Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Speaker for the opportunity to take a call on the third reading of the Civil Aviation Bill which the National Party will be supporting tonight. This bill has been a long time coming. In fact I think it has been around 10 years in the preparation and consultation and many various different stages. Of course the Transport and Infrastructure Committee which I sat on considered this bill and all of the submissions and the input from officials in relation to this particular piece of legislation and now we're finally here at the third reading where this bill will finally be passed.This bill as the Associate Minister of Transport has described is very important for our civil aviation sector which plays a critically important role in our economy: 11.2 percent of our GDP and enabled over $17 billion of international tourism into the country as well. So this is not just about aviation in New Zealand. This is critically important to helping us to sustain and grow our economy particularly our tourism sector which is a critical component of our economy providing jobs and opportunities here in New Zealand exporting our goods to markets around the world and providing the ability for industries in New Zealand to be able to thrive and flourish and to be able to serve their communities.The Minister talked about the role aviation played recently with the cyclone and the response to that: being able to get into remote communities being able to respond rapidly and quickly. The reality is that was due to the fact that so many New Zealanders are so passionate about aviation. They're passionate about what aviation can do they love flying they love the ability to get around our country in this way. I must say it was New Zealanders who stood up to those challenges who donated their planes who helped to fund-raise efforts which were then taken into those communities which were cut off because the roading network was down and who were able to respond in that way. I'm incredibly proud of what they were able to do.But of course it's not just about having the aviation sector; we need to make sure there is good regulation in place which supports them and also Government agencies which are focused on outcomes and focused on ensuring that the whole sector can operate as efficiently as possible and that is what this piece of legislation is about doing. It's about making sure that it's fit for the 21st century; that it is keeping up to date with new technology including drones autonomous aircraft and other technology which is rapidly changing the face of civil aviation across New Zealand at the moment.Of course also the issues around security and threats and climate change are all addressed in this piece of legislation and of course the Government has recently had an International Civil Aviation Organisation report which has audited our aviation security and that found it wanting and that was because we had not been keeping pace with our international obligations around security at our airports—the international security that is required at our airports to ensure that our civil aviation is given that confidence for other airlines to come to New Zealand.But there were a number of issues that have been dealt with in this piece of legislation. We've discussed that now in the committee of the whole House in relation to the Public Works Act. The original bill was far too ambitious on behalf of the officials who wanted to give Land Information New Zealand significant powers to be able to make decisions around where airport land was surplus or not. The committee felt that that was far too excessive. We listened to the submissions in which it was put to us that that should not be made by the chief executive of Land Information New Zealand because those decisions are best made by airports through an objective test rather than by officials who aren't part of the long-term plans that are required for airports to be able to make those long-term investments and to give those airports that confidence.There were other issues in relation to regulatory undertakings the space that has to be provided to airports—that issue has been I think put into a better position than it was in the original bill but I'm not sure if it completely deals with all of the issues that were raised by airports. And of course it is a space which must be provided by airports to ensure that those Government agencies are able to operate whether it's civil aviation security biosecurity the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI)—of course they all need space but the original bill made it clear that they could tell the airports how much space they needed to have and then it was the airport's job to provide that and of course if you're in the business of building airports you can't just add an extra thousand square metres on to a building; it's not that easy. So we have got to a position which does require the agencies to work with the airports around what those spatial plans should look like. There is still a regulatory backstop for the officials if they cannot come to common ground. I would hope that that regulatory backstop is not having to be used because ultimately the officials and the departments should be working closely with airports. It is in both parties' interests to make sure that those conversations are dealt with through negotiation rather than through regulation and enforcement. I think that would be a bad outcome.There was a big discussion right through this process around the need for decisions made by the director of the Civil Aviation Authority to be able to be reviewed. There was significant disquiet by submitters across the board around the fact that the only recourse for people who had decisions made was to then go to the courts and through judicial review which of course takes a long time and costs a lot of money and really only benefits lawyers who are prepared to charge a lot of money for the privilege. It is good to see that there is now an independent reviewer who is able to make decisions within 10 working days around those decisions. That will make a significant improvement but I do note that it still does not give that independent reviewer teeth; all it does is require those decisions to then be reviewed again by the Civil Aviation Authority. So I do hope that the Civil Aviation Authority takes note of those reviewers' decisions after the passing of this legislation to give people better confidence in the decisions that are made. That is something which I hope the Civil Aviation Authority takes incredibly seriously.There were other smaller submissions made but important nevertheless—such as in regards to the issue of medical certificates the fact that in appealing those there are no time limits for the medical convenor. We've had that discussion here. I do disagree with the Government's position; my view and our view is there should be a time frame on those decisions being reviewed because it's critically important that pilots can have those decisions made quickly so they can either get on with their lives or have that decision around their medical certificate made and decided. It's critically important that the Civil Aviation Authority is not just consuming time that the medical convener is not just consuming time because time is of the essence.And when it comes to time we're all seeing up and down the country the significant wait times that we have whether it's at biosecurity civil aviation security or MPI. In all of these places we are seeing significant queues and a significant part of that is due to workforce shortages. But this is where the Government needs to have a focus on outcomes. A Government needs to be focused on the consumer. The Government needs to be focused on making sure that departments are operating efficiently and actually serving the people who pay the fees. People who travel the travelling public pay for those services through their airfares and they deserve to have timeliness when it comes to the provision of those services whether it's civil aviation security whether it's going through the border. There needs to be timeliness brought back to the system. And it's not just here in aviation but it's across the board. We need to have timeliness of New Zealand's travelling public considered.So on that note of timeliness and on the whip's suggestion I will recommend this bill to the House and thank all the submitters and officials for their help through the process. Thank you very much.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members before I take the next call just to clarify the motion we are debating is that the bills divided from the Civil Aviation Bill—that is the Civil Aviation Bill and the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill—be now read a third time. That means that we have one question for both bills unless members indicate they wish to vote separately at the end.