get real. This sad and sorry litany of incidents and accidents leads to several conclusions. The causes of the various incidents include human error, mechanical failure and organisational incompetence. By their very nature, in practical terms those things cannot be prevented in the future. Events like this will inevitably occur again. The issue is whether the risk of these things happening, granted the consequences, can be accepted.

    The risks in my view are increased by the absence of controls, notably and obviously a control tower and radar. The consequences are very severe. The number and proximity of the nearby suburbs makes the consequences just too great. In my view the airport should close. It is also worth noting that one of the relevant issues is that over time the situation is likely to get worse, not better. That is because there is already an underutilised capacity at Hoxton Park and because the Federal Government wants to change operations at Bankstown, which will lead to more training aircraft coming to Hoxton Park.

    Mr DEBNAM (Vaucluse) [4.51 p.m.]: I appreciate the opportunity to speak in this debate today, which has obviously been prompted by the tragic accident last Sunday when a family of four were killed.

    [Interruption]

    The honourable member for Liverpool says it has not, but if one reads Hansard, every time there has been a light aircraft accident in surrounding airports the honourable member has spoken in this House about Hoxton Park. Be that as it may, in the tragic accident last Sunday four people lost their lives on approach to Bankstown airport. An official investigation into the accident is under way and it is not appropriate to make any further comments about it today. However, the honourable member for Wagga Wagga told me that the deceased family was returning from Wagga Wagga after celebrating a twenty-fifth wedding anniversary with cousins Frits and Yoka Slieker. The Opposition puts on the record its condolences to the family of the people killed.

    I congratulate the honourable member for Liverpool on the number of times he has raised his concern about Hoxton Park airport. His point of view appears to be always the same—simply close the airport. Clearly that would affect a very large number of people, not just his constituents. I can understand the honourable member's concerns about light aircraft in that area, which he has eloquently put on behalf of his constituents. The airport was established for some time during the Second World War and there is a very real issue of the interaction between such a busy airport and the surrounding community. The issue to which he is referring is urban planning across the Sydney basin, and he should pursue with the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning what the Government is planning for the greater Sydney area. It would seem to me that over a number of years very little has been done.

    The honourable member is certainly right to continue to raise safety concerns whenever he has the opportunity, and he has done that. I am sure his constituents are actively lobbying him to do so. It is also worth noting—I think the honourable member mentioned it in passing—that the operation of the airport really does involve a large number of people in businesses in various aircraft operations whose interests also need to be taken into consideration in any discussion about the future of that airport. I am sure the honourable member has pursued this topic with the Federal Government on a number of occasions and that the Federal Government will approach those discussions very sensibly with him. I wish the honourable member well in pursuing those discussions.

    The line I have suggested that the honourable member should pursue is the question of planning in this area. What has Department of Urban Affairs and Planning considered over the years? How has its policy changed over the years in relation to these sorts of operations and activities in the Sydney basin? That would be a more productive area to pursue, given the honourable member's State interests. As I said, I am sure the honourable member would get a very sympathetic hearing from the Federal Government about all his concerns.

    Ms MEGARRITY (Menai) [4.56 p.m.]: As previous speakers have said, the tragic crash on the weekend in which four members of the one family were killed is of concern to all honourable members, and we extend our condolences to the family. The accident made me vividly recall a mid-air collision of another plane which left Bankstown to fly to Hoxton Park in June 1998. The honourable member for Liverpool reminded us today of the death of the two occupants of that plane, which crashed into an unoccupied house. The unsung story of that accident was that a child's birthday party was being conducted in the house next to the one that was demolished by the plane. Community concerns about these sorts of incidents are constantly before local members in the south-west of Sydney and certainly the western part of my electorate. They serve to bring home the danger that we face on a daily basis.

    Issues in relation to Hoxton Park and Bankstown airports have been raised in his House before, and indeed they have because they are legitimate concerns of this House. On 3 June 1999 when Hoxton Park was being discussed the honourable member for Liverpool said there was no control tower at Hoxton Park and that planes fly without the direction of a control tower and according to visual flight rules [VFR]. The anomaly is that it was considered important enough to have a control tower for the Olympics but the day-to-day safety of the residents of those suburbs is not considered on the same scale, which is to be regretted.

    On that day the honourable member for Wakehurst—the eminent authority on safety issues and plane issues—told us that he undertook his aircraft pilot training at Bankstown airport. He told the House that he took off in Piper Tomahawks from Bankstown airport—I wish I had known the exact occasions on which he did that—and landed at Hoxton Park airport. One can see that the suburbs in my electorate are directly affected by flights to and from both Hoxton Park and Bankstown airports. The honourable member for Wakehurst, informative as he always is, said that planes have blind spots, just like cars. He referred in particular to Piper Archers, Piper Cherokees and Cessnas.

    Indeed, it is interesting to note that on that day in June 1999 he personally recalled a plane crash into a factory at Bankstown with six people aboard. He advised the House that he sent the May Day call because he could see smoke coming from the factory. I say that is interesting because obviously the tragic crash on the weekend of an aeroplane into a factory at Milperra echoes what the honourable member must have witnessed prior to June 1999, although that was not part of the media coverage of the events of Sunday. The honourable member also said:
        I was flying above it because both aircraft had taken off from simultaneous runways.

    The honourable member, in his attempt to justify the Hoxton Park arrangements, responded to statements made by the honourable member for Liverpool by saying the crash had occurred "despite the fact it was flying under supervision from the control tower at Bankstown". That is cold comfort to those affected by the crash, and it would ring hollow for the family and friends of the four members of the van Montfoort family who were killed on Sunday. But, politics aside, such incidents highlight the ongoing concerns of my constituents about the thousands of aircraft movements to and from Hoxton Park and Bankstown airports.

    That is why, as I have previously said, to our astonishment, in December 2000 the Federal Government announced its intention to expand Bankstown airport. In March 2001 it announced its intention to sell Bankstown, Hoxton Park and Camden airports by a trade sale in the second half of 2002. Indeed, one private owner is proposed for all three airports. The Federal Government has consistently refused to shut down Hoxton Park airport or to take any significant steps to improve it. Like Hoxton Park, Bankstown airport operates 24 hours a day seven days a week. I must advise the House that, according to the latest advice I have received, the Bankstown airport tower operates between 6.00 a.m. and 8.00 p.m. so we are a little bit better off than Hoxton Park, but not much. In the time I have left I would like to record the advice I received today from Kim Ellis, the General Manager of Bankstown Airport Ltd, who said:

        We were deeply saddened by the accident that claimed the lives of four people on Sunday. On behalf of the Chairman, Board, Management and Staff of Bankstown Airport, we extend our deepest sympathies to the family and friends of those who died.
    The House echoes those sentiments. Both Hoxton Park and Bankstown airports need serious consideration by the Federal Government. [Time expired.]

    Mr LYNCH (Liverpool) [5.01 p.m.], in reply: I thank the honourable member for Vaucluse and the honourable member for Menai for their contributions to this discussion. I make the point that the tragic events of Sunday were not the prompt for my raising this matter. Last week I spoke to various people about raising the matter for discussion today. It was, therefore, an almost frightening experience, when I was looking through papers on Sunday to prepare some notes on what I would say today, that I heard what had happened at Bankstown airport. If anything, it re-emphasised the horror of the events that led to the tragic deaths on the weekend.

    I would like to comment on some of the statements made by the honourable member for Vaucluse. I thank the honourable member for a sensible and useful contribution to the discussion. He said that my response has simply been to call for the closure of Hoxton Park airport. At one level, that is quite right. But at various times I have suggested other alternatives. For instance, I put to the Federal Government a proposal to have an inquiry so that we might have proper discussion about whether there are any alternatives. That proposal met with a brick wall.

    For some time I have complained about the lack of a control tower and the lack of radar at the airport. If there was the slightest suggestion that the airport would get a control tower with radar, I may well have a somewhat different view about the future of the airport. But, granted that there has been no serious attempt to look at options and that there has been not just a refusal to have a control tower but a campaign against one by the aviation industry, and given the circumstances I outlined when I moved this matter of public importance, it seems to me there is no option but to call for the closure of the airport. If someone were to offer an alternative, I would be very happy to have a look at it. But none of the alternatives that have surfaced have been accepted. That leaves us with the inevitable concern that Hoxton Park airport is the busiest uncontrolled airport in Australia, without a control tower, without radar and right next to residential developments.

    The honourable member for Vaucluse said that the livelihood of a number of people is based upon the operation of the airport. That is certainly true. But, on a simple assessment of what is more important—whether residents will be killed, or whether people's financial interests will be affected—it seems to me that there is no equation between the two considerations; it is just all one-way traffic in favour of protecting the residents. I should also make the point that whilst the number of people employed at Hoxton Park airport is quite significant, the total number involved is nowhere near as large as the number at Bankstown airport. For example, Bankstown airport probably has a lot more community support than Hoxton Park airport. One reason for that is the significantly greater number of people employed at Bankstown airport and in the surrounding area than there are at Hoxton Park.

    The honourable member for Vaucluse was very optimistic in thinking that I might be having some success with the Federal Government in respect of these matters. Regretfully, I have to say that I have had no success at all despite raising these matters with the Federal Government. After I had raised the matters in May 1999, John Anderson, the Federal Minister for Transport, wrote back to me and made it absolutely clear that the Federal Government had no plans to close Hoxton Park Airport. He said so as bluntly as that. The only possible circumstances in which he said he could imagine Hoxton Park Airport closing would be if the Badgerys Creek proposal progressed, which would probably make it impossible for the Hoxton Park Airport to operate. But, apart from that one option, the current Federal Government sees no circumstances at all in which it would be prepared to close that airport.

    It is interesting that, despite some of the rhetoric from the aviation industry—that the Hoxton Park facility is so critical it could never under any circumstances be closed, and that no-one had ever thought about that—any serious look at the Badgerys Creek proposal leads to the conclusion that the Hoxton Park facility must close. Therefore the Hoxton Park facility cannot be as critical as everyone makes out. In addition to that, Ralph Hunter, when he was Federal Minister, wrote letters to the effect that it was proposed that Hoxton Park Airport would close. So there has certainly been a strain, all through the history of this matter, suggesting that Hoxton Park Airport would close. As I say, that is a useful rebuttal of the rhetoric from some in the aviation industry.

    Most of the people who use Hoxton Park Airport are not from my electorate of Liverpool. Whenever I raise this matter I receive a series of letters from people complaining and telling me that I do not know what I am talking about. They all tell me that they are not silvertails—but they all seem to have addresses in Willoughby and close-by areas, so I am a tad sceptical about their claims. Probably the most unique suggestion about saving the airport coming from the silvertails from Vaucluse was to try to get it listed on the national estate due to its heritage significance deriving from the Second World War. The only problem with that proposal is that the really significant heritage items are things called revetments—structures to protect aeroplanes from being bombed. But the revetments are not actually on the airport; they are on environmentally sensitive land west of the airport owned by the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. So one has to be a tad cynical about the misuse of the heritage process to try to save the airport. That proposal will not work. This airport must close.

    Discussion concluded.


Last modified 05/12/2007 16:36:57   :   Update this page