By Janet Parker
SYDNEY — Anger at the third runway disaster continues to grow. Government promises of enforcing curfews and fining airlines which flout flight paths have proved a sham.
The government package, launched with great ceremony on December 8 by Prime Minister Paul Keating and transport minister Laurie Brereton, promised stricter policing of the 11pm-6am curfew, backed by fines of $25,000. The package also promised narrower flight paths to the north and south so that fewer residents would be affected by jets passing overhead. Again, the maximum penalty for deviating from the flight path was $25,000.
The package did little more than tinker at the edges. It was a desperate act on the part of state and federal Labor politicians to shore up their dwindling support in traditionally safe seats.
Contrary to their hopes, the proposals only served to increase the anger and discontent of those affected by the third runway, who subsequently redoubled their efforts to build the blockade of the airport on December 17. Some 10,000 demonstrators blockaded the international terminal for four hours, causing the cancellation and rescheduling of flights by at least six international airlines.
People's cynicism toward the cabinet package was well-founded. It has now emerged that the 1989 federal regulations permit international airlines to reschedule up to 56 movements a week — 2912 a year — between 11pm and midnight and 5am and 6am without incurring a fine. On top of this, up to 42 Airbus and freight aircraft and certain propeller planes are allowed to use the airport throughout the night.
When daylight saving ends on March 5, the situation will worsen, because many international flights will land one hour earlier.
As for the promise to fine airlines deviating from the gazetted flight paths, no action has been taken. The Civil Aviation Authority has apparently issued "operational instructions" to airlines to observe the flight paths, but they won't be enforced until February 2.
Local Labor members from the affected areas have called on the federal treasurer to bring forward spending on the second airport at Badgerys Creek into the next budget. The call to "fast-track" Badgerys airport is one that has been enthusiastically taken up by community protests. However, the Badgerys proposal is not without its critics.
The Democratic Socialist candidate for the seat of Marrickville in the state election, Karen Fletcher, issued a warning about Badgerys at the 1994 runway protests. Fletcher is concerned that siting a new airport there is just transferring the problem to the outer western suburbs. With 30,000 new homes being built in estates in Hinchinbrook, Cecil Hills and Hoxton Park, just to the east of Badgerys, this area is one of the fastest growing residential areas in Sydney's metropolitan region.
"If the noise maps for the proposed Badgerys airport end up being as inaccurate as those for the third runway at Kingsford Smith Airport", Fletcher told Green Left Weekly, "the densely populated areas like Penrith, Blacktown, Liverpool, Fairfield and Cabramatta could all be adversely affected by excessive noise.
"The truth is that Badgerys is an environmental disaster waiting to happen. Despite the ever increasing residential population, it is proposed there be no night curfew. Secondly, Badgerys Creek is also the site of the Prospect Dam, which supplies one third of Sydney's water supply. What will the impact of aircraft emissions — the dumping of kerosene and fuel — be on our water supply?"
Late last year the ABC's 7.30 Report raised some of the problems with Badgerys, but these have not been widely canvassed and the government is refusing to do another environmental impact statement.
Fletcher says, "Ultimately, Kingsford Smith should be closed altogether. No airport should exist in a densely populated area and particularly not one that's right next door to a petrochemical complex! But nor should we rush to create another disaster at Badgerys. A serious study must be made — and urgently — of alternative sites for a major airport outside Sydney's residential area. The tourist giants will scream, but that's tough. People's quality of life must come before the tourist dollar."
[For details of protest meetings and anti-runway actions, see pages 26-27.]