- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Assembly
- 1 May 2003
Bankstown Airport
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 6 of 44
| Next Item »
Page: 183
Mr ASHTON (East Hills) [12.31 p.m.]: I move:
That this House:
(1) notes the Federal Government's decision to sell Bankstown Airport.
(2) calls on the Federal Government to include an environmental impact study and the introduction of a night curfew in the sale documents.
(3) calls on the Federal Government to include the retention of the Australian Aviation Museum at Bankstown Airport as a condition of any sale.
It has long been known that the Federal Government proposes to sell Bankstown Airport. As we know, it now proposes to sell Bankstown Airport as one lot with Camden and Hoxton Park airports. There are three points I make about this. First, that on numerous occasions this House has placed on record the State Government's opposition to the sale of Bankstown, Camden and Hoxton Park airports. The Government believes that the loss of those airports would severely disadvantage country people in New South Wales, and that it would severely disadvantage the hundreds of thousands of residents who live within Sydney's south-western suburbs. Nevertheless, the Government has made the decision to hopefully sell the airports as a package of three.
The Federal Government has announced that it is going to sell Bankstown Airport particularly—which is totally within my electorate—but it has not said that it will carry out an environmental impact study. The Bankstown and wider regions communities have fought for an environmental impact study for two or three years since the Bankstown sale was announced. At present, Bankstown airport has no curfew, so there is the potential for any buyer of the airports to continue to conduct a 24-hour service into Bankstown. Also, because the sale documents indicate that no special conditions or special development obligations will apply to the sale, as the Federal Ministers have announced, it is equally likely that there will be no curfew.
I am calling for the Federal Government to carry out an environmental impact study. It has consistently refused to do that and one can only wonder why. It may be because the Government is afraid that an environmental impact study may show there will be a considerable deleterious environmental impact on the people who live around Bankstown Airport. The second possible reason is that if an environmental impact study is carried out, it is bound to show that the curfew is one of the major issues in the Bankstown area. Planes are allowed to take off and land 24 hours a day. A couple of planes have landed in the Georges River and one or two have landed in factories in the middle of Milperra. These are issues that the local community is still very much concerned about. I note the Government's suggestion that the proposed plan not have big jets come into Bankstown is predicated on these concerns. I quote from the media release by Senator Minchin and Wilson Tuckey:
Changes to the aviation environment since September 11 2001, the collapse of Ansett, and the trend to using larger aircraft particularly on regional routes mean that there is no longer a need for Bankstown airport to develop an overflow capacity to supplement Sydney airport.
We welcome the fact that it may well be that Bankstown does not have to take any overflow capacity from Kingsford Smith airport, but there is no guarantee about that. We already know that the Macquarie Bank consortium—whom we believe paid half a billion dollars too much for Kingsford Smith airport—may well need to put up their prices, and that may force an overflow to go to Bankstown. So, based on a press release, I do not have any great confidence that the message about the operation of Bankstown Airport is as good as some people first interpreted it.
I am wary that an airport, or one lot of three airports, is to be sold on the basis of a terrorist attack nearly two years ago and, for that matter, the collapse of Ansett that happened on the same day, 11 September 2001. There is a belief that bigger planes are in operation. At the moment the airline industry is absolutely crippled with a combination of problems, including the SARS virus. If this announcement had come out a week later it probably would have included the SARS virus as a reason why no-one is catching planes any more. It might as well have said also that the Wests Tigers are not winning many games—we hope to win a few more—and therefore there is no great need for airports. Fly into Bankstown and see what is happening there. We call on the Government to include the special conditions of an environmental impact study and a curfew in the sale documents.
For more than 10 years many volunteers in my electorate and in the wider electorates have been involved in establishing the Australian Aviation Museum at Bankstown. Work was commenced on the aviation museum in February 1994 by the then Prime Minister, Paul Keating, who turned the first sod and unveiled a plaque in memory of Sir Charles Kingsford Smith. Since then the project has come a long way and there is already a lease on this land at Bankstown Airport. Conceptual drawings and actual construction have already taken place in part, there is a massive hangar, and many volunteers spend their weekends and afternoons restoring old Australian planes. We have a great aviation history. We may not have been the first country in the world to get a big plane up in the air—I believe there is some argument that Lufthansa was first—but Qantas was certainly next. We know that Australia's history includes many great flyers and great achievements in the airport and aircraft industry.
Bankstown Airport is the perfect place to continue the operation of the Australian Aviation Museum. I know there is no great bucket of money, but I hope to approach the Premier about that. Most of this work is being done by the volunteer labourers who have been able—legally—to get disused fencing from building sites and who have taken possession of the old hangar that Sir Kingsford Smith had at Mascot. The hangar was sitting there rotting away and the volunteers are re-establishing it. This airport has the support of the local council. I have a letter from the Mayor of Bankstown, Councillor Helen Westwood, supporting the retention of the aviation museum, and there is some funding for it. The general manager of Bankstown Airport Limited, Kim Ellis, supports maintaining the airport and recognises that there is already an existing lease.
The Bankstown District Sports Club, one of the great clubs in the Bankstown area, is committed to supporting this aviation museum, as are the Bankstown Trotting and Recreational Club and all local schools. The University of Western Sydney recognises the need for increasing the size of this museum and making it even more professional. It will be a great attraction. I have a copy of a letter from Nancy Bird-Walton, one of the patrons of the museum, and Dr Paul Scully-Power, one of the first astronauts and a patron of the museum, who have written in support of it.
If the Federal Government persists with this sale—and I accept that this State Parliament will probably not be able to change that—it should conduct an environmental impact study and introduce a night curfew. Those are major issues of concern. As the lease has already been signed there is a good chance that it will be binding on any new operator who buys the site. However, leases can be changed. We want to ensure that that lease is continued. I hope that the Federal Government can do those three things. The Federal Government, which has not been supportive in the past, has tended to treat the Bankstown and south-western areas of Sydney as no-go zones. Large jets might not be coming into Bankstown at present; however, I do not have a great deal of faith in press releases. I would like to see the sale documents. I hope that this motion will make the Federal Government aware of what is expected of it.
Mr DEBNAM (Vaucluse) [12.41 p.m.]: I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak in debate on this motion. About once every six or 12 months the honourable member for East Hills moves a motion relating to the aviation museum at Bankstown. I acknowledge that the honourable member is placing on the record the concerns of his community, so the Opposition will not oppose the motion. The honourable member for East Hills referred to a number of legitimate issues that are of concern to communities around the airport.
[Interruption]
As the honourable member for Wakehurst said, I hope that the honourable member for East Hills has already sent a letter to the Federal Government expressing these concerns. I am sure that the Federal Government will deal sympathetically with them, as it would with any other community concerns. The honourable member for East Hills raised the issue of transport infrastructure in Western Sydney, which is an issue we should consider—an issue which the Carr Government has ignored for eight years and which has been a major embarrassment to it. That is one of the reasons why the former Minister for Transport was in hiding for the entire election campaign. What has the Carr Government done in Western Sydney, especially around the airport? The former Minister for Transport spent about $350 million on a bus transitway in south-western Sydney, which proved to be a local bus service for his constituents.
Mr Lynch: Point of order: I have been provoked into taking a point of order. The honourable member for Vaucluse spent about the first 20 seconds of his speech referring to issues that are germane to the motion. Thereafter he has said nothing at all that is germane to the motion. It might be interesting but it is not relevant to the motion.
Mr DEBNAM: To the point of order: I was referring to the motion, which is about transport infrastructure in Western Sydney. The honourable member for Liverpool has always had an interest in Federal issues and I am sure that his interest in those issues will continue next year. We will watch that closely. I am talking about Bankstown airport and about transport infrastructure in Western Sydney—issues of great importance to the community of Western Sydney.
Madam ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Andrews) Order! I uphold the point of order. The honourable member for Vaucluse may continue.
Mr DEBNAM: As I said at the outset, the Opposition does not oppose this motion. The honourable member for East Hills has done his job by expressing these legitimate and worthwhile concerns on behalf of his community. The three points to which he referred earlier have been issues of concern for a long time. There is nothing new in what he said. However, today he put on the agenda the transport infrastructure issue that is being confronted by communities in Western Sydney and, specifically, around Bankstown airport. The honourable member for East Hills referred to country residents. I am sure the Federal Government is aware that a number of country residents and general aviation enthusiasts will watch closely what happens to Bankstown Airport.
As I used to work at Bankstown Airport I am aware of the great level of employment around the airport, which is critical to New South Wales. What has the Carr Government done to the economy of New South Wales in its eight years in office? It has tried to run down the economy and milk it. Employment in Bankstown is a major issue. The former Minister for Small Business—the present Minister for Tourism and Sport and Recreation, and Minister for Women—who is in the Chamber, has said often in this Chamber that this Government created jobs in New South Wales. Jobs are not created by the public sector and they are certainly not created by the Carr Government; jobs are created by private enterprise in Australia on the back of the economy of the Federal Government.
I am sure that the Federal Government is mindful of the fact that employment at Bankstown Airport is critical. Has the honourable member for East Hills put his concerns in writing and sent those concerns to the Federal Government? If not, he should do so today. I am sure he will receive a sympathetic hearing from the Federal Government. I endorse the comments made by the honourable member for East Hills relating to the aviation museum. We should do all we can to acknowledge our history and our tradition in aviation. With the tyranny of distance in Australia, that aspect of Australian history is extremely important. Recently, when I visited Canberra I saw the new presentation of aircraft at the Australian War Memorial. I commend to honourable members a visit to the War Memorial to see the display of aircraft. It is worthwhile having a look at the Beaufort bomber, which was included in the new section of the War Memorial one week after the election, and at the aviation museum at Bankstown.
If honourable members use public transport to get to Bankstown Airport they will discover just how difficult it is to travel around Western Sydney. The train system is in disarray and there is a major problem in relation to buses that are run by the public and private sectors in eastern Sydney. The Carr Government has not fulfilled its part of the bargain and worked with private bus companies in New South Wales. That resulted in almost all the contracts with private bus companies lapsing prior to the election. The Government promised to behave itself after the election and it offered to sign new contracts a few weeks before the election. Public transport in Western Sydney was not a priority for the former Minister for Transport or for the Premier. If the honourable member for Liverpool uses public transport to get to Bankstown airport he will see how difficult it is to get there. It is a major problem. The train system is in disarray.
Michael Costa is telling people privately—I am sure he is not stating it publicly in the House—that everything I said over the past 12 months about the public transport system, and especially rail services, is correct. For the past 12 months I expressed community concern about how unreliable and unsafe are public transport and the rail system. Michael Costa found that out two weeks ago. As I said earlier, Michael Costa is now talking publicly about restructuring and reshuffling, but privately he is telling people that he is amazed as everything I said over the past 12 months is true. The former Minister for Transport was moved to another portfolio area because he failed the people of Western Sydney and the people around Bankstown airport. Clearly, he was a major embarrassment to the Government.
The former Minister for Transport was demoted and given the job of Leader of the House, which is a make-or-break job for him. In a few weeks he will prove as much of an embarrassment for the Carr Government as he proved in his last job. I have no doubt that he will be a major embarrassment to this Government. However, we are happy not to oppose this motion and to encourage the local member to put his concerns in writing to the Federal Government. I assure him that he will get a sympathetic hearing regarding the community's legitimate points of concern. I urge honourable members who have not already done so to visit the aviation museum to learn about the history of aviation in Australia.
I urge them also to consider the employment opportunities at Bankstown Airport—I am not sure whether the honourable member for East Hills mentioned that during his contribution. Such employment is absolutely critical. The airport and its associated services employ thousands of people and we must protect their jobs. The Federal Government will be extremely mindful of protecting employment, of the environmental impact of any changes at the airport and undoubtedly of curfew issues. Let us consider the handling of the Sydney airport issue. John Howard was the first person to take a sensible, commonsense approach to the issues concerning Mascot airport, which people such as Laurie Brereton had mishandled over the years. Laurie Brereton used to tell people, "The third runway is coming and you'll just have to put up with it". That was how Labor approached such issues.
Mr STEWART (Bankstown) [12.51 p.m.]: It is good to see Opposition members for once showing a little commonsense and supporting this motion. However, I am perplexed by the comments of the honourable member for Vaucluse about public transport infrastructure, particularly in Bankstown and the surrounding region. I suggest that the honourable member would need a packed lunch, a map and a compass to get to Bankstown. He has probably never been there. He has probably seen Bankstown only from a plane window. I am happy to take the honourable member to Bankstown one day to show him the real world. We could enjoy some good Bankstown hospitality.
Mr Debnam: Point of order: I must correct the record. I worked in Bankstown from 1980 to 1982 and then for a period until 1985 I travelled backwards and forwards from Bankstown Airport to Melbourne several times. I understand the issues very well. Even at that time I understood the inadequacies of public transport for the people of Western Sydney. That remains the case today, 20 years later.
Madam ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Andrews): Order! I uphold the point of order. The honourable member for Bankstown may continue.
Mr STEWART: I respond to the point of order only by saying that it does not show: one could not tell that the honourable member for Vaucluse had spent time in Bankstown. This is an important issue and I am pleased to support the motion of the honourable member for East Hills regarding the proposed sale of Bankstown Airport and its potential impact. Along with him, I am particularly concerned that the Federal Government has handled this issue in a relatively clandestine manner. The sale was announced in March 2001 but the issue received only superficial attention from the Government. The press release issued on 9 April 2003 by Senator Nick Minchin, the Minister for Finance and Administration, and Wilson Tuckey was not sent to the local State or Federal members. It was not sent to me or to honourable members representing the electorates of East Hills, Auburn, Menai or Liverpool—the honourable member for Liverpool is in the Chamber—that will be affected by the sale. No details or background information were provided. Those opposite may have received copies of the press release as they are members of the Coalition. That rings alarm bells and that is why this motion is important and needs our strong support.
We must ensure that the sale progresses in a fair and reasonable manner. We must ensure also that it does not have adverse effects on the amenity of residents in the Bankstown region. It could easily do so. In his press release, the Federal Minister says that no changes to the operation of Bankstown or Camden airports will be required or are proposed as part of the sale and that therefore the sale is not expected to impact on local communities. He goes on to say that there will be no real changes to existing conditions at the airport. We need to know what that means, how the airport will operate and whether that will affect the amenity of local residents. That is why this motion has been moved in this place. We must be a barometer of public concern about the proposed sale.
If the Federal Government had got its way on this issue it would have already sold the airport and allowed large jet aircraft to land there. However, the community took up that fight and won. I commend the action of Bankstown City Council in support of its local State and Federal members—Michael Hatton and Daryl Melham—who expressed concerns about this issue. We must now ensure that this sale is handled in a fair and reasonable manner that is in tune with the wishes of the local community. We must protect the largest industry in the Bankstown region: the airport. About 4,000 people are employed at the airport, which is also a feeder industry for approximately another 7,000 jobs. We must protect those jobs and ensure that residential amenity is not affected adversely. Local State members will join our Federal colleagues, Michael Hatton and Daryl Melham, in that quest.
Mr HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [12.56 p.m.]: This is an interesting motion. It is almost as though the honourable member for East Hills was instructed to make work for himself—his endeavours proved most successful—by moving a motion and taking up the time of the House. The motion does not say much. It calls upon the House to note "the Federal Government's decision to sell Bankstown Airport". Why do we need to note it when the sale was announced in the Sydney Morning Herald and the Daily Telegraph? Senator Nick Minchin also spoke about it extensively on television and radio some weeks ago.
The simple fact is that we do not need a take-note motion. It is interesting to note that the honourable member for East Hills has marched into the House and moved a nothing motion when privately and publicly for the past few years Labor members have jumped up and down claiming that they would oppose the sale of Bankstown Airport. What has happened to that view? This motion signals a hypocritical shift by those opposite: They have not said publicly that they welcome the sale but that is exactly what they are doing privately. The honourable member for Bankstown should indicate clearly to the House whether he supports the Federal Coalition's decision to sell Bankstown Airport. Why have he and his State colleagues spent so much time in the past few years opposing the sale only to accept implicitly now that it will be good for the people of Bankstown and for industry in that area?
I must correct the claim made earlier that Liberal members do not know anything about Bankstown. We have heard already that the honourable member for Vaucluse worked in Bankstown for some years and travelled to the airport by public transport—when he could get it. I worked in Bankstown as a solicitor for nearly four years and during that time I gave up trying to use public transport because the infrastructure offered by the then Labor Government was appalling. The situation has not changed under the current Government—in fact, it has worsened: as the population has increased the transport services have diminished. I talked only yesterday to residents of Penrith who told me that the train from St James station in the city to Penrith has been cancelled regularly—often three out of five times every week—in the past couple of months.
Mr Tripodi: What's that got to do with the sale of Bankstown Airport?
Mr HAZZARD: We are discussing the transport infrastructure surrounding the airport. The honourable member for Fairfield has come late to this debate. We have been talking broadly about transport infrastructure. In addition to working as a solicitor in Bankstown I also learnt to fly at Bankstown Airport. It has been interesting to hear the comments of the honourable member for Bankstown about the airport from time to time.
Mr Tripodi: They let you fly?
Mr HAZZARD: Yes. The honourable member for Fairfield had better watch out because I might fly an aircraft over his next factional meeting. I notice that half the members currently in the House are his factional colleagues so I congratulate him on whatever tactics he is using. This is a do-nothing motion; it is a make-work motion. Paragraph (2) calls on the Federal Government to include an environmental impact study and the introduction of a night curfew in the sale documents. What does the honourable member mean? Has he sent a letter to Senator Minchin simply to raise a reasonable issue, that is, the environmental impact?
Mr Stewart: I have.
Mr Ashton: And the Deputy Premier has sent letters.
Mr HAZZARD: The honourable member for East Hills should table the letters today and show us what he has done. He should let us help him because the Coalition supports what he is doing in that regard. An environmental impact study is necessary if there are to be substantial changes to the use of Bankstown Airport and to the flight path—I have flown that flight path in both directions many times—that could impact on the residents of Bankstown. That is the key, the catalyst. It is not simply a case of having an environmental impact statement for the sake of having one, which is what the motion seems to imply.
We would support a request that the Federal Government look at those issues to assist the people of Western Sydney. To simply play political games, as the honourable member for East Hills has done today, indicates the certain paucity in his arguments. Finally, the night curfew is a significant issue. If the night curfew requested by the honourable member were introduced, it would curtail any opportunity for night training at Bankstown Airport. The outcome must be sensible. Next time the honourable member should come back with a motion that tells us something substantive. I look forward to the honourable member tabling the letters and showing us what he has done. [Time expired.]
Debate adjourned on motion by Ms Nori.
[Madam Acting-Speaker (Ms Andrews) left the chair at 1.01 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:31:16 : Update this page