Bills Digest no. 4 2009–10
Aviation Transport Security Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as introduced
and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest does not have
any official legal status. Other sources should be consulted to determine
the subsequent official status of the Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage history
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Main provisions
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Aviation Transport Security Amendment
(2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009
Date introduced: 24 June 2009
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local
Government
Commencement: Sections 1 to 3 commence on Royal Assent. Parts 2–4 of
Schedule 1 commence the day after Royal Assent. Part 1 of Schedule 1 – which
deals with categories of security controlled airports – commences a day to be
proclaimed, or 12 months after Royal Assent, whichever is the earlier.
Links: The relevant links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum
and second reading speech can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/. When Bills have been passed they can
be found at ComLaw, which is at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
The Bill amends the Aviation Transport
Security Act 2004 to make modest changes to the existing Commonwealth
aviation transport security regime. Specifically the Bill will:
- increase the flexibility in designating an airport as a security
controlled airport by enabling regulations to be made to categorise airports in
accordance with their relative risk profile
- to increase the range of situations in which aviation security
inspectors may enter certain premises without notice
- introduce the option of enforceable undertakings as a compliance
measure, and
- allow aviation security inspectors to issue compliance control
directions in a wider range of circumstances
Background to the development of the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 (the Act) is contained in the
relevant Bills
Digest.[1] The main object of the Act is to ‘establish a regulatory framework to safeguard
against unlawful interference with aviation’.[2]
A brief summary of some of the key features of the current
aviation transport security regime can be found at the relevant
part of the website of the administering Commonwealth Department, the
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local
Government.[3]
The Act has been regularly amended since 2004 to incorporate
various changes in the regime. The perceived need for such amendments appears
to have in part been generated by operational experience over time, and this is
presumably the case with this Bill. However, there have also been specific
reviews done on aviation security in recent years, notably the 2005 Wheeler Review of airport security,[4] and the 2006 report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Public Accounts and
Audit Developments
in Aviation Security since the Committee’s June 2004 Report 400: Review of
Aviation Security in Australia.[5]
There is no information in the Minister’s second reading
speech or the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill about whether, or to what
extent, the aviation industry has been consulted about the proposed amendments.
At its meeting of 25 June 2009, the Senate selection of
Bills Committee deferred consideration of the Bill until its next meeting.
The Bill does not appear to
have generated any significant public comment from the aviation industry or the
press.
According to the Explanatory
Memorandum, the amendments contained in the Bill will have ‘no significant
financial impact on Government expenditure.’[6]
Existing subsection 28(2) of the Act enables the Secretary of the administering Department to declare an
airport to be a ‘security controlled airport’.[7] Such a declaration allows, amongst other things, the Secretary to then
establish airside and landside security zones. There may be different types of
such security zones prescribed by regulations, but as their name implies, these
zones are intended to provide appropriate levels of security by controlling
movements of persons, vehicles, goods etc. However, the Explanatory Memorandum
comments:
The declaration of an airport as a … [security controlled airport]
… generally places the same legislative requirements on all such airports,
regardless of their size, location and type of aircraft operating from that
airport. The amendments under items 2 and 3 have been developed with the
purpose of allowing legislative requirements to be tailored according to the
security risk profile of each … [security controlled airport]. It is intended
that [the amendments in Part 1] will enhance regulatory activity, whereby,
airports would be better targeted when categorised in accordance with their
relative risk profile.[8]
Item 3 inserts new section 28A, which will enable
regulations to prescribe different categories of security controlled airports.
The assignment of a particular category to an individual airport will be done
in the same way as airports are now declared to be security controlled airports
– that is, by publishing a notice in the Gazette, and giving a notice to
the airport operator: item 2.
The declaration of an airport as a security controlled
airport is reviewable by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) under
existing paragraph 126(1)(e). Item 5 inserts a new paragraph 126(1)(ea) so that a decision by the Secretary to assign a security controlled airport a
particular category will also be reviewable by the AAT.
Aviation security inspectors are employees of the
administering Department, or State or Federal police officers, or protective
service officers under the Australian Federal Police Act 1979. Such
inspectors have wide entry and inspection ranging powers under existing section
79 which can be exercised for determining whether a person is complying with the
Act and /or investigating a possible contravention of it.
Amongst the inspectors powers are those to enter and inspect
any area, building or vehicle under the control of an Accredited Air Cargo
Agent or aviation industry participant.[9] However, where the proposed
entry and inspection is in place that is not within the boundaries of a security
controlled airport, ‘reasonable notice’ must first be given before exercising
the power: existing subsection 79(3). The Explanatory Memorandum asserts that:
The requirement to provide reasonable notice reduces the
effectiveness of inspection activity as it is possible that businesses could
quickly alter their practices for the period of the inspection.[10]
Items 7 and 8 would delete this reasonable notice
requirement in most instances. However, reasonable notice would still be
required for entry and inspection of a residence.
In addition to offence provisions scattered throughout the
Act, Part 8 currently contains a range of compliance mechanisms in relation to
aviation industry participants. Item 11 and the related consequential amendments will now allow
the Departmental Secretary to enter into enforceable written undertakings with such
participants. The Explanatory Memorandum characterises this option as a ‘middle
range sanction’ to address ‘regulatory issues and contraventions of the [Act],
particularly in instances where the breaches are not serious enough to warrant
preventing an [aviation industry participant] from
continuing to operate’.[11]
An enforceable undertaking is
voluntary. It may specify that the aviation industry participant, will
for the purpose of complying with the Act, take, or refrain from taking,
specified action: new paragraphs 123A(1)(a)-(b). In may be also be more
anticipatory in nature, requiring that specified action be taken that is
directed at ensuring the participant does not contravene the Act, or is
unlikely to contravene it, in the future: new paragraph 123A(1)(c).
Such undertakings may be cancelled by the Secretary, or the relevant
participant may withdraw from them or have them varied, although only with the
consent of the Secretary. In cases where the Secretary considers the person has
breached an undertaking, they may seek a variety of court orders, including an
order to comply, or an order to make a payment of some form of financial
penalty or compensation: new paragraphs 123B(2)(a)-(d).
Existing sections 74A-74E deal with control directions.
These can be used to control the movement of aircraft, and may be given to
pilots in command or aircraft operators. There are two types of control
directions:
- Compliance control directions, given by aviation security
inspectors, are used to ensure compliance with this Act. They may only be given
in relation to aircraft that are not in flight.
- Incident control directions, given by the Secretary, may only be
given in response to aviation security incidents.
In the case of compliance control directions, aviation
security inspectors currently have no power to give such directions to airport
operators or screening authorities. The Explanatory Memorandum comments:
There have been many instances where it would have been
appropriate for such directions to be issued to an airport operator or
screening authority. For example, an inspector may wish to issue a compliance
control direction to an airport operator or a screening authority that all
passengers and their luggage on a particular flight must be screened or
rescreened before the aircraft can depart from the airport to ensure compliance
with the [Act].[12]
Item 15 inserts new subsections 74B(1A) and 74B(1B).[13] These only apply to security controlled airports. New subsection 74B(1A) will
allow aviation security inspectors to direct operators to take ‘specified
action’ in relation to the airport. New subsection 74B(1B) will allow aviation
security inspectors to direct a screening authority or screening officer to take
‘specified action’ in relation to a screening point. It is unclear whether, in
the case of subsection 74B(1B), where action was considered necessary in
relation to multiple screening points, an inspector could give one direction
that would cover all points. Presumably this is the intent of the legislation,
so it may be advisable to make this clear.
Existing subsection 74C contains penalties for a failure to
comply with compliance control directions. The maximum penalties range up to
200 penalty units ($22 000).[14] Item 18 amends section 74C to apply the existing penalties in cases of failure to comply
with the expanded range of directions contained in item 15 above. The
existing defence of reasonable excuse continues to apply.
Members, Senators and
Parliamentary staff can obtain further information from the Parliamentary
Library on (02) 6277 2764.
Angus Martyn
27 July 2009
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Library
© Commonwealth of Australia
This work is copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted by the
Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit any part of this
work by any process without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary
Librarian. This requirement does not apply to members of the Parliament
of Australia acting in the course of their official duties.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament
using information available at the time of production. The views expressed
do not reflect an official position of the Parliamentary Library, nor
do they constitute professional legal opinion.
Feedback is welcome and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary Librarian.
Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications
with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients
may contact the author or the Library’s Central Entry Point for
referral.

|