[Peetwo]

GWEP MKII solutions for GA and secondary airports?? -   

From the GWEP submissions pages there are two excellent contributions on the subject of GA and secondary airport advocacy.

The first was from the Archerfield Chamber of Commerce, in which their frustrations were highlighted in their introductory letter: (Ref- https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...mmerce.pdf)

Archerfield Chamber of Commerce:

Dear sir/madam, 

Please accept this email as another submission by the AACCI to Government regarding the abject failure of privatisation and successive Governments abandonment of their responsibilities as an uninformed regulator and protector of the public interest. 

I have attached several of the multitude of submissions made by our Chamber over recent years. The information is detailed and clear. None of the issues have changed so the information is still very relevant.

 We need technocrats to sort out technical issues - not bureaucrats! 

An example:- I made an email enquiry to the department as the President of the Archerfield Airport Chamber of Commerce seeking an update on progress of the current Archerfield pDMP. 

My email was addressed to ----- He was on leave and followed up with a phone call. Never anything in writing.

 He told me that AAC, the leasing company of Archerfield Airport had been given an extension of several months to complete their consultation with stakeholders. He was expecting some sort of response by the end of July 2023.

 Our chamber has to date only received an email acknowledgement of our submission made back in January but has not been approached or contacted by AAC. This is standard practice by AAC as we pose the uncomfortable questions they don’t want to answer. 

Our Chamber has made submissions to all the AAC Master Plans. made it quite clear during our phone conversation that the Department has no intention communicating with our Chamber or other stakeholders as that is the leasing company’s responsibility. 

He stated the Department is not interested in any of the leasing company’s breaches or the detailed information that our Chamber possesses to help the Minister make an informed decision to save the airport. 

We as a Chamber have been at this for nearly twenty years with a huge amount of time and resources expended having meetings with many facets of Local, State and Federal Governments to no avail. 

This disaster applies to all the ex-secondary airports across Australia without exception. Decades of aviation assets are being steadily eroded into industrial estates while the stakeholder’s businesses and assets have been stolen..

Recommendations from the exemplary AACCI submission to the 'Inquiry into the Economic Regulation of Airports - Productivity Commission' (pg 61 of the submission):

Inquiry Recommendations

Aviation, the Aviation Industry and particularly General Aviation has not been served well by the Federal
Government’s “abandonment of federal responsibility” approach to airports. Australia is a vast country
– the size of mainland USA with a tyranny of distance. General Aviation should be prospering and
growing with its costs lowering but it is not and the reason it is not rests firmly with the Federal
Government. Billions of dollars federally are spent on public roads and rail infrastructure with vast
kilometres of roads and highways linking towns and cities yet making sure there is at least one kilometre
of MOS Part 139 compliant pavement and protected approaches in each town – called an airport, has not
received equal attention or funding.

“ 11. Starting with the notorious Review of Resources ("ROR") around the time of the CAA vesting
successive Federal Governments have continued the deskilling process in the aviation portfolio and we
are now at the point that the Australian Government is acting as an uninformed regulator, standards
setter, purchaser and protector of public interest.

12. The Federal Government agencies including CASA, The Department of Transport and Infrastructure
and A TSB are de-skiIled and devoid of airports skilled professionals and has bureaucrats in key
positions not technocrats, which is highly evident from the T documents as Departmental officers appear
not to have asked all relevant questions and it is my belief they do not have relevant aviation
qualifications and backgrounds.”

To the Chamber’s Knowledge there is..

• No Airport Lighting Engineer
• No Fuel Quality Personnel
• Only one Airport Engineer with minimal credentials96
within CASA. Clearly there needs to be a reversal of the deskilling process.

The Head of Power issue needs to be clarified with certainty as raised in the Robertson Opinion and
referred to the High Court.

Secondary Airports should ideally be brought back into public control.

Tenants equitable interests in leases need to be recognised and renewed on similar terms as existed preprivatisation with any buildings / hangars asset stripped by reversion returned to them with
compensation, and/or substituted buildings if the building has been demolished.

An “National Aviation Infrastructure Security Act” [“NAISA”] (which may need mirroring state
legislation) is needed to legislate the protection of airport infrastructure including.

• Disclosure of Airport Protected areas on all property survey plans – similar to easements etc
• The restrictive covenants over all ALOP airports legislated.
• The terms of each Commonwealth lease particularly clause 13 clauses as to the protection of
the airport made into legislation.
• Making it an offence to close a runway or attempt to close a runway on an airport, downgrade
an airport or lobbying activities of individuals or corporations to try to close a runway (e.g. for
property development financial gain.).
• Right of airport access provisions requiring all airports not subject to a federal RDMS to accept
any aircraft for the code number rating of the airport – that is the airport must be open to public
aviation use and be a participant of the whole airspace system (e.g. as to alternates etc).
• Providing extensive powers for the ACCC to act for tenants or aviation users regarding

o Lease issues including valuations and renewal and changes to use and unreasonable
conditions not conducive to competition (e.g. not permitting aviation users to bring
their own fuel and oils onto the airport or having to use the ALC’s preferred supplier.)
o Aeronautical access to the airport and dealing with any rejection for access or failure
to allow aeronautical facilities for aviation businesses on the airport.
o Unconscionable conduct on and off the airport
o Abuse of market power by the ALC.
o Reasonable Pricing of Services (including requiring each ALC to publish their
financial statements and be subject to special purpose audit or investigation )
o Users requirements
o Abuse of on-airport control regulations powers by ALCs or off airport developments

• Requiring all airport engineering consultants to be registered professional engineers, apply a
code of conduct similar to the Queensland RPEQ legislation with mandatory exclusion
requirements where there is a conflict of interest and to publicly disclose the terms of reference
of any engineering work engagement by ALC’s.
• Set mandated infrastructural improvements requirements in accordance with national intertest
requirements and a timeline for implementation.
• All master plans or major development plans to be subject to independent technical review by
a new independent body of skilled highly qualified airport registered engineers (design,
pavement, lighting, and noise specialists) plus experienced aviators with civil aviation
backgrounds all such members requiring mandated endorsement by the aviation industry e.g.
AOPA, RAAA Airport Chambers of Commerce etc.
• Any assessments of the usability of runways to be based upon the actual laws that an air
operator needs to comply with – e.g. as to factoring, balanced field length in the event of engine
failure etc, not raw flight manual data - unfactored.
• Report to the Commonwealth Parliament Public Works Committee who may also make
directions under the NAISA.
• Development of a “Airport Land Use Planning Handbook” (similar to the California Airport
Land Use Handbook)
• Consider readoption of the FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13 (Airport Design) published by
the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (Refer Australian history of this in
Annexure 13), and in particular for General Aviation Chapters 2 and 3 of AC 150/5325-4B
related to airport design for small aircraft ( <5700kgs) and aircraft > 5700 but < 27200 kg and
in table 1.3 and figure 2.1 and 2.1 .

Some of the changes needed to be made to the Airports Act 1996 and Regulations:

o Clarify beyond doubt that the present” underlying interests in the land” certification for master
plan approval is required to include both legal and equitable interests.
o Require Master Plans to be in compliance of Commonwealth lease terms, not just Major
Development plans.
o No decision by the Minister in relation to approving a master plan under the Airports act
presently constitutes deemed approval of the ALC’s master plan. This needs to be repealed.
o Airport Master Plans are produced every five years looking forward to the next twenty years.
This is too short a time-frame. Use of the airport well into the future is required to provide for
the expected growth of aeronautical facilities. Further ALCs must be able to show any non-aviation use proposed on an airport will be able to be readily repurposed back to aviation use to meet long term aeronautical expansion of the airport asset.
o Objections to Master Plans need to be made to the Minister’s office not the Airport Leasing
Company deal with them and fob them off.
o The Minister needs to refer objections to an independent reskilled expert technical body
potentially formed under for example a “National Aviation Infrastructure Security Act” and
ditch the present system where departmental bureaucrats merely act as a post office and have
no skills to assess airport plans technically. This could be funded by levying filing fees for the
submission of master plans or major development plans plus billing ALCs on an hourly fee
basis for the expert assessment / review of the plan, investigating objections submitted in
relation to the draft master plan, providing reports in relation to such objections and oversight
prior to communicating to the minister such bodies recommendation about the Master Plan.n g.
o Presently there can be no objection to a noise exposure forecast prepared by an Airport Leasing
company. This needs to change to allow same.
o Presently the Minister is deciding about Master Plans and Major Development Plans as an
ordinary person not as an expert. Approval of master plans and major development plans needs
to be made only after recommendation of an independent reskilled expert technical body formed
as defined above – which can accept input from aviation user bodies such as AOPA, RAAA and
the Chambers of the respective airports.
o If Airport leasing companies want to repurpose existing aviation land where aviation businesses
are operating they should pay compensation at market values and factor that into their costs
similar to any developer on state land.
o Each Airport be subject to an aviation user’s representative body report card every two years –
such report to operate outside of the interference of Airport Leasing Companies, be confidential
and submitted to the National Aviation Infrastructure oversight group and the technical group
as part of ongoing monitoring of the airport’s performance in meeting the actual aviation needs
and the national interest.

Now let's refer to Kingston Council contribution to the GWEP MKII: https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...ngston.pdf







Also refer from page 229 of the 20 November 2023 Kingston Ordinary Council minutes: https://www.kingston.vic.gov.au/files/sh...eeting.pdf

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorse the submission at Appendix 1 in response to the Aviation Green Paper and formally lodge it with the Commonwealth Government
2. Write to the Hon. Catherine King, Minister for the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communication advocating for legislative changes to the Airports Act 1996, and
3. Note the work undertaken on the approved Moorabbin Airport Masterplan and the work commenced on the review of Aviation at a Commonwealth level has superseded the need for an Aviation Support Policy.

 
&..

Aviation Industry Support Strategy

The work undertaken by a number of departments across Council over the last two years has surpassed the intent of the Aviation Industry Support Strategy that was proposed in 2021. The levels of engagement that regularly occur now superseded the work proposed as part of the Aviation Industry Support Strategy and Officers feel that it is best placed that the continued efforts and advocacy work being done continues to occur as a priority. The Kingston Business Team, who run a range of business support activities that are aimed at supporting retail and industrial businesses in Kingston, now include actively engaging with the MACCI group by providing support services. This has included:

- Business mentoring programs.
- Events and workshops in areas including Digital Marketing, Search Engine Optimisation and Visual Branding.
- Exposure of the MACCI through eNews.
- Opportunities to access grant opportunities through State or Federal Government Programs.
- Exposure to other local businesses off airport land where scope for cross collaboration may be possible.

&..

4. Key Issues

Officers have reviewed the Green Paper and prepared a submission (Appendix 1) which covered the following:

1. General Aviation

The Green Paper fails to define General Aviation, nor does it acknowledge the critical role that General Aviation plays for the entire aviation sector within Australia. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) classifies General Aviation (GA) as covering a range of operations that are not commercial air transport services. This includes aerial work (such as agriculture, photography, surveying, search and rescue), instructional flying and recreational flying. It relates to small to medium aviation, private, sport, recreational, private aviation for businesses (single engine) across Australia with our regional and rural areas heavily reliant on GA. Without GA our regions would face unique additional challenges due to the broad role that GA plays in ensuring the viability of regional/rural communities. General aviation encompasses airport maintenance companies, flying schools, charter businesses for hire, and aerial firefighting. It is arguably the backbone to Australis’ aviation industry. The safe efficient and effective operation of Australia’s airports should be a paramount policy goal. The protection of these assets from inappropriate development is critical to the protection and growth of the industry. Which is they the application of the masterplan process is so important.

Finally the following video was Kingston Council's public hearing evidence provided to the discontinued Senate GA Inquiry:

So what's the outcome of all these substantive factual, evidence based, submissions to the GWEP etc..etc from both the AACCI and the Kingston Council??

Extract from the GWEP MKII (from page 147): https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/...-paper.pdf

8.4 Airport access

The primary role of airports is to enable civil aviation activities, including GA

Airports maintain a balance of commercial development to promote the sound development of civil aviation and to promote the efficient and economic development and operation of airports.

Since the Australian Government privatised Australia’s airports, non-aviation developments have become an important revenue stream to help fund maintenance and improvement of airports. These developments diversify revenue sources for airport operators, ensuring they are able to remain viable, including during disruptions to the aviation sector such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

On average, LFAs generated greater revenue and greater operating profit from non-aeronautical activities. Privatisation of airports has seen GA tenants offered leasing arrangements which reflect commercial costs and arrangements, instead of relatively low-cost, long-term leases that were previously offered by the Australian Government. As a result, some aviation businesses with lower revenues or private individuals no longer have the same access to airport infrastructure.

While existing planning regulations protect aviation activity at LFAs, privatisation of LFAs has placed pressure on smaller GA operations, especially in outer metropolitan airports. One of the objects of the Airports Act is to promote the sound development of civil aviation in Australia and to establish a system for the regulation of airports that has due regard to the interests of airport users and the general community.

LFAs must have final master plans approved by the Australian Government. A purpose of master plans is to ‘establish the strategic direction for efficient and economic development at the airport over the planning period’ – in particular, the intended land use across various airport precincts. When the airport lessee company gives the Minister a draft master plan, in deciding whether to approve the plan the Minister must have regard to the extent to which carrying out the plan would meet present and future requirements of civil aviation users of the airport.

Some in the GA community are concerned that, if they are not adequately protected by government, they will be unable to compete with larger GA businesses for existing aviation facilities, and airports will preference non-aeronautical developments over aeronautical developments in plans for future expansion, leaving them unable to access airport facilities. Many metropolitan airports are predicting growth in the number of flight movements in the coming decades, and existing regulations are designed to safeguard this activity to promote the growth of GA.

The Australian Government will continue to protect General Aviation at LFAs through regulations that require lessees to operate LFAs as airports

GA activity at secondary LFAs, such as Moorabbin and Jandakot, is protected through airport planning, development and land use oversight by the Australian Government. Airport lessees must also account for growth in aviation by continuing to develop the airports as demand grows. Master plans and MDPs ensure LFAs meet their requirements to provide for general (‘civil’ in the Airports Act) aviation activity and provide clarity for other issues, such as where mixed-use zoning can and cannot be used.

The Minister for Transport has written to the operators of LFAs, making it clear that, when making decisions about master plans and MDPs, the Minister will have regard to whether appropriate access to the airport site is provided for GA. The Minister will also have regard for the continued investment in GA activities and precincts on airport sites. The Australian Government will continue to pay close attention to the implementation of these protections for GA operators, as has been recently demonstrated in the consideration of Moorabbin and Archerfield Airports’ master plans.

      
  Hmm...ask can be seen some of the basic findings and evidence provided, by the AACCI and the Kingston Council in their advocacy over many years and in their recent submissions, has been regurgitated in the GWEP MKII. However any thought of there finally being some positive progress made in the Albo Govt policy settings for GA and Secondary airports, is totally nugatory when you read the next paragraph that followed the above...  

By 2030, the Australian Government will conduct a comprehensive review of the Airports Act and the regulatory settings for planning and development of LFAs. The Australian Government will also seek to include examination of GA market dynamics in relation to airport access in the next Productivity Commission inquiry into the economic regulation of airports. This will include looking at federally leased secondary metropolitan airports for the first time.

   
"By 2030" what's left of the industry will be "DEAD, BURIED and CREMATED!!"   


MTF...P2   

PS:  Bye the bye, I ran some of the info above past members of the BRB and this prompted Sandy to write the following to certain Members of the Federal Liberal and National Parties..  

Dear Liberal National Party Members of Parliament. 

The abject neglect by governments towards our irreplaceable and vital secondary airports continues. The attachments from Kingston Council (Vic) and Archerfield (QLD) refer. 

It never fails to amaze that the Coalition does not have a rational policies for these airports and the wider General Aviation (GA) industry that will have the following benefits:-

1/.    The very strong approval of the many thousands who are part of or connected to General Aviation and who are currently highly disillusioned with the dysfunctional Civil Aviation Safety Authority. 

2/.    The regeneration of GA in terms of aerial mobility as vital element of our National security. 

3/.    Decentralisation;  with the abilities of a revitalised GA to cover our disparate communities and conquer the ‘tyranny of distance.’ Increased viability of GA will encourage professional and tradespeople to service outlying communities and to live in regional areas. 

4/.    (a) Job creation by growth of GA flying trading and aircraft maintenance in regional centres. 
         (b) Job creation to be greatly enhanced with regulatory reform to international standardisation which will allow the whole Australian aviation industry to participate in world markets of aviation manufacturing and services. 

Kind Regards,

Sandy Reith