07-02-2019, 07:33 PM
Great to see the ‘Public Interest’ being served by this new proposal at Essendon. Lots more opportunity for shopping. Lots more opportunity for residential development. Lots more opportunity for short term real estate development with a good ROI. Bugger aviation and the critical role it plays in our economy. They can fly from somewhere else.
Methinks the long term plan is to close down the airfield altogether using the ‘death-by-a-thousand-cuts’ method big developers have honed to perfection with tacit government approval. It goes something like this: ‘hey mate, stick in the application, no worries. We’ll take care of it.. it’ll go through the normal approvals process using the flawed ‘affordable risk’ methodology we’ve been using for years without consequence. Don’t worry about all that international shit. We give lip service to that so it looks as if we are meeting that standard when nothing could be....well, you know. Then when you find there’s reduced air traffic you can put an argument for further reductions in width and length and we’ll go with that because, clearly, aviation is giving you a poor ROI...we can’t have that, can we? We can’t stifle the market place! And Bob’s your father’s brother. Oh, and about that donation for a good cause........!
Of course this is a purely fictional account of what might happen bearing no resemblance to those living or dead!
In the interim the public and fliers are at risk and not just along the sides of runways but at the ends where there ARE NO PUBLIC SAFETY ZONES courtesy NASF which is not interested in looking after the public at end of runways for established airfields. Nup, you’re on your own. School kids, local residents count for nothing. Just an affordable payout should things go pear-shaped. Tells us something about the value governments puts on human life. The message, for those of you who’ve missed it, is humans are a commodity with a certain value, and that value is the price of doing business. How much are you worth!
Methinks the long term plan is to close down the airfield altogether using the ‘death-by-a-thousand-cuts’ method big developers have honed to perfection with tacit government approval. It goes something like this: ‘hey mate, stick in the application, no worries. We’ll take care of it.. it’ll go through the normal approvals process using the flawed ‘affordable risk’ methodology we’ve been using for years without consequence. Don’t worry about all that international shit. We give lip service to that so it looks as if we are meeting that standard when nothing could be....well, you know. Then when you find there’s reduced air traffic you can put an argument for further reductions in width and length and we’ll go with that because, clearly, aviation is giving you a poor ROI...we can’t have that, can we? We can’t stifle the market place! And Bob’s your father’s brother. Oh, and about that donation for a good cause........!
Of course this is a purely fictional account of what might happen bearing no resemblance to those living or dead!
In the interim the public and fliers are at risk and not just along the sides of runways but at the ends where there ARE NO PUBLIC SAFETY ZONES courtesy NASF which is not interested in looking after the public at end of runways for established airfields. Nup, you’re on your own. School kids, local residents count for nothing. Just an affordable payout should things go pear-shaped. Tells us something about the value governments puts on human life. The message, for those of you who’ve missed it, is humans are a commodity with a certain value, and that value is the price of doing business. How much are you worth!