Williamson Maurice: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Williamson Maurice: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:631;Page:3552] 
12.  
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National—Pakuranga) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: Does she have confidence in the board and the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority in light of the comments by chairman Ron Tannock that the CAA had not grounded Air Adventures because it had not stuck to its own “no-compliance no-fly” rule; if not why not? 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 Yes for the following reasons. Firstly Mr Tannock was not the chair of the Civil Aviation Authority at the time of the crash of the Air Adventures plane and only one board member from that time remains on the board. Secondly it is not the board that makes the decisions relating to the enforcement of the Civil Aviation Act and the suspension or revocation of aviation documents. Under the Civil Aviation Act it is the Director of Civil Aviation who has statutory independence from the board and the Minister in making these decisions. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: In light of the fact that Mr Tannock said that the authority had to face up to the responsibility of the accident and given the often-used quotes by this Government about accountability can the Minister tell this House the names of anybody—the chair board members senior management or low-level functionaries—who has either resigned or been sacked from or been disciplined in some way by the Civil Aviation Authority? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: No I cannot but I can tell the member that the board has taken the recommendations from the coroner’s report and the auditor’s report very seriously. The board has undertaken to implement all the recommendations—and not only to implement them but to ensure they are shown publicly to be implemented. That is certainly far more progress than I can remember coming from any other similar accidents. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: How does the Minister square away things within this Government when a “low-level messenger” as the Prime Minister called him was sacked on the day he leaked a Cabinet paper but the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority who openly admits the authority caused the death of eight good people by its failure to act—he admitted that; those are not my words—is not touched in any way? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I explained to the member that the board in fact does not make the decision as to who will fly and not fly; it is made by the director. The board’s responsibility is to deal with the director and I will certainly leave that in its hands. I am confused by Mr Williamson because on 6 June he put out a statement in the morning saying that we had to deal with the management; by the evening he had changed it to the board. So I am not sure whether he wanted us to deal with both of them. I cannot deal with the director but I am comfortable with what the board has undertaken to do. 
Peter Brown 
: Noting those answers is the Minister aware that in section 665 of the coroner’s report on the Air Adventures crash he states: “One man one aircraft and one part-time assistant were not a safe critical mass and the safety processes of the Civil Aviation Authority should have detected that and prevented the flight in question.”; and if the Minister is aware of that statement will she inform the House just how she will ensure that the authority will detect such flights and will prevent them from taking off? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Those issues are addressed in the recommendations. There were 31 of them: six relate to the Minister of Transport and are now being looked at by the Ministry of Transport to provide me with advice; the others relate to the Civil Aviation Authority which has undertaken to implement the recommendations; and one relates to Crop and Food Research which is one it will implement. So I believe that action is being taken and that the issue is being taken seriously not only by the Civil Aviation Authority board but also by the Government. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Given that the Minister says she cannot take direct action with management but only with the board what has she directed the board to do about this issue in terms of making somebody—anybody—within the organisation take some responsibility for the ghastly crash that the Civil Aviation Authority admits would not have occurred had it done its job? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I have required that the board ensures that all recommendations are implemented and that each month the progress on those recommendations and their implementation will be made public and published. That is the action I have taken. The member is aware that the civil aviation industry—I know it will have been filling his ear—believes that the approach that ought to be taken in civil aviation is one of making quality improvement rather than of putting people’s heads on stakes. I do not believe that that is the appropriate action for the board; I want it to implement the recommendations. The board needs to ensure that the director does implement them. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Can I ask the Minister whether she has any concerns about paragraph 545 of the coroner’s report which states that the law enforcement unit of the Civil Aviation Authority—which is ostensibly ring-fenced from the Civil Aviation Authority operational groups—was subject to considerable pressure from the general aviation group not to take action against Bannerman; and if that is the case why is the person and head of the general aviation group not being disciplined for taking that action against the supposedly independent ring-fenced body within the Civil Aviation Authority? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: He may well be disciplined by the director. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Really? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I do not know that but he may well be—that is up to the director. Anyone who has half a brain over there on the Opposition benches knows how the Act works; I know Maurice Williamson knows how the Act works. I cannot tell the director how to run his outfit. However I know that Maurice Williamson also knows that one of the recommendations is to look at that part of the Civil Aviation Authority and the authority has undertaken to do just that. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Can the Minister give this House an assurance today 14 June 2006 that no operators out there flying today have such question marks over their operation as Mr Bannerman did and that everyone out there is operating in a safe and proper manner? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: The reassurance I received was from the board which received it from the director and the board believed there were no safety issues out there today. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: In light of that answer can the Minister now name one operator—just one—who has been grounded by the Civil Aviation Authority for poor shoddy operation in the last 12 months or since the Bannerman crash or since the Auditor-General’s report or since the coroner’s report? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I do not think I can off the top of my head. But I can remember that Air Chathams was grounded— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: That was years ago! 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: No it was not years ago because the first Audit Office report I think goes back to the late 1990s and I know that Air Chathams was grounded after that. I cannot give an accurate answer; that is just from my memory. However I am happy to find out for the member. But I did think when I spoke to him that he was a strong believer in an industry that looked not for “name blame and shame” but for trying to have quality improvement within this industry. When I have met with members of this industry that is what they have told me. Whether they are from those organisations that own parts of the industry or those that operate it they say “Let’s learn from the experiences—” 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Should he be left flying? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: It is quite obvious from the coroner’s report that he should not. That was a decision for the director and I think it is fair to say for the chairman who has already said that. The chairman has already said that. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: So why are we persisting with two regimes depending upon the size of commercial aircraft when most countries have one and when the current system is prejudicial against the interests of the safety of low-capacity aircraft passengers? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: The model itself I do not have a great problem with. The fact is that what is identified in the coroner’s report is the general aviation sector—planes with nine or fewer passengers: helicopters top-dressing planes and so on—an area where there has been some concern for a small number of operators. I want to assure this House and New Zealanders that there is no concern at all with our Air New Zealand our Freedom Air Qantas and so on. That sector is not of concern. This coroner’s report goes to the area of some of those operators who have thought—and probably not for the first time—that they can get away with something they ought not to be able to get away with.