[Peetwo]

CBASA Senate Inquiry - Update: 29/09/23

First, Hansard from 27/09/23 YSCB public hearing: Select Committee on Commonwealth Bilateral Air Service Agreements 27/09/2023

Extract from page 9 of Hansard (see PS for Hansard link):

Senator BIRMINGHAM: It is very telling, I think, that the department put up a brief for a negotiating mandate to the minister in January this year.

CHAIR: Yes. That assumes some action is going to be taken.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: It does suggest that the request should enter into a negotiations phase. That brief was put to the minister in January this year, which I note is consistent with what the Virgin CEO told us yesterday—that when she met with Minister King on 20 January, she expected a negotiating mandate to be released the following week. Minister King had had the brief for a week or two by that time and obviously was figuring she'd be in a position to sign it off within the following week. It would seem that's about the same time line in which she dealt with the international priorities brief. Were you expecting a response from the minister by the end of January?

Mr Wood: We expect a response when the minister has made a decision. I don't think we'd put a particular time on it. Different decisions will take different amounts of time, depending on what priorities the minister may have and whether a minister feels they need to consult more broadly. There's a range of factors, so we don't have a particular expectation. There's no legislative time frame that we need to meet here. It's not a matter of expectation on our behalf.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: When did you get that minute back from the minister?

Mr Wood: We know the minute was signed by the minister on 10 July, and we received it back formally through our systems on 13 July.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Six months later, in this case, you got the minute back from the minister. Did it agree a negotiating mandate?

Mr Wood: The minister has clearly indicated that the capacity was not to be agreed at this time.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Did you ever enter into negotiations?

Mr Wood: I think that's a technical question—

Senator BIRMINGHAM: It is, so I'd like a technical answer.

CHAIR: That's why you're at the table.

Mr Wood: Qatar has made a request, so, depending on your point of view, you could argue it's a commencement of negotiations.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Under the treaty and the agreement, are they called 'negotiations' or 'consultations'? What exactly is Qatar requesting to enter into?

Mr Wood: I would need to see the exact document. I can check this in the—

Senator BIRMINGHAM: But there is a word? Let's call it 'negotiations', can we?

Mr Wood: Yes. There is a consultations clause, which can be where parties can formally ask for one. I can't remember whether the word 'consultations' or 'negotiations' was referred to in that letter. In this instance, it's essentially the same thing.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Did we ever enter into those engagements with Qatar under that technical clause?

Mr Wood: Traditionally what has happened is, where air services negotiations commence, there is a formal two-day process where you get people in a room like this and have a formal negotiation. In recent times, these have tended to be much more informally done, through correspondence or through virtual meetings. However, in this instance we did not have a formal engagement with the Qatar authorities or through a videoconference.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: That's a long way of saying no. There were not negotiations or consultations to proceed beyond Qatar's request?

Mr Wood: That's correct.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Chair, I appreciate that you are wrapping me up.

CHAIR: We can come back, Senator Birmingham.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: I have one last particular point. Between sending the minute to the minister—the minute dated 4 January—and the minister not agreeing to the negotiating mandate in her decision on the minute of 10 July, did the department provide any further minutes or revised recommendations or revised negotiating mandate to the minister during that six-month period?

Mr Wood: No. I think the only engagement we had was to ask: has a decision been made as yet?

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Not an unreasonable question! And you had stakeholders who were asking you that question too, I'm sure.

Mr Wood: Yes, there would have been stakeholder interest in that.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: I'll bet.

  
Then FFWD to page 22:

Senator BIRMINGHAM: that there were going to be questions about interactions between Minister King and Mr Joyce. So did the ministerial office refuse to provide those details to you?

Ms Purvis-Smith: We don't yet have any information on the contact that Minister King and the officers may have had.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: So you've been left in the uncomfortable position of the fact that the minister's office has closed down in terms of providing details to you of when the minister actually engaged with Mr Joyce or Qantas generally. They don't seem, as a matter of routine, to ask for information briefs, meeting briefs, to prepare the minister for such engagements. They keep the diary secret from the department even in terms of when those meetings or discussions might occur. Even when it's been foreshadowed that you're coming to a Senate committee and you're going to be asked when the minister met with Mr Joyce, the minister's office hasn't provided you with the details. Is that correct?

Ms Purvis-Smith: I think those questions need to be asked to the minister and her office.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Well, I would welcome the minister to sit where you're sitting, Ms Purvis-Smith. That would be a very helpful opportunity to perhaps get to the bottom of these issues. In the meantime, I'm particularly focused on this time frame, on or around 23 January, because we know from the transparency of the Virgin CEO, Ms Hrdlicka, that on 20 January she spoke with Minister King, and on 20 January, she said, Minister King told her the negotiation mandate would be released the following week—the negotiation mandate that your department had properly prepared and provided to the minister earlier that month, in January of this year. We also know from Ms Hrdlicka that Minister King indicated she understood Mr Joyce was unhappy and had asked to speak with her and she expected that meeting to happen the following Monday. That would be Monday 23 January 2023. The department has no awareness as to whether that meeting or discussion took place. Is that your evidence?

Ms Purvis-Smith: I'm not aware that that discussion took place. We've said that we will double-check for you in our systems as to any meeting brief, but we're not aware that a meeting brief was...

...Senator BIRMINGHAM: Can we have the officials who are watching this ask the minister's office now whether there was such a discussion or meeting on or around 23 January 2023 between Minister King and Mr Joyce?

Ms Purvis-Smith: We will see what we can do.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: I would like you to ask and I would like there to be a response. I might have to keep coming up with other questions to ask the department until we get a response this morning.

CHAIR: A little bit of stick.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Let's see what the minister's office can provide by way of response in relation to what appears to be a pretty critical juncture. You had provided a brief to the minister that included a negotiating mandate that would have taken it to the next step. It would've taken Qatar's request into negotiations that would in most circumstances lead to the approval of more flights. Minister King had received it, acknowledged it and said to the Virgin CEO that she expected it to be signed off and publicly released in the next couple of weeks—that the only resistance was Qantas and she was having that conversation with Qantas. What we want to know is: did that conversation occur? If it did, we appear to have gone from a situation where the minister thought she was going to sign it off in the space of the next week or two and publicly release it, to one where it lingered for the next six months, with no request to the department for further information, no further analysis provided by the department and seemingly nothing provided by any other department of state or government agency, and, at the end of that drawn-out six-month period, the minister sent it back rejected. Something happened at that point in time, and that is the critical juncture. I hope we can get that transparency from the ministerial office in terms of that particular meeting. Of course, Senator McKenzie has also asked on notice for all of the engagements between Qantas and the minister or the ministerial office, the office being critical for that as well. You're agreeing to take that. Do you understand the urgency of the specifics I'm requesting, but also then all details of engagement between Qantas and the ministerial office or the minister during the life of consideration of Qatar's request?

Ms Purvis-Smith: Yes, I do. In relation to the timing, I have asked some people to reach out to see what we can do in the time frame here in relation to your specific request of the 23 January meeting. We will also take on notice, more generally, all discussions and meetings with Qantas at the departmental and ministerial level.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Thank you, Ms Purvis-Smith. I appreciate that and I hope that the ministerial office won't be putting you in a difficult position by not coming back. I have no doubt that there are staff, sitting just metres from where we are, who have access to the minister's diary and records of such meetings and could respond very, very quickly—if the Albanese government wants to be the virtue of transparency that it promised to be but to date is failing to be in relation to this type of issue.

And then to page 34:

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Your evidence earlier was that the only engagement that the department had during that six-month period was to say to the minister's office: 'Hey, where's it at?'

Ms Purvis-Smith: We were not asked, and we didn't provide any further advice following on from that initial piece of advice.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: And even when the minister sought some foreign affairs advice or information, that was done minister's office to minister's office, not with any direct departmental engagement.

Ms Purvis-Smith: That's correct.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: So all information that we might be seeking around what transpired in that sixmonth period comes back to the minister herself and her office and their engagements or discussions.

Ms Purvis-Smith: I think that, in terms of the consideration of the matter, there were considerations and discussions at ministerial level.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Yes. We're aware, clearly, that there were some, and we're also aware, at least from the evidence of others, that there was engagement and discussions that the minister was having with airline chief executives and others during that time. How have you gone so far in terms of the minister's office coming back to you about a meeting between the minister and Mr Joyce on or around 23 January?

Ms Purvis-Smith: I've not received any information. I think any requests in relation to outcomes that the minister had will need to be directed to the minister directly.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Is that the response?

Ms Purvis-Smith: In a sense, we have no information to be able to provide you.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Your people have asked her people. Have her people replied?

Ms Purvis-Smith: We don't have any access, so any request would need to be made of the minister and her office.

CHAIR: Do you need to go into camera, Ms Purvis-Smith, to give us the answer?

Ms Purvis-Smith: No, I don't. We don't have access. Any request in relation to outcomes of discussions that the minister may have had where the department was not in attendance would need to be made directly to the minister and her office.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Ms Purvis-Smith, you were very helpful and upfront before in indicating that you had sent a message to your team to ask them to ask the minister's office.

Ms Purvis-Smith: I said I would see what I can do, and the outcome is that any request would need to be directed directly to the minister's office and to the minister.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: So that is what the minister's office has come back to your team with?

Ms Purvis-Smith: That's the advice I have received—that the request be—

Senator BIRMINGHAM: I would like the precise wording of that advice and how it was provided.

Ms Purvis-Smith: I've just received that from my team, so we don't have—

Senator BIRMINGHAM: You received it by message while you've been sitting there?

Ms Purvis-Smith: I don't have any—

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Have you received it by message while you've been sitting there? Would you like to read the message to me?

Ms Purvis-Smith: It might not be to me, sorry.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Take your time. It's okay. I'm very happy to wait for this.

Ms Purvis-Smith: Yes, it did. I was looking at the wrong text message; my apologies.

Senator BIRMINGHAM: That's okay. We all have those challenges.

Ms Purvis-Smith: The text message I received is: 'MO view is it is not for the department to answer re the minister's diary. The question should be directed to the minister.'

Senator BIRMINGHAM: Right. Let's go back to the MO and ask them if the minister is willing to appear before the committee.

CHAIR: MO, come on down!

Senator BIRMINGHAM: That's the situation they've put us in now. If Minister King's office is saying, 'Get stuffed,' when her own department is seeking to provide information to this committee, then Minister King should front up herself, because that's the situation we're left with here. It is completely unacceptable to have a situation where a minister's office is being asked by officials, who have been put in an impossible position, about a pretty simple and factual matter: did a meeting happen, or did it not happen? That's their only question, and they could say yes or no very simply. I know their minister is on leave at present, but they're putting her in a terrible position in terms of public perceptions. They're putting you and the officials in a very uncomfortable position.

And I'm sorry; we're left with nothing but to have to prosecute via these means. I don't want us to have to break rules around calling ministers' staff to the table. That's not territory that we wish to get into. So, if the attitude of Minister King and her office is that they're not going to tell the department, then there are precedents for House of Representatives ministers to appear before Senate committees, and it looks like Minister King should think very carefully about doing so to actually address this question, because, to be really clear, what they're saying to you is that Minister King's office, despite a request from her own department to help with evidence, are unwilling to confirm whether or not she had a meeting or discussion with Alan Joyce on or around 23 January this year, days after she had told the Virgin CEO that she expected to approve the negotiating mandate that your department had sent up to her to enable Qatar to have additional flights into this country. Ms Purvis-Smith, I'm sorry you have been put in this impossible position. And certainly we will pursue this—

CHAIR: Absolutely.

...  

Next John Sharp representing REX:

Well worth watching as JS knows this industry and the politics involved better than most...  

Finally I note that of the 100 submissions published so far, over 70 of these submissions, are from some seriously pissed off Qantas customers - example:

I have been a Life member of the Qantas Club for almost 50 years and a member of that Company's Frequent Flyer programme since its inception.

In mid 2022, while booking Qantas flights to Uluru, I became aware the more than 190,000 FF points (worth more than $3500) had been cancelled without my knowledge. Discussions with the Frequent Flyer call centre proved fruitless, as did endeavouring to resolve the issue on-line.

On 30 March 2023, I wrote to the manager of Qantas' Frequent Flyer Programme in an attempt to seek a response and resolve the issue. This correspondence was ignored, as was a subsequent letter dated 17 May 2023. (Copies of both letters are attached).

I am appalled at the apparent disregard Qantas has for long standing customers and at their improper business practices. At this point in time, and until Qantas responds, I consider the loss of valuable Frequent Flyer points to be "Theft by Stealth".

I am encouraged to know that a Senate Inquiry has been established to look into Qantas’ business practices in general and trust that this input will give some credence to accusations of poor and unethical business practices by the airline and its questionable Frequent Flyer "loyalty" programme.

Ref: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus...ubmissions

MTF...P2 

PS: Hot off the press here is the PDF version of the Hansard for yesterday's hearing: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/dow...cation/pdf