13th May 2020, 4:47 PM – Senate Motions - National Security - Regional South Australia

The same number of senators voted for and against a motion introduced by Tasmanian Senator Anne Urquhart (Labor), which means it failed because it didn't achieve majority.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the management of transport security is critical to our national security and to regional communities in South Australia,

(ii) on 8 May 2018, the Morrison Government announced measures to "further strengthen Australia's domestic and international aviation security", which included the introduction of body scanners and improved luggage screening technology at airports,

(iii) regional airlines and airports in South Australia have expressed concern that the cost of these upgrades will make regional airline services economically unviable,

(iv) the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee began public hearings into this matter on 7 May 2020,

(v) the Committee heard evidence that

(A) a Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications case study noted the cost of a flight to Whyalla would increase by $52 per passenger per flight,

(B) Whyalla City Council is concerned that an increase in security costs may result in one of the two major airlines that use the airport exit the market, impacting the local economy, and

(C) Regional Express Airlines said that the airline's profit margin is approximately $10 per passenger, and if the airline was required to pay security costs, they would no longer make a profit,

(vi) at the hearing, Senator Rennick stated that "We're not talking about airports, we're talking about national security, right. And, you know, something that we've got to get sorted out here, because we just had it with the Ruby Princess. Okay, and I'm a member of the federal government, and it's our job to look after national security. So this sort of pushing it out on the private enterprise or rather sort of smaller, it just leads to confusion and ambiguous responsibilities as to who's responsible for what. So I think that we ought to take a good look at whether or not it's better for us to do a holistic national approach, rather than the piecemeal airport by airport, which is going to hurt a lot of airports in the region. And I think before, you know, any more changes in regulations or decisions are made, that we look at a national approach. Because if it's good enough for the US and New Zealand, I think it's something that we should also take a serious look at, I'll just leave it at that. Thanks."

(vii) Senator Rennick is correct in saying that:

(A) the Morrison Government is responsible for national security at our airports and seaports,

(B) the Morrison Government's current approach to national security has led to "confusion and ambiguous responsibilities as to who's responsible for what", and

(C) the Morrison Government's approach to regional aviation security will potentially "hurt a lot of airports in the region";

(b) commends the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee for its' ongoing work in this area, and its long-standing history of representing rural and regional Australians on important policy issues; and

(c) condemns the Morrison Government for its implementation of airport security upgrades to date, which are causing confusion and leading to the potential loss of airports, airline services, and jobs in regional South Australia.