John MacDonald: Is this the future of airport security?

What’s the Government’s obsession with speeding things up?  

Today, it’s the queues at airport security that it wants to go faster - with Transport Minister Simeon Brown looking at bringing-in private operators to run airport security instead of the Civil Aviation Authority.   

As far as I’m concerned, if you don’t get through security on time and miss your flight, it’s your own fault. And I do not like the idea of private security outfits taking over.  

Instead, I think the Government should be focused on getting the Civil Aviation Authority to lift its game.  

Now this is done in some airports around the world. I’ve been reading about a scheme in the States. It’s also done in Australia, where private operators pretty much run all aviation security services. And Simeon Brown wants to find out if we should do the same thing here.  

But I don’t think the US and Australia are the best countries for us to mimic on this one because both countries have different standards on a lot of things because they are divided into states. With each state having their own rules and regs.  

We don't, which is why I think we need to stick with a standard operation right through the country, run by a single government agency.  

I went through San Francisco on my way to the UK back in May this year, and I see security services there are run by an outfit called Covenant Aviation Security.  

But I didn’t have any choice, and it doesn’t mean I have to like it.  

My main concerns about private operators taking over here is the risk of inconsistency in training, inconsistency in approach, and the variable quality control.  

I don’t like the fact that private operators don’t have the same access to the type of intel that gets shared between government agencies and not with private organisations and businesses.  

Nor should they, in my view.  

I like knowing that airport security is all part of the big government machine that kicks into gear when things hit the fan. For example - in times of emergency.

I know that private businesses and organisations are critical and also do great things in times of strife, but it’s not the same as a public agency, like the Civil Aviation Authority.

One of the unions that represents aviation security workers doesn’t like what the Government is proposing, either. And, before you get too excited, yes I can see through some of what it’s saying.

Especially, its concern that what the Government is proposing could mean job losses for the people involved. So, of course, a union is going to oppose anything where that’s possible.

But I’m with the National Union of Public Employees (or NUPE) when it says that privatising aviation security would be risky because the pay and conditions offered by private security firms would likely be inferior to what the Civil Aviation provides its workers. And so, you’d get less experienced people running security at the airports and there’d probably be higher staff turnover.

And I’m with the union when it says that allowing the airports to hire their own private aviation providers would lead to inconsistency across the country. Because it would allow airports to cut costs and set their own standards.

At the moment, the same rules and standards apply everywhere because the same outfit does it, and that’s how I think it should stay.

I’m at odds, though, with someone who knows a lot more about this than me. But I’m basing my position on my gut instinct.

Captain David Morgan is Air New Zealand’s chief pilot and operational integrity and safety officer - and he’s backing what the Government is looking at doing.  

He’s saying today: “We are not necessarily interested in delivering aviation security, but we are interested in the enablement of alternative providers for aviation security in New Zealand."

He says third-party aviation security providers are quite common everywhere else.

But even though Air New Zealand’s top pilot is telling me that I’ve got nothing to worry about if the Government does go-ahead with this, I still don’t like it.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Kerrywood of Morning's podcast from News
Talk sed B.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
What's the government's obsession with speeding things up? Today? Is
always something every day, I would say, getting things going
faster and stay. It's the cues at the airport, the
cues at airport security that the government wants to go
faster with Transport Minister Simeon Brown looking at bringing in
private operators to run airport security instead of the Civil

(00:32):
Aviation Authority. As far as I'm presiered to tell you,
what if you don't get through security on time and
miss your flight, it's your own font. And I do
not like the idea of private security outfits taken over. Instead,
I think the government what it should be doing is
focusing on getting civil aviation to lift its game. Now
this is done when I say this, private outfits running

(00:55):
aviation security or airport security at some some parts or
some airports around the world. I've been reading about a
scheme in the States. It's also done in Australia where
private operator is pretty much run all aviation security services,
and so some of Mbrown's to find out if we
should do the same thing here. But I don't think
the US and Australia are the best countries for US
to mimic on this one because both countries they have

(01:18):
different standards on a lot of things. And why is
that Because they're divided into different states, with each state
having their own rules and REGs. We don't do. We
we're one outfit, which is why I think we need
to stick with a standard operation right through the country
run by a single government agency. And you might be
listening to me saying that I don't like Simon Brown's idea,

(01:41):
even though I'm bound to have traveled through airports where
it does happen, and yep, I accept that probably have.
In fact, I know I have. I went through San
Francisco on my way to the UK back in May
this year. It just a few months back, and I
see security services there run by an outfit called Covenant
Aviation Security. But I didn't have any choice about that.

(02:04):
I didn't know about it at the time. But it
doesn't mean I have to like it, and it doesn't
mean I have to advocate or support this idea of
it happening here in New Zealand. My main concern about
private operators taking over here is the risk of inconsistency
in training, inconsistency and approach, and variable quality control. I

(02:26):
don't like the fact that private operators don't have the
same access to the type of intel that gets shared
between government agencies and not with private organizations and businesses,
nor should it, by the way, in my view, I
like knowing that airport security is all part of the
big government machine that kicks into gear when things hit
the fan, for example, in times of emergency. And I

(02:47):
know that private businesses and organizations are critical and also
do great things in times of strife, but it's not
the same as a public agency like the Civil Aviation Authority. Now,
one of the unions that represents aviation security workers doesn't
like what the government's proposing either, And before you get
too excited, before you get too excited, yes, I can
see through some of what it's saying. Especially it's concerned

(03:11):
that what the government is proposing could mean job losses
for the people involved. So of course, of course the
union is going to oppose anything where that's possible. But
where I'm with the National Union of Public Employees or
New Payers they call themselves, I'm with it when it
says that privatizing aviation security would be risky because the
paying conditions offered by private security firms would likely be

(03:33):
inferior to what the civil aviation provides its workers, and
so you'd get less experienced people running security at the airports,
and they'd probably be higher staff turnover. I'm also with
the union when it says that allowing the airports to
hire their own private aviation providers would lead to inconsistency
across the country because it would allow airports to set

(03:53):
their own standards, maybe even cut costs. You see, at
the moment, the same rules and standards apply everywhere because
the same outfit does it, the same government he does it,
and that's how I think it should stay. I am
at odds, though, and this might sound weird. I am
at odds with someone who knows a lot more about

(04:14):
this than me. You see, I'm basing my position on
my gut instinct. Captain David Morgan, now he's in New
Zealand's Chief Pilot, is also operational integrity and safety officer,
and he's backing what the government is looking at doing.
Captain Morgan is saying today, quote, we are not necessarily
interested in delivering aviation security when he says, we he

(04:36):
means Air New Zealand, but we are interested in the
enablement of alternative providers for aviation security in New Zealand.
He says, we're quite special here in New Zealand, special
as a unique because third party aviation security providers are
quite common everywhere else. He says, quote. Security should be
delivered on the basis of the level of threat, and

(04:58):
that level of threat doesn't necessarily exist at all of
the airports that we operate to interesting approach. But even
though even though Air New Zealand's top pilot is telling
me and telling you they've got nothing to worry about
if the government does go ahead with us, despite all that,
I still don't like it.

Speaker 1 (05:17):
For more from carry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
News Talks at B from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.