All other provisions commence on the day on which the Bill receives
Royal Assent.
- To make the operators of international terminals, rather than
airlines who use them, responsible for the security screening of
air travellers;
- To enable de facto spouses to claim compensation if their partners
are injured or killed in an air accident; and
- To give the Air Services Commission the power to allocate seating
capacity on flights between points outside Australia, as well as
those between Australia and other countries.
This Bill amends five different Acts:
- the Air Navigation Act 1920;
- the Airports Act 1996;
- the Air Services Act 1995;
- the Civil Aviation (Carriers Liability) Act 1959; and
- the International Air Services Commission Act 1992.
The most important changes are to do with airport security arrangements
contained in the Air Navigation Act 1920.
At the moment, the airlines are responsible for the security screening
of passengers at both domestic and international terminals. The usual
method of doing this at the international and larger domestic terminals
is to have security checkpoints controlling access into a 'sterile
area'. Passengers then board the aircraft from the sterile area.
However the airlines have been concerned about having the responsibility,
and therefore the liability if something goes wrong, at airports where
they do not have total control over the sterile areas. For example,
at Sydney international airport, the same checkpoint screens passengers
for more than 30 airlines. And those passengers are screened into
a sterile area with shops and other commercial operations run and
stocked by people who may come and go through other entrances which
the airlines have no control over. The responsibility for those entrances
lies with the terminal operators.
The airlines took their concerns to the industry group, the Aviation
Security Consultative Group, chaired by the Department of Transport
and Regional Development. This Bill had its genesis there and allows
for a much wider range of security arrangements.
The Bill gives primary responsibility for security screening at
international airports to the terminal operators, at least where sterile
areas are used, thus centralising responsibility rather than splitting
it between the operators and the airlines.
But the Bill also allows the secretary of the Department of Transport
and Regional Development to approve other arrangements, if s/he believes
it would lead to improved security. For example, a terminal operator,
in combination with two airlines, could have responsibility for different
parts of the one terminal.
It's worth noting that while international airports are the primary
target of the Bill, this is not mentioned specifically. The Bill is
written in general terms, and may be applied to domestic terminals
as well, with joint-user terminals like Canberra, Alice Springs, Townsville,
and Hobart among those most likely to be affected.
Airline Security: amendments to the Air Navigation Act 1920
Items 1 to 11 in Schedule 1 deal with definitions (contained
in section 3, and section 11A). They either insert new
ones including for 'screening authority' and 'screening officer',
or change existing ones. The most important change is the new definition
for 'screening point'. The old definition made it clear responsibility
for screening at the screening point lay with the operator of the
aircraft. The new definition, in item 3, is neutral. It simply
defines what a screening point is, without mentioning who is responsible
for screening. That is contained in the newly inserted definition
for screening officer - simply a person authorised under the Bill
to screen people or goods.
All these definitional changes are necessary to implement the Bill's
purpose of making screening points at international airports primarily
the responsibility of terminal operators.
The definitional changes in items 9 - 11 include 'another
country', 'bilateral agreement' and 'country'. These are made to ensure
definitions in the Air Navigation Act remain consistent with
the International Air Services Commission Act.
Item 12 inserts a new section 20(2A) which makes it
an offence for a passenger to intentionally or recklessly board a
larger commercial or charter aircraft, without being screened by the
aircraft operator. This section will apply both where the aircraft
operator is responsible for screening, and where, courtesy of the
deeming provisions in item 15, the screening is carried out
by a terminal operator. The fine is 80 penalty points- $8000.
Item 12 mirrors section 20(2) which makes it an offence
for an aircraft operator to, without reasonable excuse, permit a passenger,
who has not been screened to board a plane. The fine for that offence
is 200 penalty points - $20,000
Item 18 inserts a new section 20A dealing with an
aircraft operator's responsibilities if there is no sterile area.
This new section mirrors the existing provisions dealing with the
responsibilities of screening authorities operating sterile areas.
If there is no sterile area, the aircraft operator must screen passengers,
goods, vehicles etc as stipulated by the secretary of the Department
of Transport and Regional Development, using people and equipment
specified in writing by him/her.
New section 20A(3) makes it an offence for an aircraft operator
to allow a passenger, vehicle etc to board a plane if the screening
equipment detects a metal or unidentified object unless:
- the operator is satisfied the object is not dangerous; or
- the object is confiscated.
The fine is 200 penalty points - $20,000.
New sections 20A(5) - (10) stipulate that an aircraft operator
must keep screened passengers segregated from people who have not
been screened. The fine is 200 penalty points - $20,000.
Item 19 repeals section 21 and inserts new sections
21, 21A, 21B, and 21C. These new sections are crucial to the new
scheme of the Act.
These new sections deal with both:
- the secretary's powers to designate sterile areas, appoint screening
authorities, and stipulate how they should maintain the sterile
areas; and
- the screening authorities' responsibilities to screen people,
vehicles or goods entering a sterile area.
These sections give the secretary quite a lot of power, including
to mix-and-match screening authorities. For example, the secretary
may appoint one or more screening authorities at a terminal, which
may include, for example, two airlines, and the terminal operator.
This would depend on what the secretary thought appropriate to the
security and operational requirements. A major requirement of the
new provisions is that all of the screening area must be under the
control of at least one screening authority.
If the screening authority is in breach of these sections, including
written directives from the secretary, it face a fine of 200 penalty
points - $20,000.
Item 28 inserts a new subsection 22A(6A) dealing with
the responsibilities of screening authorities for sterile areas. The
new subsection prohibits a screening authority from allowing a person,
goods or vehicle past a screening point if the screening equipment
detects a metal or unidentified object unless:
- the screening authority is satisfied the object is not dangerous;
or
- the object is confiscated.
Item 29 inserts a new subsection 22A(7) which is very
similar, but deals with the responsibility of airline operators operating
as screening authorities using sterile areas. (Both items 28 and
29 are very similar to item 18. As already discussed that
section deals with aircraft operators screening without a sterile
area.)
Item 30 inserts a new subsection 22A(8) which makes
it an offence to contravene new subsections 22A(6A) or 22A(7),
dealt with above. The fine is 200 penalty points - $20,000.
Item 31 repeals subsection 22A(9) and inserts a new
one. This obliges the screening authority to keep passengers who have
been screened into a sterile area separate from people who have not
been screened.
Item 38 amends subsection 22B(2) to ensure that a
screening officer may stop a person from entering a sterile area or
an aircraft if that person has refused to remove headgear, handwear,
footwear and outer clothing as part of the screening check. This amendment
transfers the existing power from airline operators to screening officers,
in line with the scheme of this Bill.
New fees: amendments to the Airports Act 1996
Item 1 in Schedule 2 to the Aviation Legislation
Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1997 inserts a new subsection 132(3A)
in the Airports Act 1996. This enables the government to charge
fees for applications made in relation to regulations governing environmental
standards at leased airports (Melbourne, Perth and Brisbane as at
2 July 1997, with another 15 due to be privatised by the end of this
financial year).
Item 2 inserts a new subsection 133(3B). This enables
the government to charge fees for applications made in relation to
regulations governing monitoring and remedying breaches of environmental
standards at leased airports.
It's not clear on the face of the Bill what sorts of applications
could attract fees. However, the Department of Transport and Regional
Development gave examples including:
- requests for permission to vary environmental standards, for instance
to take account of local conditions; and
- authorisations to undertake specific activities, for example aircraft
maintenance involving large volumes of waste.
New functions: amendments to the Air Services Act 1995
Item 1 of Schedule 3 of the Aviation Legislation
Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1997 inserts a new subsections
8(1)(a) into the Air Services Act 1995 giving Airservices
Australia the additional function of 'promoting and fostering civil
aviation in Australia'.
De facto compensation: amendments to the Civil Aviation (Carriers'
Liability) Act 1959
Item 1 of Schedule 4 of the Aviation
Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1997) amends subsections
12(5) and 35(5) of the Civil Aviation (Carriers'
Liability) Act 1959 to include the term 'de facto spouse' in the
list of people eligible for compensation if a passenger dies or is
injured by an air accident.
The term 'de facto spouse' is not defined in either the Bill or
the Act. However, it probably refers only to heterosexual couples.
New powers: amendments to the International Air Services
Commission Act 1992
The Air Services Commission was created by the Air Services
Commission Act 1992, with one of its major tasks being
allocating routes and seating capacity for Australian airlines travelling
to or from Australia.
This Bill gives the commission the power to also allocate to Australian
airlines seating capacity, available under international agreements,
on routes wholly outside Australia.
Until now, this has been done by the Department of Transport and
Regional Development - the body which also negotiates the international
agreements.
The Bill has a 'grandfather clause' ensuring current seating allocations
are protected for the next five years.
The Bill also gives the commission clearer guidelines on how to
treat 'joint international air services' for the purposes of the Act.
Item 1 of Schedule 5 alters the definition of 'bilateral
arrangement' in subsection 4(1) of the Act. The new definition
is much wider, and refers simply to arrangements allowing the carriage
of passengers or freight. The old definition was restricted to arrangements
allowing the carriage of passengers or freight between Australian
and the other country party to the agreement.
Item 3 broadens the definition of 'capacity' to include capacity
allocated under more than one international agreement. The Explanatory
Memorandum puts it this way:
'This definition is deliberately broad, to encompass restrictions
or qualifications on capacity, contained in a bilateral arrangement
or combination of bilateral arrangements, that the International Air
Services Commission may need to make a decisions about in the course
of allocating capacity. These may include, but are not limited to,
capacity or frequency restrictions on the points to be served, or
a combination of these restrictions or qualifications.'
Item 5 inserts a new, broad definition for 'joint international
air services'. This is to assist the commission in one of its duties
- deciding to what extent an Australian carrier may use its capacity
jointly with any other carrier - section 15(2)(e).
Bronwyn Young
18 July 1997
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This Digest does not have any official legal status. Other sources
should be consulted to determine whether the Bill has been enacted
and, if so, whether the subsequent Act reflects further amendments.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's contents with
Senators and Members and their staff but not with members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 1997
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyright
Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted
in any form or by any means, including information storage and retrieval
systems, without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary Library,
other than by Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of
their official duties.
Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 1997.
This page was prepared by the Parliamentary Library, Commonwealth
of Australia
Last updated: 22 July 1997
