Cath O'Brien: Board of Airline Representatives chair on Wellington Airport's $500 five-year upgrade plan

An airline group is casting doubt on demand for sending long-haul flights into Wellington Airport.

The Airport's announced a $500 million five-year upgrade plan – which includes extending its runway.

It will let bigger planes land – with hopes it'll attract non-stop flights from Asia and Los Angeles.

Board of Airline Representatives chair Cath O'Brien told Heather du Plessis-Allan it costs a lot to fly to New Zealand.

“If I look at air services demand for New Zealand in total, I don’t see any real growth at the moment. So, Auckland Airport is looking at pretty much a flat scenario.”

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Wellington Airport. Now, Wellington Airport has announced it's going to
try to attract more international flights from the likes of
Los Angeles and Singapore, and it's revealed it's going to
do that in a five hundred million dollar five year
plan that includes extending the runway with these energy absorbing blocks.
Here's the chief executive, Matt Clark.

Speaker 2 (00:17):
Enhancing the safety areas around the airport mean that we
can actually optimize the space that we do have and
that produces a one hundred and two meter extension to
the effective length of the runway.

Speaker 1 (00:28):
Now, Catho Brian is the executive director of the Board
of Airlines Representatives and with us. Now, hey, kat, Hey,
do you reckon that there's demands in Wellington for these
longer flights.

Speaker 3 (00:37):
Look, I'm not sure that there is a great demand
environment on New Zealand, despite you know, Wellington Airport doing
what is clearly the right thing and investing in some
runway safety areas.

Speaker 1 (00:49):
Why do you think that there might not be the demand.

Speaker 3 (00:51):
Look, if I look at air services demand for New
Zealand and total, I don't see any real growth at
the moment. So, you know, Auckland Airport is looking at
pretty much a flat scenario. You've got a little bit
of growth going to christ Church, which is great to see,
and we've got those news services coming to Hamilton next year.
But outside of that, you know, there's not a lot
out there.

Speaker 2 (01:12):
Oh.

Speaker 1 (01:12):
Do you think when you talk about growth, you're talking
about growth in terms of airlines wanting to add capacity.

Speaker 3 (01:17):
Yeah, airlines willing to come to New Zealand and fly
more to New Zealand. Yeah, And I think you know,
one of the reasons that they that they maybe aren't
doing that is because of the increasingly high cost that
New Zealand you know, represents in terms of the destination.

Speaker 2 (01:31):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:31):
I mean, is kath are they future proofing? Maybe, because
if we actually play our cards right, we will increase
demand again, won't we. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:39):
Look, I think, as I say, Wellington Airport is doing
the right thing by by looking at it safety area
around its runway and making sure it's safely operable, and
so I think that's that's a great thing. I think
whether or not that that brings us more international air
services to Wellington is another thing. I think. You know, we,
as I say, we aren't sort of seeing that really

(02:00):
around And I think that comes from a lot of
the costs that we're imposing on airlines who fly here.

Speaker 1 (02:05):
Okay, now what about how you pay for this stuff? Right?
Are the airlines going to squeal if they are head
up for it?

Speaker 2 (02:12):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (02:13):
Look, I mean Wellington Airport consulted with airlines as part
of its price setting process on the EMAS proposal, so
it's included in the capex. It may you know that
the cost of it may change as we roll through
the process. So airlines as is the usual way pay
for airport capex in New Zealand, and that is how
it works.

Speaker 1 (02:33):
Is it not actually a good idea to bolster an
airport like this in order to be able to play
it off against Auckland Airport, given that you guys are
in such a massive fight with Auckland Airport about its costs.

Speaker 3 (02:43):
Yeah, well, I think you know, as I say, it's
good to see Wellington considering that the area around it's
runaway and making sure that it's safe. So that's a
good thing. And I think in terms of the capex spend,
it you know, pales into insignificance as we compare it
to Auckland Airport's five point nine billion dollars of aeronontical
capex that we are going to need to fund up there.
So yes, you know, the different airports have different capex profiles,

(03:06):
and so some airports become cheaper than others, and maybe
that's a good thing. But I think the important thing
to think about when it comes to this runway stuff
is that if the airlines are considering landing on a
runway in the world, their own civil aviation authority has
to consider whether or not that safe. And so that's
a consideration for each airline and for each you know,

(03:26):
international civilization.

Speaker 1 (03:28):
Are you suggesting that there would be civil aviation authorities
out there who look at Wellington's plans go not safe.

Speaker 3 (03:34):
Well, I think everyone has to make their own assessment, right,
and so I see from Wellington's announcement that the EMAS
will will allow any aircraft that runs off the runway
to be captured, which is a good thing, certainly better
than the water. But you know, it does say with
minimal damage, and so I think any airline with result
with a very large, expensive asset would think how much

(03:56):
exactly minimal damage? And you know, those are very reasonable
questions to be asking, and there will be a process
in which those questions will be asked.

Speaker 1 (04:03):
Fascinating. Hey, Kat, thanks very much, appreciate it. As Kath O'Brien,
the executive director of the Board of Airlines Representatives known
as Barnes. For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive, listen
live to news talks.

Speaker 2 (04:14):
It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.