Help Shape the Future of Australia’s Aviation Policy

Matt Graham
Have your say on the future of Australian aviation policy by providing feedback on the Aviation Green Paper

The Australian government is seeking feedback on its recent Aviation Green Paper to help it shape the direction of Australia’s aviation policy over the coming decades. Organisations and members of the public are invited to comment on a range of issues by 30 November 2023.

This is your chance to have your say on Australian government policy relating to things like airlines, airports, consumer protections for passengers and regulations that affect all of us as a community of Australian frequent flyers.

As a forum and an advocate for travellers, Australian Frequent Flyer intends to make a submission to this process on behalf of our community.

To do this, we’re seeking your feedback on what you would like the Australian government to do about some of the specific issues raised in the Green Paper. Your feedback and ideas will inform our submission.

These are the 3 questions raised by the Green Paper that we believe are most relevant to AFF members:

  • Should the Australian Government look to revise current consumer protection arrangements and, if so, through existing or new mechanisms?
  • Would an expanded remit for the Airline Customer Advocate to educate customers on their legal entitlements be useful?
  • Would policies pursued in other jurisdictions – such as a Passenger Bill of Rights or a stronger ombudsman model – deliver benefits to Australia’s aviation sector?
Have your say on the AFF forum

What’s in the Aviation Green Paper?

The Aviation Green Paper raises a lot of different issues that the government would like feedback on, including the three listed above. You can read the full list of questions in Appendix A of the Green Paper document (pages 200-204).

For full context, here are some key excerpts from the Green Paper relating to the policy areas we intend to provide feedback on (our bolding).

From Page 4:

The Australian Government is seeking views on revising the governance arrangements for the Airline Customer Advocate, including expanding its remit to educate customers on their legal entitlements, and working with industry to introduce ‘fixed payout’ type insurance products which provide more certain compensation arrangements. The Australian Government is also seeking to understand whether options pursued in other jurisdictions – such as a Customer Rights Charter or a stronger ombudsman model – would deliver benefits to Australia’s aviation sector.

Page 4, Aviation Green Paper

From Page 50:

Australia has no aviation-specific consumer protection laws. The terms and conditions issued by airlines in their ticket terms and conditions are governed by the provisions of the ACL. Government, state and territory Consumer Affairs Ministers will shortly commence a national survey looking at the experiences of consumers and businesses, including travel businesses, in relation to the ACL. The Australian Government is also considering how the ACL could include prohibitions against ‘unfair trading practices’, noting that general prohibitions against unfair trading exist in a number of international jurisdictions.

Page 50, Aviation Green Paper

And from Page 51:

The 2009 Aviation White Paper called on the airline industry to improve customer complaint-handling, which led to airlines publishing customer charters, outlining their business’s commitments to consumers, and creating the Airline Consumer Advocate (ACA) to assist consumers to resolve airline complaints.

… The ACA is not a substitute for a low-cost, accessible legal process which can ensure passengers can access fair treatment.

Page 51, Aviation Green Paper

Data from the ACCC also indicates high levels of contacts commensurate with the higher numbers of cancelled or delayed flights in mid-to-late-2022. The average number of contacts the ACCC received per month in 2021 was 263, by 2022 this had risen to 476. Prior to COVID-19, the average contacts per month in 2018 and 2019 were 129 and 180, respectively. While a ‘contact’ does not indicate a breach of the ACL, it is indicative of rising concerns in the Australian community and gives further weight to longstanding advocacy by Australian consumer groups for aviation specific rules similar to European arrangements.

There are also calls for establishing an independent ombudsman to improve processes for handling consumer complaints or a Customer Rights Charter that includes minimum requirements for consumer protection and customer service.

Page 51, Aviation Green Paper

How to provide feedback

So, over to you! We would love your feedback on the following key areas of discussion:

  • What are your views on the current effectiveness of the Airline Customer Advocate?
  • Should Australia consider broader consumer protection models for airline passengers, such as the one used in the European Union (EU261)?
  • Do you have any other experiences, insights or suggestions regarding the topics discussed in the Green Paper?

Please share your thoughts in the dedicated AFF thread by Friday, 17 November 2023.

Have your say on the Australian Frequent Flyer forum
Matt Graham
The editor of Australian Frequent Flyer, Matt's passion for travel has taken him to over 90 countries… with the help of frequent flyer points, of course!
Matt's favourite destinations (so far) are Germany, Brazil & Kazakhstan. His interests include aviation, economics & foreign languages, and he has a soft spot for good food and red wine.

You can connect with Matt by posting on the Australian Frequent Flyer community forum and tagging @AFF Editor.
Matt Graham
________________________

Related Articles

Community Comments

Join the discussion →

Loading new replies...

Himeno Nov 01, 2023 #1

What are your views on the current effectiveness of the Airline Customer Advocate?

I've never had reason to use it, but given how it is set up, the limitations in its scope, how complaints are processed, the lack of any binding resolutions and prior complaints about the ACA I've seen, I'd say it isn't effective in any way and not much better then dealing with the airline.
If you're running into problems dealing with an airlines brick wall thinking, going to the ACA who just forwards it back to that same brick wall isn't going to do anything useful.

Should Australia consider broader consumer protection models for airline passengers, such as the one used in the European Union (EU261)?

Yes. An "AU261" would likely go a long way towards fixing many of the problems currently existing in Australian commercial aviation. As long as there is some kind of oversight mechanism that can break through airline attempts at stonewalling and avoiding paying the compensation.

Reply 6 Likes

click to expand...
Blackswan Nov 01, 2023 #2

What are your views on the current effectiveness of the Airline Customer Advocate?

The effectiveness is absolutely useless. I have tried to use them a few times - first instance, they just forwarded my complaint back to the airline (without chasing it up), and the second time they didn't even respond to my complaint.

It appears it is staffed by one or two team members, who don't have the capacity or empowerment to do anything. The entity is an absolute farce, paid for by the airlines to avoid a proper oversight.

Should Australia consider broader consumer protection models for airline passengers, such as the one used in the European Union (EU261)?

Yes, absolutely. No reason why not (unless you ask the airlines).
No more needs to be said.

Reply 7 Likes

click to expand...
henrus Nov 01, 2023 #3

Should Australia consider broader consumer protection models for airline passengers, such as the one used in the European Union (EU261)?

Ever tried to claim a legitimate EU261 from a low cost carrier, borderline impossible (quite frankly JQ/VA/ZL all operate like on domestic flights charging for seat selection etc).

Reply 1 Like

L LondonAussie Nov 01, 2023 #4

Should Australia consider broader consumer protection models for airline passengers, such as the one used in the European Union (EU261)?

Absolutely - especially the duty of care sections (must provide meals, accommodation and transport) and the right to choose a refund or rebooking (customer's choice to be fully refunded within 7 days OR to be rebooked/rerouted to their destination or back to departure point - again at customer's choice, and can be on another airline or even a high speed train in UK/EU).

These sections are often overlooked as the focus of discussion is always on the compensation payouts, but EU261 provides much more than that, including refunds for downgrades and bumping/overbooking.

Reply 13 Likes

click to expand...
t tdimdad Nov 01, 2023 #5
  1. What are your views on the current effectiveness of the Airline Customer Advocate?

You can't expect that an oversight body which is owned by the companies themselves would provide effective results to the consumers. Industry self-regulation overall works poorly in Australia. The body needs to be fully independent of the companies / organisations it oversees.

This could be formed as an ombudsman with deep industry knowledge and hosted by the ACCC. Instead of recommendations, the ACCC (ombudsman) provides determinations which are binding and enforceable.

  1. Should Australia consider broader consumer protection models for airline passengers, such as the one used in the European Union (EU261)?

Definitely yes. Modelling it from the best parts of the existing EU / UK / US / CA regulations and incorporating the lessons learned in those jurisdictions. The model needs to be kept simple and straightforward so that the number of loopholes and workarounds are minimised.

The emphasis needs to be two-fold compared to the current situation:
1) Make good. In any disruption, the operating carrier is to make good ("no worse off") to the passenger. The method must be of customer's choosing (reroute / rebook, refund, etc). In case of downgrades, a legislated model to calculate a fair compensation needs to be included to avoid any ambiguity and dispute. The resolution times need to be kept to the minimum (e.g. 7 days, as suggested by LondonAussie above).
2) Contract. The sale of a ticket needs to be seen to form a contract (not a "bundle of some mysterious rights which only the company can adjudicate"). Any changes from that by the carrier is to be treated as a breach of contract which needs to be made good (point 1).

Reply 12 Likes

click to expand...
yaziyo Nov 01, 2023 #6

On the topic of an "AU261" I think this would absolutely go a long way in better aligning the incentives of airlines to do the right thing by their customers. Late flights, cancelled flights and downgrades should be a rare occurrence, not a free tool airlines can use without consequence. The airlines will argue it will make flights more expensive - the European aviation market begs to differ.

Next time you read a horror story on here of someone getting to the airport and being mistreated by their airline, look up the applicable law in Europe for that scenario. My experience is that more often than not, the customer would have been entitled to significant protection or compensation had they been in Europe and not Australia.

Reply 4 Likes

click to expand...
g gidxg03 Nov 02, 2023 #7

As others have said EU type protection for Australian consumers is critical. It is a wild west out there with airlines having no accountability to their customers. And airlines have shown they cannot police themselves.

Reply 3 Likes

I Ian Bud Nov 02, 2023 #8

Dear AFF Community,

The Australian government recently published its Aviation Green Paper which will shape our nation's aviation policy for the upcoming decades.

The paper touches on numerous topics that directly impact us as frequent flyers. Key areas of discussion include the Airline Customer Advocate's role and the potential for new consumer protections.

How you can assist the AFF community:

Australian Frequent Flyer intends to voice our community's collective feedback by providing a submission on the Green Paper. To do this effectively, we’re seeking your input.

The central questions of our focus are:

  1. What are your views on the current effectiveness of the Airline Customer Advocate?
  2. Should Australia consider broader consumer protection models for airline passengers, such as the one used in the European Union (EU261)?
  3. Any other experiences, insights or suggestions regarding the topics discussed in the Green Paper?

See our article for more details about the Aviation Green Paper.

Please share your perspectives and suggestions in this thread by Friday, 17th November 2023.

Your feedback will be invaluable. It will not only shape our collective response but will also have a lasting impact on the future of aviation in Australia. We will share our final submission with the AFF community.

Thank you for your participation!

I don't know why they bother with the Airline Customer Advocate - it has no power and is complicated and bureaucratic. The easy answer is to simply adopt every line from EU 261, just as the UK did on leaving the EU by creating UK261. It will be easy for the airlines to administer because they are all familiar with it. And then the Airline Customer Advocate could be terminated completely because AU261 would do the job by law! It seems so simple, I can't think why we leave it to politicians

Reply 4 Likes

click to expand...
lawrencep Nov 02, 2023 #9

The biggest issue is targeting lack of competition. This starts with telling the Government to get their fingers out of accepting perks for anti-competition corruption policies with Qantas by denying more planes to come into Australia. We need to open up more international and domestic slots and lower the barrier to entry for other airlines.
This will increase competition for international and domestic routes, more competition means airlines will need to drop prices or improve services otherwise they will lose market share.

Right now because of the duopoly between Virgin and Qantas, they can get away with poor customer service whilst having minimal impact on their market share.

Reply 6 Likes

Forg Nov 02, 2023 #10

The biggest issue is targeting lack of competition.

... and with competition, very slightly increasing their cost of providing the service by making them compensate when they screw-up (ie. this "AU261") doesn't translate to embiggened ticket prices either. The very lowest ticket price is set by whatever it costs the airline, but we're not currently paying that lowest price for anything apart from the very occasional limited sale fares.

Reply 3 Likes

Join the full discussion at the Australian Frequent Flyer →