Shame or fame for Chester?

miniscule 4D (M&M prepared) AAA speech; & the PFAS ticking PED - Confused  

(PED definition: Politicised Explosive Device)

Referring to the GD post here:
Quote:P2;


"If 4D was actually sincere about the above statement then you would think that he would have responded by accompanying the AAA MR with a presser from his own office?? But for some reason that didn't occur".

Very good pick up P2. Well done. Pollies love positive Pressers. Perhaps he saw that there was a risk he may have to shelve out money, hence his forgoing some PR? Or maybe he was busy at the hair salon that day getting his todger trimmed and primed for another men's urinal selfie shot? And that's about the truth of it isn't it? This der-brain Politician hasn't got a clue. He accepts a report, shakes someone's hand, twerps it out on Twatter (probably along with a photo of his perfect hair and manscaped body), files the report on Barmyboys top shelf under the heading 'More IOS Complaints' and leaves it there to gather dust for the next half a century.

Amongst other platitudes, I note that ironically miniscule 4D, in his address to the AAA conference, has more publicly acknowledged the AAA exemplary report:
Quote:Australian Airports Association — National Airport Industry Awards 2016

Great Hall, Parliament House Canberra.

& via AA:

[Image: Lenn-Bayliss-First-747-8-to-Wellcamp-Air...2015-2.jpg]
Federal government committed to funding regional airports

November 24, 2016 By Jordan Chong

Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester says the federal government is committed to help regional airports meet the financial challenges in the years ahead. While the likes of …

“I thank the AAA for its recent report on Regional Airport Infrastructure, highlighting the challenges that these essential transport hubs are facing,” he said.



& this AM from Oz Flying:


[Image: http%3A%2F%2Fyaffa-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com%...ter_MP.jpg]Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Darren Chester.

Minister commits to Regional Airport Funding
25 November 2016
 
Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester has committed the Federal Government to funding regional and remote airports across Australia.

Speaking at the Australian Airports Association (AAA) dinner in Canberra last Wednesday, Chester said he would work with the AAA to make sure airport infrastructure was adequately maintained.
"At the local level, it can be a challenge to adequately fund the ongoing maintenance and development of regional or remote airports," Chester said.
"Other levels of government are generally responsible for these airports within our federal system. However, we do provide funding for access and safety upgrades through the Regional Aviation Access Programme."
"This year we also announced funding to upgrade airports in Merimbula, Moruya, Port Macquarie, Tamworth, and Busselton-Margaret River.
"And in Round Three of the National Stronger Regions Fund – funds have recently been committed to the Derby, Parkes and Dubbo airports.
"I am committed to continue to fund our regional and remote aerodromes and will work with the AAA on how best our government can deliver the appropriate support to this vital infrastructure."
Chester pointed out that, as a regional MP himself, he understood the importance of aviation to regional communities, but also noted that airports had to exist with a level of harmony in the communities they serve.
"Airport operators, whether large or small, need to develop a strong, open, beneficial relationship within their communities, to manage issues such as potential noise impacts.
"In this vein, a great deal of work has gone into promoting the National Airports Safeguarding Framework, incorporating guidelines on noise, wildlife strike [and] wind turbine risk."
The full text of Chester's speech is available on his ministerial website.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...pb7zHQt.99

However on that encouraging note for airports, I must again highlight the growing PFAS issue that is a bit like a PED ticking away outside 4D's office:

1st an update from GD off the BITN thread:
Quote:Perth airport next on the PFOS testing program;

http://www.communitynews.com.au/southern...amination/

"PERTH Airport is being assessed for contamination from the same toxic chemicals that leeched into groundwater and rendered farmland unusable around the RAAF Williamtown base in New South Wales.

The culprits are the man-made chemicals perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) found in fire fighting foam used at airports and Department of Defence sites across Australia.

Federal government organisation Airservices Australia, responsible for regulating firefighting foam used at government-owned airports, is expected to release preliminary test results in a report next month.

A spokesperson for Perth Airport said it was working closely with a range of State and Commonwealth government agencies, including the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (DIRD), Airservices Australia and the state departments of Environmental Regulation and Health.

“Perth Airport complies with the DIRD guidelines in conducting risk assessments on its operations to ensure the safety of its employees,” the spokesperson said.

Interesting though, the new Pertth CEO is a hedge fund stool. What is Ironic is that Perth's former environment manager is now CEO Newcastle! Anyway, the new Perth CEO cut the guts out of the environment staff at his last venture, North Queensland Airports. They had heaps of issues which include PFOS and a still not-contained underground fuel leak.

It's a relatively small world when it comes to airports and I know there are a number of people not happy that this particular CEO is joining joining a healthy vibrant airport known for its transparency.

Tick Tock Perth and welcome to the PFOS hall of shame
    
I also noticed in the HoR Hansard for yesterday's sitting of Parliament there was no less than five MP statements highlighting their electoral constituents growing concern on the PFAS issue: STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

Now I know that these statements are all addressing defence facilities with known PFAS contamination issues but considering all of those statements were made by Labor MPs including opposition leader Bill Shorten...
Quote:Mr SHORTEN (Maribyrnong—Leader of the Opposition) (13:57): I want to thank my colleagues who have spoken today. That is what good local members do; they stand up for their communities when times are tough. I have had the privilege, through the member for Paterson, of meeting with families near Williamtown—parents like Samantha Kelly, the loving mother of baby William. These brave residents currently fear the worst. They are worried about the effects on their health, their homes, their children and their livelihoods. They have been waiting too long for decisive action from the Commonwealth government—action which involves listening as well as doing.

For me, it is this simple: imagine if your livelihood was under a cloud and your property was at risk. Imagine if it was your family and your children. Would you be satisfied with the inaction and mixed messages from the government? This is not a time to airily dismiss people's concerns or hide behind red tape and process. It is not an occasion where we can let our fellow Australians be passed from one phone queue to another. We have seen what happened at Fiskville, for example. Therefore, we cannot simply dismiss the concerns of Australians at Williamtown, Oakey and elsewhere—all around the country—who are looking to this parliament for a national approach. They are asking for our help. To those residents who are concerned I say: Labor will stand with you. We will keep fighting for you today and every day.
 
  ...it is obvious that Labor feel they are on the right side of the ledger politically to attack the Malcolm Turnbull government on this issue; therefore it is just a matter of time before it becomes a political headache for miniscule 4D... Dodgy

MTF...P2 Cool

Ps Oh well at least the miniscule will be pleased I didn't talk about the war err...MH370 Big Grin
Reply

P2;

it is obvious that Labor feel they are on the right side of the ledger politically to attack the Malcolm Turnbull government on this issue; therefore it is just a matter of time before it becomes a political headache for miniscule 4D...

Correct. Now sit back and watch as this multi billion dollar mess keeps growing and at the same time Team Murky looks for a compensation circumvention process such as a change to the law to deny natural compensatory justice to those affected. Don't think for a moment that it won't happen.

Tick Tock DDDDarren
Reply

Dick backs Pauline - "Match made in heaven" Big Grin

[Image: c644459d2fe0d58fddebfc2777d219f2?width=650]
Courtesy the Daily Telegraph... Wink :

Quote:Dick Smith will advise Pauline Hanson as she plans an assault on Western Sydney
[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/article/b73c297b8b3e4624a811bc261a52a788?esi=true&t_template=s3/chronicle-tg_tlc_storyheader/index&t_product=DailyTelegraph&td_device=desktop[/img]EXCLUSIVE: Shari Markson, National Political Editor, The Daily Telegraph
December 6, 2016 12:00am

MILLIONAIRE patriot Dick Smith is backing Pauline Hanson’s tough immigration stance and offering to advise One Nation as the party plans an assault on Western Sydney at the next state and federal elections.

The buy-Australian campaigner will meet with Ms Hanson before Christmas to advise her on policy, predicting she will ride a wave of Trump-like support in traditionally conservative areas such as Sydney’s north shore.

Ms Hanson told The Daily Telegraph she will launch a major campaign in Western Sydney, running One Nation candidates in the next NSW state and federal elections.

[Image: a4e6fe1d09da290a7fc44ea4f75e9cdd?width=316][Image: 48978214177f5d366dd7382a08acc101?width=316]

It is a move that will petrify both Malcolm Turnbull’s government and the Labor Party.
Mr Smith, an opinionated former Australian of the Year, had an initial conversation with Ms Hanson last week, drawn to speak with her after his friends, long-term Liberal and Labor voters, had embraced One Nation.

“I support her policy on Julian Assange. I support her immigration policy. She says she’s going to have a policy to help general aviation. I’ll certainly support that,” Mr Smith said.

“I agree with her views on immigration numbers, that is about 70,000 a year, not 200,000. But I do not agree with her views on Muslim immigration,” he said.

The retailer is so passionate about curbing Australia’s immigration intake he is planning to pay for an advert protesting Lucy Turnbull’s growth predictions for Sydney. He also authored a book in 2011 titled “Dick Smith’s Population Crisis”.

“I noticed that Pauline’s is about the only political party that has a policy on not having perpetual population growth,” Mr Smith said.

[Image: 6348d1aeb6baccbf8987e69c3cb86aae?width=650]Dick Smith’s move to support Pauline Hanson will petrify both Malcolm Turnbull’s government and the Labor Party.

“That means we’ll end up stabilising our population so young people will be able to afford houses.” Mr Smith has also offered to help Ms Hanson with her aviation policy.

He said he would help her cement the support of tens of thousands of voters who work in the industry.

“Myself and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association will come up with what needs to be done and I will give her some suggestions,” he said.

“I think she would get tens of thousands of votes from the aviation community because they have been let down by the ALP and Liberals.”

Ms Hanson will target seats across Sydney where, she argues, voters are disillusioned with the major parties and want change.

[Image: 09a8257c2cbfa7e5174679bddbd8cb95?width=650]Mr Smith said he did not agree with Ms Hanson’s position on stopping Muslim immigration, and during their phone conversation asked her some tough questions.

“We will definitely be standing candidates in the next NSW state elections and federally, yes,” Ms Hanson told The Daily Telegraph.

“People are just really fed up with the major parties and screaming out for change.

“I think there’s a move on across the country for One Nation,” she said. “People know I care about the country and the people are sick of career politicians.”

The electronics retailer, once worth $50 million, said he had never donated to a political party and ruled out ­financially backing One Nation.

Traditionally a conservative voter, except during Bob Hawke’s tenure as prime minister, Mr Smith said he may stand for federal Parliament as an independent at the next federal election.

He said his three main platforms would be stopping Australia’s ballooning population, ensuring young Australians can buy their own home and curbing debt.

[Image: f973edbb7afac4d61a3aab22acb05bc5?width=650]“So many of my friends who normally voted Coalition reckon they are going to vote for Pauline Hanson,” Dick Smith says.

Mr Smith threatened to run against former Howard government minister Bronwyn Bishop in the last federal election in the NSW seat of Mackellar if the Liberal politician did not retire.

Mr Smith said the support for Ms Hanson all across NSW was palpable — even in the traditionally blue-ribbon north shore area.

“So many of my friends who normally voted Coalition reckon they are going to vote for Pauline Hanson,” he said. “You only have to look at what happened in America with Trump. “People are so disillusioned with our present party politics. Our politicians don’t tell the truth. They’re all actors.”

[Image: 3836ca30ac2e23f231d614b259e75820?width=650]Mr Smith, an opinionated former Australian of the Year, had an initial conversation with Ms Hanson last week.

“While I wouldn’t say I agreed with all of her policies, I am starting to see why she’s going have incredible support and how completely disappointed people are with the two major parties.” Mr Smith said he did not agree with Ms Hanson’s position on stopping Muslim immigration, and during their phone conversation asked her some tough questions.

“People tend to say that she’s racist. So I asked her, does she think that she’s superior to other races? She said no,” he said.

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

(12-06-2016, 09:36 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  Dick backs Pauline - "Match made in heaven" Big Grin

[Image: c644459d2fe0d58fddebfc2777d219f2?width=650]
Courtesy the Daily Telegraph... Wink :

Quote:Dick Smith will advise Pauline Hanson as she plans an assault on Western Sydney
[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/article/b73c297b8b3e4624a811bc261a52a788?esi=true&t_template=s3/chronicle-tg_tlc_storyheader/index&t_product=DailyTelegraph&td_device=desktop[/img]EXCLUSIVE: Shari Markson, National Political Editor, The Daily Telegraph
December 6, 2016 12:00am

MILLIONAIRE patriot Dick Smith is backing Pauline Hanson’s tough immigration stance and offering to advise One Nation as the party plans an assault on Western Sydney at the next state and federal elections.

The buy-Australian campaigner will meet with Ms Hanson before Christmas to advise her on policy, predicting she will ride a wave of Trump-like support in traditionally conservative areas such as Sydney’s north shore.

Ms Hanson told The Daily Telegraph she will launch a major campaign in Western Sydney, running One Nation candidates in the next NSW state and federal elections.

[Image: a4e6fe1d09da290a7fc44ea4f75e9cdd?width=316][Image: 48978214177f5d366dd7382a08acc101?width=316]

It is a move that will petrify both Malcolm Turnbull’s government and the Labor Party.
Mr Smith, an opinionated former Australian of the Year, had an initial conversation with Ms Hanson last week, drawn to speak with her after his friends, long-term Liberal and Labor voters, had embraced One Nation.

“I support her policy on Julian Assange. I support her immigration policy. She says she’s going to have a policy to help general aviation. I’ll certainly support that,” Mr Smith said.

“I agree with her views on immigration numbers, that is about 70,000 a year, not 200,000. But I do not agree with her views on Muslim immigration,” he said.

The retailer is so passionate about curbing Australia’s immigration intake he is planning to pay for an advert protesting Lucy Turnbull’s growth predictions for Sydney. He also authored a book in 2011 titled “Dick Smith’s Population Crisis”.

“I noticed that Pauline’s is about the only political party that has a policy on not having perpetual population growth,” Mr Smith said.

[Image: 6348d1aeb6baccbf8987e69c3cb86aae?width=650]Dick Smith’s move to support Pauline Hanson will petrify both Malcolm Turnbull’s government and the Labor Party.

“That means we’ll end up stabilising our population so young people will be able to afford houses.” Mr Smith has also offered to help Ms Hanson with her aviation policy.

He said he would help her cement the support of tens of thousands of voters who work in the industry.

“Myself and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association will come up with what needs to be done and I will give her some suggestions,” he said.

“I think she would get tens of thousands of votes from the aviation community because they have been let down by the ALP and Liberals.”

Ms Hanson will target seats across Sydney where, she argues, voters are disillusioned with the major parties and want change.

[Image: 09a8257c2cbfa7e5174679bddbd8cb95?width=650]Mr Smith said he did not agree with Ms Hanson’s position on stopping Muslim immigration, and during their phone conversation asked her some tough questions.

“We will definitely be standing candidates in the next NSW state elections and federally, yes,” Ms Hanson told The Daily Telegraph.

“People are just really fed up with the major parties and screaming out for change.

“I think there’s a move on across the country for One Nation,” she said. “People know I care about the country and the people are sick of career politicians.”

The electronics retailer, once worth $50 million, said he had never donated to a political party and ruled out ­financially backing One Nation.

Traditionally a conservative voter, except during Bob Hawke’s tenure as prime minister, Mr Smith said he may stand for federal Parliament as an independent at the next federal election.

He said his three main platforms would be stopping Australia’s ballooning population, ensuring young Australians can buy their own home and curbing debt.

[Image: f973edbb7afac4d61a3aab22acb05bc5?width=650]“So many of my friends who normally voted Coalition reckon they are going to vote for Pauline Hanson,” Dick Smith says.

Mr Smith threatened to run against former Howard government minister Bronwyn Bishop in the last federal election in the NSW seat of Mackellar if the Liberal politician did not retire.

Mr Smith said the support for Ms Hanson all across NSW was palpable — even in the traditionally blue-ribbon north shore area.

“So many of my friends who normally voted Coalition reckon they are going to vote for Pauline Hanson,” he said. “You only have to look at what happened in America with Trump. “People are so disillusioned with our present party politics. Our politicians don’t tell the truth. They’re all actors.”

[Image: 3836ca30ac2e23f231d614b259e75820?width=650]Mr Smith, an opinionated former Australian of the Year, had an initial conversation with Ms Hanson last week.

“While I wouldn’t say I agreed with all of her policies, I am starting to see why she’s going have incredible support and how completely disappointed people are with the two major parties.” Mr Smith said he did not agree with Ms Hanson’s position on stopping Muslim immigration, and during their phone conversation asked her some tough questions.

“People tend to say that she’s racist. So I asked her, does she think that she’s superior to other races? She said no,” he said.

On another front I note that miniscule NFI 4D Chester found a 'good news' story that he'll be hoping will relieve some of the aviation industry 'big end' of town pressure... Rolleyes

Via Oz Aviation:
Quote:
Quote:Australia signs open skies agreement with China

December 5, 2016 by australianaviation.com.au

[Image: Air-China-Chengdu-Sydney-12-November-2016-arrival.jpg]Another day, another Chinese airline inaugural. Air China’s inaugural Sydney-Chengdu services is welcomed at Sydney Airport in November. (Sydney Airport/Kurt Ams)

Chinese airlines will have unrestricted capacity into Australia after the federal government announced it had reached an agreement with China for an “open aviation market” between the two countries.

The agreement, announced on Sunday, paves the way for China-based carriers to maintain the furious pace of growth into this country in recent times, catering for the increasing number of Chinese tourists travelling overseas.

Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester said opening up aviation capacity in the Australia-China air services agreement had been a top priority since he took up the portfolio.

“These new arrangements will remove all capacity restrictions between Australia and China for each country’s airline which is an important enabler for increased trade and tourism,” Chester said in a statement.

While the most obvious benefit will be for Chinese carriers, who are now free to continue their rapid expansion into this country, Chester noted the new agreement also contained some benefits for Australian flag carriers.

“We have also liberalised traffic rights and code share arrangements, which are important for Australian airlines,” Chester said.

“This will enable Australian and Chinese airlines to service destinations between and beyond both countries, and will allow them to take full advantage of their cooperative arrangements with their commercial alliance partners.

The Australia-China air services agreement was most recently expanded in January 2015, which increased the available capacity for both flights between the major cities of China (Beijing/Guangzhou/Shanghai) and Australia (Brisbane/ Melbourne/Perth/Sydney) as well as between so-called secondary cities in China.

Currently, there are seven Chinese airlines flying to Australia. Meanwhile, there is just one nonstop flight from an Australian flag carrier to China – Qantas’s daily Sydney-Shanghai service, although Qantas will also resume Sydney-Beijing nonstop flights from late January 2017.

Virgin Australia has proposed operating to Hong Kong and Beijing from June 2017 as part of a commercial alliance with HNA Group. However, it has offered few details publicly about their proposed flights.

Sydney Airport chief executive Kerrie Mather welcomed the announcement.
“This decision delivers expanded bilateral capacity ahead of demand, maximising the value to the visitor economy,” Mather said in a statement.

Australian Airports Association chief executive Caroline Wilkie hoped the open skies agreement with China would lead to further additional capacity in other air services agreements.

“Today’s announcement will provide further impetus for growth in travel between Australia and China and means that airlines and airports can continue working together to provide more flights and better services between the destinations unconstrained by capacity limits on the number of flights or seats,” Wilkie said in a statement.

“We look forward to continuing to work with the Government and other stakeholders to remove constraints on air access from other markets where possible, in order to facilitate the continued growth and contribution of our airports and aviation industry to the Australian economy.”
  
Although I do question why it is acceptable to have an 'open skies' air services agreement with China but not with Qatar? Big Grin Rolleyes

Quote:Traffic rights for Qatari carriers unchanged: Chester
November 22, 2016 by Jordan Chong
[Image: Qatar_A380_A7_APE_16Sep2016_SYDAPT.jpg]A file image of Qatar Airways Airbus A380 A7-APE at Sydney Airport. (Sydney Airport)

There has been no change to air traffic rights for airlines from Qatar to operate to Australia despite media reports suggesting the two countries had signed an open skies agreement.

It was reported over the weekend that Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and her Qatari counterpart Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani had signed an open skies agreement during the Australian’s recent official visit to Doha.

However, Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester said this was not the case.

“The agreement that was signed does not provide for ‘open-skies’,” Chester said in a statement to Australian Aviation.

“The agreement that was signed does not change the existing commercial entitlements currently available to airlines of Qatar.”

Rather, the signed agreement provided “for an over-arching legal framework under which air services between Qatar and Australia can operate, including regulatory requirements in relation to safety and security”...

Oh well unfortunately for Caroline Wilkie from the Triple-A...

Australian Airports Association chief executive Caroline Wilkie hoped the open skies agreement with China would lead to further additional capacity in other air services agreements.

“Today’s announcement will provide further impetus for growth in travel between Australia and China and means that airlines and airports can continue working together to provide more flights and better services between the destinations unconstrained by capacity limits on the number of flights or seats,” Wilkie said in a statement.

“We look forward to continuing to work with the Government and other stakeholders to remove constraints on air access from other markets where possible, in order to facilitate the continued growth and contribution of our airports and aviation industry to the Australian economy.”

 ...it doesn't look like the current Qatar agreement, put in place in September after consultation between the Murky Mandarin (& his minions) and Akbar Al Baker (& his zillions) back in March - see HERE - will be increasing capacity anytime soon... Blush


MTF...P2 Cool
Reply

We love the Dick!

Bravo Dick smith bravo! Any political entity that supports, promotes, engages, fosters and benefits aviation will get my vote, and oddly enough Hanson with Dicks tutorage fits that criteria. Never thought I would say that.
The Independents have entered a perfect storm. A time when on the back of Brexit, Trumps victory, our own local political changes, and the changes sweeping world elections, the time for change is ripe. The Global IOS (all voters) are sick of the game, where politicians play around with red or blue ties depending on the seriousness of the situation, lie, are never held to account, are all multi millionaires who are not connected to or understand the rest of us or what is actually happening out here in the burbs.

Dick and Pauline;

"It is a move that will petrify both Malcolm Turnbull’s government and the Labor Party".

You got that right. Turnbull is worth $200m and is a disciple of Goldman Sachs. Go research Goldman's history and what strings they pull globally and then come back and tell me if you're not worried. Bill Short'one is another multi millionaire related to the GG and sits at Kirribilli House sipping green tea and eating caviar. These clowns have no idea.

Dick is a self made entrepreneur that although wealthy, is humble and passionate about two things - Australia, and aviation. Throw in some qualities such as justice and transparency and you have a good mentor.
Hanson for all her faults is passionate about Australians first, something Labor and Liberal could learn a lesson or two about, especially the way they have treated us, our pensioners, our education system and our disadvantaged for years. They've successively fucked us Aussies over while giving away billions in aid to corrupt countries with their corrupt leaders.

Malcolm and Bill you've been put on notice boys - the tide has tuned, the swell against your entrenched political bullshit is growing, and the harder you push us the bigger the shit fight will be. Can ya hear the clock ticking, can ya? Well you ought to.

TICK TOCK Honourable ones 'cough cough'  TOCK TOCK
Reply

(12-06-2016, 11:59 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  
(12-06-2016, 09:36 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  Dick backs Pauline - "Match made in heaven" Big Grin

[Image: c644459d2fe0d58fddebfc2777d219f2?width=650]
Courtesy the Daily Telegraph... Wink :

Quote:Dick Smith will advise Pauline Hanson as she plans an assault on Western Sydney
[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/article/b73c297b8b3e4624a811bc261a52a788?esi=true&t_template=s3/chronicle-tg_tlc_storyheader/index&t_product=DailyTelegraph&td_device=desktop[/img]EXCLUSIVE: Shari Markson, National Political Editor, The Daily Telegraph
December 6, 2016 12:00am

MILLIONAIRE patriot Dick Smith is backing Pauline Hanson’s tough immigration stance and offering to advise One Nation as the party plans an assault on Western Sydney at the next state and federal elections.

The buy-Australian campaigner will meet with Ms Hanson before Christmas to advise her on policy, predicting she will ride a wave of Trump-like support in traditionally conservative areas such as Sydney’s north shore.

Ms Hanson told The Daily Telegraph she will launch a major campaign in Western Sydney, running One Nation candidates in the next NSW state and federal elections.

[Image: a4e6fe1d09da290a7fc44ea4f75e9cdd?width=316][Image: 48978214177f5d366dd7382a08acc101?width=316]

It is a move that will petrify both Malcolm Turnbull’s government and the Labor Party.
Mr Smith, an opinionated former Australian of the Year, had an initial conversation with Ms Hanson last week, drawn to speak with her after his friends, long-term Liberal and Labor voters, had embraced One Nation.

“I support her policy on Julian Assange. I support her immigration policy. She says she’s going to have a policy to help general aviation. I’ll certainly support that,” Mr Smith said.

“I agree with her views on immigration numbers, that is about 70,000 a year, not 200,000. But I do not agree with her views on Muslim immigration,” he said.

The retailer is so passionate about curbing Australia’s immigration intake he is planning to pay for an advert protesting Lucy Turnbull’s growth predictions for Sydney. He also authored a book in 2011 titled “Dick Smith’s Population Crisis”.

“I noticed that Pauline’s is about the only political party that has a policy on not having perpetual population growth,” Mr Smith said.

[Image: 6348d1aeb6baccbf8987e69c3cb86aae?width=650]Dick Smith’s move to support Pauline Hanson will petrify both Malcolm Turnbull’s government and the Labor Party.

“That means we’ll end up stabilising our population so young people will be able to afford houses.” Mr Smith has also offered to help Ms Hanson with her aviation policy.

He said he would help her cement the support of tens of thousands of voters who work in the industry.

“Myself and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association will come up with what needs to be done and I will give her some suggestions,” he said.

“I think she would get tens of thousands of votes from the aviation community because they have been let down by the ALP and Liberals.”

Ms Hanson will target seats across Sydney where, she argues, voters are disillusioned with the major parties and want change.

[Image: 09a8257c2cbfa7e5174679bddbd8cb95?width=650]Mr Smith said he did not agree with Ms Hanson’s position on stopping Muslim immigration, and during their phone conversation asked her some tough questions.

“We will definitely be standing candidates in the next NSW state elections and federally, yes,” Ms Hanson told The Daily Telegraph.

“People are just really fed up with the major parties and screaming out for change.

“I think there’s a move on across the country for One Nation,” she said. “People know I care about the country and the people are sick of career politicians.”

The electronics retailer, once worth $50 million, said he had never donated to a political party and ruled out ­financially backing One Nation.

Traditionally a conservative voter, except during Bob Hawke’s tenure as prime minister, Mr Smith said he may stand for federal Parliament as an independent at the next federal election.

He said his three main platforms would be stopping Australia’s ballooning population, ensuring young Australians can buy their own home and curbing debt.

[Image: f973edbb7afac4d61a3aab22acb05bc5?width=650]“So many of my friends who normally voted Coalition reckon they are going to vote for Pauline Hanson,” Dick Smith says.

Mr Smith threatened to run against former Howard government minister Bronwyn Bishop in the last federal election in the NSW seat of Mackellar if the Liberal politician did not retire.

Mr Smith said the support for Ms Hanson all across NSW was palpable — even in the traditionally blue-ribbon north shore area.

“So many of my friends who normally voted Coalition reckon they are going to vote for Pauline Hanson,” he said. “You only have to look at what happened in America with Trump. “People are so disillusioned with our present party politics. Our politicians don’t tell the truth. They’re all actors.”

[Image: 3836ca30ac2e23f231d614b259e75820?width=650]Mr Smith, an opinionated former Australian of the Year, had an initial conversation with Ms Hanson last week.

“While I wouldn’t say I agreed with all of her policies, I am starting to see why she’s going have incredible support and how completely disappointed people are with the two major parties.” Mr Smith said he did not agree with Ms Hanson’s position on stopping Muslim immigration, and during their phone conversation asked her some tough questions.

“People tend to say that she’s racist. So I asked her, does she think that she’s superior to other races? She said no,” he said.

Update: Via AOPA thread & Oz Flying.

Quote:]Sandy Reith Wrote: AOPA is to be congratulated for its work towards GA reform. As a long time member having watched the accelerating decline it is very pleasing to see the organisation taking it up to government. As of today AOPA's CEO Ben Morgan has issued another couple of press releases about the need for immediate relief. This coincides with Dick's support of Pauline Hanson's One Nation, quote;  

" Dick Smith has also offered to help Ms Hanson with her aviation policy.

He said he would help her cement the support of tens of thousands of voters who work in the industry.

“Myself and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association will come up with what needs to be done and I will give her some suggestions,” he said.

“I think she would get tens of thousands of votes from the aviation community because they have been let down by the ALP and Liberals.”

With this type of political pressure we have the best chance of causing change for the better and the naysayers should take a back seat. It will be a fight with CASA and Transport bureaucrats, they will pull every trick in the book in order to maintain their highly paid cushy jobs. We've come to realise that the interests of the country are not their concern. All power to AOPA's Board for encouraging political action.
For Sandy's benefit here are the two AOPA Media Releases issued today... [Image: wink.gif]

Quote: Wrote:Tuesday, 6th December 2016
 
PRESS RELEASE – For immediate release
 
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia to work with Queensland Senator, Ms Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and all sides of politics to develop general aviation reform policy.
 
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia welcomes interest from all sides of politics with regard to the important issue of general aviation reform, understanding how important it is for the country’s political leaders to have a clear and concise understanding of the challenges facing our industry.
 
The AOPA Australia confirms that it will work with Queensland Senator, Ms Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party and all other sides of politics to develop a general aviation reform policy framework that can serve to arrest the serious decline of the general aviation industry.
 
The AOPA Australia has recently highlighted to government, that over the past 10 years;
 
  • General aviation pilot numbers have declined by 34% (loss of 8,000+ from the industry)
  • General aviation fuel sales have declined by 35%
  • Number of general aviation aircraft not flying has increased by over 50% (over 3,000+ aircraft parked)
 
The AOPA Australia has called on the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Mr Darren Chester, to;
 
  • Amend the Civil Aviation Act so as to require the Civil Aviation Safety Authority to foster and develop aviation, so as to provide growth and opportunity for all Australians
  • End the wasteful +$300 million taxpayer funded CASA regulatory reform program
  • Harmonise our regulations to that of the world’s most successful aviation marketplace, the United States and their Federal Aviation Regulations (US FAR).
 
The AOPA Australia promotes the following core regulatory values;
 
  • Only regulate where necessary
  • Deregulate everywhere we can
  • Reduce cost to industry
  • Create a vibrant and dynamic general aviation industry for all Australians
 
Yours Sincerely,
 
BENJAMIN MORGAN
Executive Director - Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) 
 

&..

Quote: Wrote:Tuesday, 6th December 2016

 
PRESS RELEASE – For immediate release
 
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia commences work on Minister Chester’s review into General Aviation Decline.
 
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia this week met with representatives of the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) to commence work on Minister Chester’s, review into general aviation decline – the first of a number of meetings planned.
 
Leading the BITRE review team is Director of Aviation Statistics, Mr Glenn Malam, who provided AOPA Australia with government data that confirms graphs released by AOPA Australia in August 2016, showcasing the serious decline in general aviation over the past 10 years, including;
 
  • General aviation pilot numbers have declined by 34% (loss of 8,000+ from the industry)
  • General aviation fuel sales have declined by 35%
  • Number of general aviation aircraft not flying has increased by over 50% (over 3,000+ aircraft parked)
 
The AOPA Australia has put forward a range of valuable feedback during the first meeting, which included;
 
  • Amend the Civil Aviation Act so that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) is required to foster general aviation industry growth and development
  • Adopt and harmonise to the world’s most successful general aviation regulatory framework, the United States Federal Aviation Regulations
  • Extend the ADS-B install deadline to 2021 without restriction to both commercial and private operators
  • Remove unique Australian aging-aircraft requirements (ie. Cessna SIDs)
  • Remove the unnecessary ASIC requirement for general aviation users
  • Immediately implement Class 2 Medical Reform to re-introduce thousands of GA pilots to flying
  • Remove unreasonable industry charges and fees for interactions with the safety regulator
 
The AOPA Australia also confirmed its stance on aviation regulatory management;
 
  • Only regulate where necessary
  • Deregulate everywhere we can
  • Reduce cost to industry
  • Create a vibrant and dynamic general aviation industry for all Australians
 
The BITRE team have until 30th June of 2017 to complete their review and will shortly commence interviewing general aviation business operators seeking to understand the industry’s view with regard to general aviation decline.
 
The AOPA Australia welcomes aircraft owners, pilots and general aviation business operators who would like to provide direct input to this important review to contact the AOPA Australia office by telephone
on: (02) 9791 9099 to register your interest in participating.

 
Best regards,
 
BENJAMIN MORGAN
Executive Director – Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA)

 
&.. from Oz Flying:
Quote:[Image: http%3A%2F%2Fyaffa-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com%...Hansen.jpg]Senator Pauline Hanson. AOPA has committed to helping her develop an aviation policy. (composite image)

We'll work with Hanson: AOPA
6 December 2016

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) has confirmed that it will work with Queensland Senator Pauline Hanson to develop an aviation reform policy for her One Nation Party.

In a statement released today, AOPA CEO Ben Morgan said the association was prepared to work with all political parties when it comes to reform for general aviation.

"[AOPA] welcomes interest from all sides of politics with regard to the important issue of general aviation reform, understanding how important it is for the country’s political leaders to have a clear and concise understanding of the challenges facing our industry," Morgan said.

"[AOPA] confirms that it will work with Queensland Senator, Ms Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party and all other sides of politics to develop a general aviation reform policy framework that can serve to arrest the serious decline of the general aviation industry."
Earlier today, aviation activist Dick Smith said he also would back Senator Hanson's forthcoming policy on general aviation, telling The Australian he expected Hanson to ride a "Trump-like wave of support".

Hanson, a divisive voice in Australian politics since 1997, was elected to the Senate at last July's federal election along with three other members of her One Nation party

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...qyXV25i.99

Then back to Sandy... Wink : #75
Quote:In as I recall 1989 the Berlin Wall came down. No one foresaw that event, triggered as it was by obvious truth. Truth was, and remains 'is', that prosperity and fairness do not derive from super government. It is remarkable that two hundred years have passed since the most of the North Americans overturned the notion that rights are not the perogative of the Crown, i.e. Government. They decided that all power resides in the people, not derived from one exalted person or the oligarchs. This self evident truism has still to take on in Australia. Obvious truth is that general aviation in Australia has suffered grievously from very poor governance. Those of us having watched this slow motion disaster remain appalled at the lack of responsible government action to correct this blot on the life of the nation, let alone the numerous injustices perpetrated on so many individuals.

The likes of Ben Morgan and the Board of AOPA, Dick Smith, Ken Cannane of AMROBA, Phil Hirst, TAAAF and numerous others to inspire reform are working in the interests of Australia. I am hopeful that all the pet theories, the various individual ideas are now coalesced into the one true direction.

With increasing publicity, eg Dick and One Nation, our message of freedom of action, simple rules like road rules, can cause a great burst of GA activity to the benefit of all aviators and the general community. Aerial transport, employment, education, manufacturing, training, airports (private property on landside please) and many other facets of general aviation stand to grow and benefit the whole country.

We would & should support AOPA and whomever stands for our freedom, freedom to exercise our right to fly. The biggest lie, and we are guilty of allowing it, that it is a government given privilege to fly. This must be a priority, to express that to fly is our right, not a government (Crown) privilege.

Well said Sandy - choc frog for that man... Wink


MTF...P2  Cool
Reply

Update: Dick on a roll - Rolleyes (just add OzEsauce)


(12-06-2016, 07:07 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  
(12-06-2016, 11:59 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  
(12-06-2016, 09:36 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  Dick backs Pauline - "Match made in heaven" Big Grin


Courtesy the Daily Telegraph... Wink :

Update: Via AOPA thread & Oz Flying.

Quote:
Quote: Wrote:Tuesday, 6th December 2016
 
PRESS RELEASE – For immediate release
 
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia to work with Queensland Senator, Ms Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and all sides of politics to develop general aviation reform policy.
 
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia welcomes interest from all sides of politics with regard to the important issue of general aviation reform, understanding how important it is for the country’s political leaders to have a clear and concise understanding of the challenges facing our industry.
 
The AOPA Australia confirms that it will work with Queensland Senator, Ms Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party and all other sides of politics to develop a general aviation reform policy framework that can serve to arrest the serious decline of the general aviation industry.
 
The AOPA Australia has recently highlighted to government, that over the past 10 years;
 
  • General aviation pilot numbers have declined by 34% (loss of 8,000+ from the industry)
  • General aviation fuel sales have declined by 35%
  • Number of general aviation aircraft not flying has increased by over 50% (over 3,000+ aircraft parked)
 
The AOPA Australia has called on the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Mr Darren Chester, to;
 
  • Amend the Civil Aviation Act so as to require the Civil Aviation Safety Authority to foster and develop aviation, so as to provide growth and opportunity for all Australians
  • End the wasteful +$300 million taxpayer funded CASA regulatory reform program
  • Harmonise our regulations to that of the world’s most successful aviation marketplace, the United States and their Federal Aviation Regulations (US FAR).
 
The AOPA Australia promotes the following core regulatory values;
 
  • Only regulate where necessary
  • Deregulate everywhere we can
  • Reduce cost to industry
  • Create a vibrant and dynamic general aviation industry for all Australians
 
Yours Sincerely,
 
BENJAMIN MORGAN
Executive Director - Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) 
 

&..

Quote: Wrote:Tuesday, 6th December 2016

 
PRESS RELEASE – For immediate release
 
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia commences work on Minister Chester’s review into General Aviation Decline.
 
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia this week met with representatives of the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) to commence work on Minister Chester’s, review into general aviation decline – the first of a number of meetings planned.
 
Leading the BITRE review team is Director of Aviation Statistics, Mr Glenn Malam, who provided AOPA Australia with government data that confirms graphs released by AOPA Australia in August 2016, showcasing the serious decline in general aviation over the past 10 years, including;
 
  • General aviation pilot numbers have declined by 34% (loss of 8,000+ from the industry)
  • General aviation fuel sales have declined by 35%
  • Number of general aviation aircraft not flying has increased by over 50% (over 3,000+ aircraft parked)
 
The AOPA Australia has put forward a range of valuable feedback during the first meeting, which included;
 
  • Amend the Civil Aviation Act so that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) is required to foster general aviation industry growth and development
  • Adopt and harmonise to the world’s most successful general aviation regulatory framework, the United States Federal Aviation Regulations
  • Extend the ADS-B install deadline to 2021 without restriction to both commercial and private operators
  • Remove unique Australian aging-aircraft requirements (ie. Cessna SIDs)
  • Remove the unnecessary ASIC requirement for general aviation users
  • Immediately implement Class 2 Medical Reform to re-introduce thousands of GA pilots to flying
  • Remove unreasonable industry charges and fees for interactions with the safety regulator
 
The AOPA Australia also confirmed its stance on aviation regulatory management;
 
  • Only regulate where necessary
  • Deregulate everywhere we can
  • Reduce cost to industry
  • Create a vibrant and dynamic general aviation industry for all Australians
 
The BITRE team have until 30th June of 2017 to complete their review and will shortly commence interviewing general aviation business operators seeking to understand the industry’s view with regard to general aviation decline.
 
The AOPA Australia welcomes aircraft owners, pilots and general aviation business operators who would like to provide direct input to this important review to contact the AOPA Australia office by telephone
on: (02) 9791 9099 to register your interest in participating.

 
Best regards,
 
BENJAMIN MORGAN
Executive Director – Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA)

 
&.. from Oz Flying:
Quote:[Image: http%3A%2F%2Fyaffa-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com%...Hansen.jpg]Senator Pauline Hanson. AOPA has committed to helping her develop an aviation policy. (composite image)

We'll work with Hanson: AOPA
6 December 2016


Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...qyXV25i.99

Then back to Sandy... Wink : #75
Quote:In as I recall 1989 the Berlin Wall came down. No one foresaw that event, triggered as it was by obvious truth. Truth was, and remains 'is', that prosperity and fairness do not derive from super government. It is remarkable that two hundred years have passed since the most of the North Americans overturned the notion that rights are not the perogative of the Crown, i.e. Government. They decided that all power resides in the people, not derived from one exalted person or the oligarchs. This self evident truism has still to take on in Australia. Obvious truth is that general aviation in Australia has suffered grievously from very poor governance. Those of us having watched this slow motion disaster remain appalled at the lack of responsible government action to correct this blot on the life of the nation, let alone the numerous injustices perpetrated on so many individuals.

The likes of Ben Morgan and the Board of AOPA, Dick Smith, Ken Cannane of AMROBA, Phil Hirst, TAAAF and numerous others to inspire reform are working in the interests of Australia. I am hopeful that all the pet theories, the various individual ideas are now coalesced into the one true direction.

With increasing publicity, eg Dick and One Nation, our message of freedom of action, simple rules like road rules, can cause a great burst of GA activity to the benefit of all aviators and the general community. Aerial transport, employment, education, manufacturing, training, airports (private property on landside please) and many other facets of general aviation stand to grow and benefit the whole country.

We would & should support AOPA and whomever stands for our freedom, freedom to exercise our right to fly. The biggest lie, and we are guilty of allowing it, that it is a government given privilege to fly. This must be a priority, to express that to fly is our right, not a government (Crown) privilege.

Via the Oz today:
Quote:Smith gifts $1m to charity
[Image: 9f8771a537f653bb6b4ea03a81408e7f]12:00amSIMON KING
Dick Smith will give $1mn to charity out of frustration with his plan to recreate a historic air race.
Quote:...Such is Mr Smith’s disappointment that he will give the $1m he had earmarked for the air race — which would have used electric planes in the recreation to spark a new round of innovation — to the Rotary Australia Benevolent ­Society.

“I’m incredibly disappointed,” he told The Australian.

In 1919, Australian prime minister Billy Hughes offered £10,000 to the first aircrew to reach Darwin from London.

“Back in 1919, people had no idea the planes that were used in World War I could actually do long distances,” Mr Smith said.

“Billy Hughes came up with the original idea and it was the start of long-distance air travel.

“I thought wouldn’t it be great if 100 years later we did it with electrically powered planes.

“It would be all about inno­vation because electrically powered aircraft can do about 300 nautical miles (now) and you need about 500. It would mean you have three years to extend the boundaries; innovate to get better storage. Which would help every bit of alternative energy.”

Mr Smith said he encountered the same problem in all his aviation dealings with government: “Nobody makes a decision.”

He said he had mentioned the project directly to Malcolm Turnbull and then wrote to the Minister for Innovation, Greg Hunt. “I can’t even remember his name he’s so dynamic — but I wrote to him and he didn’t commit himself to anything.

“At one stage they said, ‘What do you want?’ and I said, ‘It would be great if you match the money but you don’t have to, just come with some enthusiasm for it’. But I got nothing.”

Mr Smith said the aviation community had been overwhelmingly supportive of the idea. “But no doubt the minister would have been advised, ‘Oh minister small planes crash, I wouldn’t suggest you get involved with this.’

“They are so risk-averse and so politically correct — even with Dick Smith on side putting the money in, they couldn’t bring themselves to support it.

“So I’m giving a breakfast talk ... at the Rotary Club of Wahroonga and then I’ll hand $1m to them.”

Yesterday, a spokesman for Mr Hunt maintained that his department’s lack of involvement was a financial issue: “We respect his initiative, but the government can’t fund every proposal for using taxpayer’s money,” the spokesman said.

“We’d be very happy for Mr Smith to provide his own funds rather than calling on taxpaying Australian families There is no barrier to Mr Smith paying for this himself.”...

...The donation is part of more than $4.1m Mr Smith is giving to charities and organisations from the sale of his Cessna Citation aircraft. He sold the plane in disgust at ever-increasing maintenance costs caused, he said, by years of industry mismanagement by both major political parties through the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. “Every time you blink, CASA comes up with a more expensive equipment to be fitted to your plane,” he said....

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

Greg H©unts lament

"Yesterday, a spokesman for Mr Hunt maintained that his department’s lack of involvement was a financial issue: “We respect his initiative, but the government can’t fund every proposal for using taxpayer’s money,” the spokesman said".

Oh, how thoughtful of you Greg, looking out for the taxpayers best interest. Your a champion mate. Perhaps you will consider no longer funding Comcar's for yourselves, not flying business class anymore, not taking your wives on 'overseas study tours' during the Can'tberra winter, and not dining at Can'tberras most expensive restaurants any more, all to save us poor taxpayers hundreds of millions per year? Or perhaps you will stop giving billions in financial aid to crooked third world countries run by thieves and miscreants? After all, it is all taxpayer money.

Greg, you are an assclown, bite me.
Reply

A is for...??? Big Grin

miniscule adviser - "..4D whatever you do, FCS don't mention the A word.." Confused

Sandy said (Reference #75):

"..Obvious truth is that general aviation in Australia has suffered grievously from very poor governance. Those of us having watched this slow motion disaster remain appalled at the lack of responsible government action to correct this blot on the life of the nation, let alone the numerous injustices perpetrated on so many individuals. 

The likes of Ben Morgan and the Board of AOPA, Dick Smith, Ken Cannane of AMROBA, Phil  Hurst, TAAAF and numerous others to inspire reform are working in the interests of Australia. I am hopeful that all the pet theories, the various individual ideas are now coalesced into the one true direction..."


Absolute spot on statement, regardless of the Alphabet different wants, needs and approach to advocacy, the message should remain loud & clear to miniscule 4D i.e. "Not happy Jan!" Angry  

The following is an example, yesterday BM tweeted this message to 4D:
Quote:@DarrenChesterMP AOPA Australia calls on you Minister to provide investment in general aviation to help regional communities #auspol

And recently from this thread we made mention of the Triple-A concerns in regards to regional airports and possible closures:

(11-25-2016, 11:57 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  
Quote:P2;"If 4D was actually sincere about the above statement then you would think that he would have responded by accompanying the AAA MR with a presser from his own office?? But for some reason that didn't occur".

Very good pick up P2. Well done. Pollies love positive Pressers. Perhaps he saw that there was a risk he may have to shelve out money, hence his forgoing some PR? Or maybe he was busy at the hair salon that day getting his todger trimmed and primed for another men's urinal selfie shot? And that's about the truth of it isn't it? This der-brain Politician hasn't got a clue. He accepts a report, shakes someone's hand, twerps it out on Twatter (probably along with a photo of his perfect hair and manscaped body), files the report on Barmyboys top shelf under the heading 'More IOS Complaints' and leaves it there to gather dust for the next half a century.

Amongst other platitudes, I note that ironically miniscule 4D, in his address to the AAA conference, has more publicly acknowledged the AAA exemplary report:
Quote:Australian Airports Association — National Airport Industry Awards 2016

Great Hall, Parliament House Canberra.

& via AA:

[Image: Lenn-Bayliss-First-747-8-to-Wellcamp-Air...2015-2.jpg]
Federal government committed to funding regional airports

“I thank the AAA for its recent report on Regional Airport Infrastructure, highlighting the challenges that these essential transport hubs are facing,” he said.



& this AM from Oz Flying:


[Image: http%3A%2F%2Fyaffa-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com%...ter_MP.jpg]Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Darren Chester.

Minister commits to Regional Airport Funding
25 November 2016 

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...pb7zHQt.99

Then along the same theme Hitch in the Yaffa yesterday reported... Wink

Quote:[Image: http%3A%2F%2Fyaffa-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com%...ang_18.jpg]Regional airports without RPT services face potential closure over the next 10 years due to funding shortfalls. (Steve Hitchen)

AAA Report heralds Regional Airport Closures
7 December 2016

A report into regional airports presented to the Australian Airports Association (AAA) in September predicts a funding shortfall that may force some airports to close over the next 10 years.

According to the report compiled by ACIL Allen Consulting, regional airports that don't have regular public transport (RPT) services have a 45.6% funding gap between income and expenditure, compared with just 3.4% for airports with RPT, a situation that local council owners may be reluctant to bear in the decade ahead.

ACIL Allen estimated that the average income for non-RPT airports is $99,000 per year against an average cost outlay of $182,000, with maintenance costs averaging 49% of the expenditure.

"The AAA has always understood from discussions with our members, that regional airports do face significant challenges in maintaining and repairing essential infrastructure and that they do not always have access to adequate financial resourcing," said AAA Policy Manager Simon Bourke

"Most regional airports are not profit-generating enterprises due to the high costs involved in maintaining safe operations and the limited revenue opportunities available. The most surprising finding was the extent of the financial burden facing non-RPT airports."

ACIL Allen believes the consequences of these funding gaps is that many non-RPT airports face challenges just to stay open, as they have to compete with other infrastructure and amenities for local council cross-funding, and may eventually buckle under financial pressure and close.

It is a situation that the AAA believes is a very real scenario.

"The unfortunate reality is that for a number of small regional airports, particularly those without the benefit of RPT services, there is simply no way to generate enough revenue from the airport to cover the cost of its operation," Bourke told Australian Flying.

"This ultimately means that if the local government council that operates the airport is no longer able to afford sustaining operations, there is the real risk of it facing closure.

"This is why it is essential for both the Commonwealth and State Governments to provide financial assistance for critical infrastructure investment and maintenance that allows the airport to continue facilitating aviation services essential to the local region."

The AAA has said it has started a strong advocacy campaign with both the federal and state governments to make sure the situation for all regional airports (RPT and non-RPT) is recognised, with the goal of securing additional funding in the 2017-18 federal budget.

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...qp8Siut.99

Now referring to the website of the gurus of regional aviation advocacy the RAAA and their statistics pages:
Quote:Statistics Menu
Quote:Conclusion
Australia is a large country with maps not truely recognising visually the distance between different destination. For example, Bourke NSW to Sydney NSW is about 800kms, Alice Springs NT to Darwin NT is about 1,500kms, Mt Isa Qld to Townsville Qld is about 900kms, and Pt Hedland WA to Perth WA is about 1,700kms. Distances that take many hours travelling by car or train.

Reliable RPT services give people the peace of mind that they can routinely obtain access to essential medical, financial, and educational services and also be able to get away to see friends and family without having to undertake an arduous car or train trip.

RAAA Members operating RPT services provide a quality service to city dwellers, international visitors and people in the bush. This is in the light that aircraft are an expensive asset to purchase, operate, plus maintain and the economic realities this entails.

It is understood that given market forces not all RPT routes would of survived. With improved road conditions in some areas and modern vehicles the necessity for short route RPT services is deminished if not removed. However, it could be argued that there has been an over reduction of airports with RPT services in regional and remote Australia.

The data and commentary contained here is but the tip of the mountain but does highlight that:
  • Governments at all levels their departments and agencies need to focus on the implications of these figures,
  • the market based approach that the Government has been relying on for air services in Australia is not effective in all situations,
  • equitable air transport should be available to all Australian regardless of where they live - not just those living in the cities and other major centres, and
  • Governments at all levels need to start looking at aviation services in regional and remote parts of Australia from a social justice perspective and start working with the regional aviation industry to find solutions to the current inequable situation experienced by people in regional and remote Australia.
                          

Although much in need of an update we can see that the RAAA conclusions from the statistics very much reflect the concerns of AOPA & the AAA.

On another front which should also carry another serious wake up call for 4D and the Turnbull government ( Dodgy but probably won't ) I note the following promotional tweet from PT:  https://twitter.com/PlaneTalking/status/...9730362369
Quote:#Boeing's wake up call re future aviation jobs sharply contrasts with policy failures in Australia https://t.co/3LaWlx5BY7

This was also reported on by Oz Aviation:
Quote:[Image: IMG_2884.jpg]
Boeing forecasts need for 30,000 new pilots and maintainers in Oceania
December 7, 2016 By australianaviation.com.au

Boeing expects Australia, New Zealand and the nations of the South Pacific to require an additional 30,000 pilots and aviation professionals over the next two decades to meet the growing demand for..[-]

The PT tweet garnered this response from Phil Hurst and the AAAA's: https://twitter.com/PhilHurst62/status/8...2370396160
Quote:Missed opportunity coming? See TAAAF policies!
So as you can see the Alphabets all have different approaches/methodologies to advocacy but their discontent & frustrations with a seemingly disengaged miniscule and government is reaching critical mass. As Sandy said, if they can now all coalesce into one true direction for reform, maybe (just maybe) we might get the undivided attention of the Minister... Rolleyes

MTF...P2 Cool

Ps
[Image: RAAA-Jim-Davis-quote.jpg]
[Image: Phil-Hurst-AAAA.jpg]
Pps  I know ever an optimist... Big Grin
Reply

Please, somebody, make airports great again......a Gobbledocks twiddle

GA and airports, my two favourite subjects. Of both I am fiercely passionate about.
This is the reality of airports - only a small amount actually turn a profit, and that is predominately the big few owned by the investment sharks.
Successive Governments have flogged the airports in fire sales, leaving regional areas vulnerable to the mischief making hedge funds who take, take, and take some more, and then invest nothing back into the airport. A regional area without its airport is as good as the same regional area being without water or sewerage. It will eventually collapse.

An average new 2,000m runway alone is around $50m. How many regional Councils can afford that? None basically. And even if they could afford it they won't do it because that constitutes 'spending for the future', something a 4 year Council will not do.

The government needs to be subsidising more routes and flights. Do it under a contractural arrangement with the airline(s) but in a way that the airline cannot gouge the regional residents. Fair and equitable ticket prices combined with fair and equitable landing fee charges and passenger head taxes. A triangulated win for all parties - the fare payer, the airline, the airport. A wise investment by state and federal government as it will stimulate more business creating more revenue for them with benefits returned to the economy.

There also needs to be streamlined funding application processes. Some of the hoops that airports are forced to jump through courtesy of state Treasury departments are ludicrous. Most regional areas do not have the skill and manpower to apply for these funding programmes as the project already needs to be shovel ready to get the money. You could spend a $1m getting a project shovel ready for a new runway or terminal upgrade, only to miss out on the funding anyway! Who can afford that? And the further you are away from the coast the more expensive your maintenance and new infrastructure costs are. Try doing the same construction work at Newcastle or Sunshine Coast as you would do in Weipa! Compare the costs, I dare you.

A lot of our airport infrastructure has been neglected over the past decade or so and it is catching up. The Government needs to smarten up and realise the risks that are present when you have failing airport infrastructure. It's also time for people to accept that not every airport is some kind of bottomless cash cow. Many rely on paltry revenue from some landing fees, that's it. The airport is screwed by the airlines, has no paid car parking, has little in its terminal to lease or sub-lease, and few to nil car hire vehicles. The big revenue dollars just aren't there. Hell, even the fuel companies are taking a hit in regional areas and are often running at a loss or breaking even.

Aviation and it's linkages are a huge driver of the national economy. Those tentacles spread far and wide. It is a portfolio all of its own. It needs it's own Junior Minister, someone who knows about business models and aviation holistically, to oversight it. Imagine if you may - Minister Fawcett as Minister for aviation, working hand in glove with Nash, Xenophon, Smith, AAA, AOPA, RAAA, AMROBA, Ag Phil, the whirlybirders, even the red haired clown Hanson? Surely some good would come from that, rather than having a succession of these NFI Ministers who don't know an aircraft beacon from a control towers light.

All I'm trying to articulate in a peaceful and pragmatic approach is that there needs to be collaboration (governments favourite word). GA and airports are begging for it, the RAAA, AOPA, AAA, Independents are pushing for it, so it is time that people like Minister Chester, even Albo and all other past National, Liberal and Labor Governments woke up to the fact that our industry is sick, it is dying, and if it does finally die it will take a lot of associated services, businesses, people and regions down the shitter with it. Just sayin.........

Tick Tock
Reply

One good twiddle deserves another.

GD – “[It] (aviation) needs it's own Junior Minister, someone who knows about business models and aviation holistically, to oversight it.”

Every good ‘twiddle’ has a framework from which both the definition and interpretation may be developed; this leads to both affirmative and negative argument. But I can’t see how GD’s sentence above could ever be debated – logically. The sentence is a “classic” no brainer.

Aviation is now in such a sorry state that nothing else will bring fresh water into the stagnant, stinking, weed choked pond. Take DDDD-NFI-DD as ‘the’ perfect example of why aviation must have a dedicated minister.

This is a brainless political animal; sole interest (apart from grabbing as much from the trough as possible) is getting re elected; the main focus of his political party is retaining the seat. The whole thing has little to do with the well being of the country; but lots to do with retaining ‘power’.  Provided DDDD can keep his seat then the party will back him to the hilt, no matter what. So not through talent, experience, knowledge or even a sense of caring, DDDD is gifted a ‘ministry’; the fact that he has absolutely NFI is not a political consideration.

With one of the top jobs comes a bevy of ‘advisors’, experts in their field, who will, like seeing eye dogs, guide the helpless, hapless incumbent through the minefield – primarily to ensure no embarrassment occurs which could affect the chances of re election. A secondary advisor role is that of protecting the departments associated with the ministry: in this case ASA, ATSB and CASA.

The ministers advisors will take their advice from the department heads; who get their advice from the management; who get their advice from the ground crews. There is a Daisy chain of cut-outs, all protecting their rice bowls. This provides a long line of heads which will roll before the minister’s gets anywhere near the chopping block.  Thus, the ministerial and government arses are covered; and that, good Sir GD is a lot of rubble to shift, a veritable mountain of shit, shinola and garbage glued together with self interest, power and money.  

We can (must) live with all this as a fact of life. The ‘system’ supporting the minister should work, just fine; provided the advice he receives from the department heads is ‘good’. But, it ain’t. is it. The very people who have made a dogs breakfast of the aviation related ‘safety’ departments are the ones providing the advice. It’s ducking risible.

With the ‘right’ advice the village idiot can be a successful minister and make aviation flourish. With the wrong advice from those who created the mess, the village idiot will continue along the road to perdition, deaf to the cries of agony, blind to the carnage and too ducking dumb to change it.

There is a raft of Senators, from all sides of the political spectrum, who could be called on to ‘manage’ aviation – even if only for a short while. Pick anyone of ‘stars’ sitting on the current Estimates RAT standing committee, pass the portfolio along and watch things change, from liability to asset. At government speed, it would take but a heartbeat, to rectify the problems.

Selah.
Reply

(12-06-2016, 09:36 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  Dick backs Pauline - "Match made in heaven" Big Grin

[Image: c644459d2fe0d58fddebfc2777d219f2?width=650]
Courtesy the Daily Telegraph... Wink :

Sundy raid off the UP - Big Grin

While on UP troll duty I noted that there is actually a thread (that is yet to be shutdown) that acknowledges Dicks support of Pauline... Rolleyes : Dick Smith supports One Nation on Immigration and Aviation 

Here are a few of the more pointed and informative posts for posterity... Big Grin:

Quote:Ixixly - Oh god...is this really how low we have to go to get some support for GA?! This seems far too high a cost having to back this looney!!

Creampuff -
Quote:Oh god...is this really how low we have to go to get some support for GA?!
If GA wants any real change? Yep.

Whether you consider it going "low" or not, it's the only real chance for real change. Fact is that Senator Hanson's chief advisor flies a Jabiru. Whatever your personal views may be about him and her, at least he has some insight into the reality of what the regulatory regime and airport privatisation are doing to private and 'little' GA, and she has the power change things.

Ben Morgan should be addressing all of AOPA's letters to each and every one of the cross-bench Senators, not people who have no interest in changing anything.

Frank Arouet - And recently AOPAA support Pauline Hanson.

Perhaps more should run the flag up and see who salutes.

Quote:Tuesday, 6th December 2016


PRESS RELEASE – For immediate release

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia to work with Queensland Senator, Ms Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and all sides of politics to develop general aviation reform policy.

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) of Australia welcomes interest from all sides of politics with regard to the important issue of general aviation reform, understanding how important it is for the country’s political leaders to have a clear and concise understanding of the challenges facing our industry.

The AOPA Australia confirms that it will work with Queensland Senator, Ms Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party and all other sides of politics to develop a general aviation reform policy framework that can serve to arrest the serious decline of the general aviation industry.

The AOPA Australia has recently highlighted to government, that over the past 10 years...

dr dre -
Quote:Originally Posted by Creampuff -  
If GA wants any real change? Yep.

Whether you consider it going "low" or not, it's the only real chance for real change. Fact is that Senator Hanson's chief advisor flies a Jabiru.
I can't find anything about any One Nation policy regarding aviation. There's more than one party or person in politics and more can be lobbied to support aviation rather than a party which will probably disintegrate soon, just like they did in the 90's (actually it's happening now). Even if they offered to buy every licenced pilot in the country a Jabiru, I still wouldn't support a party with such toxic, racist, unscientific and unconstitutional views.

Creampuff - I'm not advocating "support" for her.

I'm advocating for her to be lobbied, along with every other cross-bench Senator. They might just listen, understand and use their votes to change things.

In reality, that's the only (slim) chance there is of making any substantial change to arrest the decline of GA.

CASA, Airservices, DIRD and the Minister couldn't care less about the plight of GA. Why would they? So why would AOPA bother trying to reason with them?

Frank Arouet - Some of you people amaze me with your lack of objectivity and vision. Preferring to dismiss somebody or something because it doesn't concur with your overall agenda or political bias. Maybe somebody should ask One Nation/ Pauline Hanson if they have an aviation policy. If it turns out they don't, or are just getting around to thinking one up, why not suggest Dick Smith write one for her/them. Maybe some of you could suggest to Dick what they would like to see in an aviation policy. Maybe some other Party's may seize on that policy and write the salient parts into their agenda just like they have pretty well done with all her past suggestions, policy's and ideas.


Can it hurt? Probably not.


Can it help? Possibly.


Is it better than what we are doing to date? Well, maybe you can answer that question.


Apologies Torres: Not directed at you.

Creampuff -
Quote:If I was looking for a crossbench senator with an interest in the Australian aviation industry I would look elsewhere...

Give me an "X"!
Not look "elsewhere".

Better to look to NXT "as well as" all the other cross-benchers.

Does no one on PPRuNe pay any attention to how government decisions are really made?

LeadSled - Folks,

I can tell you something for nothing:

This has got the attention of Gippsland's Answer To George Clooney (aka "The Minister") like nothing else out of aviation's left field (or is that right field) ---- maybe he has run the numbers and even his seat is not really safe.

Ain't preferential voting a great thing!

Tootle pip!!
 

Enjoy your Sundy -  Wink


MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

Interesting to see hat UP hasn't changed by looking at the above posts - still some dickheads there, still some good people too.

I've said all along that I don't particularly like Hanson, but if she ends up being the only politician to support aviation then I will have little choice but to support her. And yes, James Ashbey her Advisor is a GA pilot so that means she has strong support from her key person who actually understands the topic. Time will tell though.

As for the suggestion that Dick advise Pauline on policy etc, that is a splendid idea, very clever, and he certainly has the skill and set of kahuna's to do that task very well, plus he commands a good deal of respect from fellow aviators.

Gobbles
Reply

Perhaps DDDD of NFI D should forget about watching his own visage and study a real statesman; hard at work for 'her' country. There are some outstanding Senators, from all parties, who could teach the mister much. Selfies are all well and good, for private consumption; but, want make friends and influence people – watch a winner.

Fiona Nash (sans Pete) full throttle. Bravo.

Reply

YES miniscule - all is good in aviation. Dodgy

Good catch "K" and top shot Minister Nash... Wink



The word is that last Friday the members of TAAAF had a meeting in Can'tberra to discuss the bureaucracy progress (or lack of) in implementing the government supported ASRR recommendations. Courtesy of the AMROBA latest newsletter, KC gives a summary of what I believe can be regarded as the general sentiment amongst TAAAF membership: 

Quote:[Image: dc50c9cdcea67d167c60ca482f04cd61.jpg]

1. Lack of political support for jobs in General Aviation


The real reason general aviation, i.e. aviation sectors other than the major airlines, cannot achieve its growth potential and add to the Australian economy is the lack of political support in this country for an industry that could create many jobs and careers, especially for rural Australia.

The government defines general aviation as: "General aviation commonly refers to that part of the aviation industry that engages in activity other than commercial air transport activity. This may include small charter operators, aeromedical operators, agricultural aviation businesses, aviation-based fire-fighting services, training and aerial work such as aerial photography and surveying. It also includes private, business, recreational and sports aviation activity."

These are all operational sectors that ignores the ICAO classification of Activities that also lists: "Airport Services, Air Navigation Services, Civil Aviation Manufacturing, Aviation Training, Maintenance and Overhaul, Regulatory Functions and Other Activities (e.g. Design Activities)" ..that are common to both Commercial Air Transport and General Aviation. Regulatory Reform now means adopting one of either the FAA, Canada or the EASA system that is most applicable to the Australian needs. Each adopted provision must be reviewed to determine compatibility to other Australian Federal legislative systems and integration with other government departments and agencies promulgated requirements.

What actual benefits and jobs have been created by this reform?

Nearly 4,000 aircraft on the CASA Aircraft Register do not fly.

That means there is really only 12,000 active aircraft.

BITRE Stats state that private aircraft average less than 30 hrs per annum.

Low hours caused by public service inflicted ‘red tape’ and operating requirements.

The falloff in participation started with government creating the Civil Aviation Authority in 1990 with appointment of non-regulatory experienced management with every review and restructure, almost annually at one stage, increased; as regulatory experienced, internationally recognised and respected aviation experienced regulators were knowingly replaced to improve "management".

The aviation industry is conceptually focused on adapting to change as new aircraft and products are brought into service regularly. However, North America modernised their aviation regulatory systems in the last decade or so and these changes were not adopted which left Australia stranded with a system introduced in 1990s that was as flawed as was the CAA’s 1988 approach. In fact, the change from Air Navigation Regulations to Civil Aviation Regulations in 1988 was a disaster for aviation as operator after operator closed. Its effect was so bad it created another government parliamentary review that created CASA in the mid 1990s.

How many reviews has this industry and its regulator, now called CASA, been through since the Hawke/Keating economic reform was commenced? How many recommendations implemented?

We all know that the most honourable "Sir Humphrey Appleby" could think up "political speak" to satisfy (mislead) a Minister whilst doing nothing to implement. Looking at some past episodes clearly identifies the problem in Australia. Government endorsed recommendations from enquiry after enquiry over the decades have not been fully or, in some cases, partially implemented, because of the administrators of policy inane "we know best" attitude.

The ASRR report and the Government Response will not be supported, or understood, by CASA. They will do the minimal and tell government that they have implemented the recommendations.

NOTHING HAS CHANGED to bring benefits to aviation in the last 3 decades. The industry has had more red tape added to it where the FAA, for instance, has made changes to improve productivity, remove red tape, and improve safety so the FAA can provide improved regulatory oversight.

Look at the international authors of the ASRR report – two internationally acclaimed aviation management experts that government and CASA should have been thankful they provided such expertise behind each recommendation. Sadly, the ‘Sir Humphries’ are still in charge and little has been achieved. Harmonisation by adoption is what the ASRR is really recommending. Bring Australia and CASA up to the standards of mature aviation countries. Two eminent international authors:

1. Mr Spruston has wide-ranging experience in oversight and regulation of the aviation sector with the Canadian Government. He has also been extensively involved in the development and implementation of criteria for reviewing aviation safety regulatory performance as part of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP). Formerly Director General of Civil Aviation at Transport Canada, Mr Spruston was until recently, the Director General of the International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) based in ICAO headquarters in Montreal, Canada. He has previously held senior positions with Transport Canada including Director General of Aircraft Services, and Regional Director of Air Navigation Services in the Pacific Region.

2. Mr Whitefield has held senior positions in both regulatory and operational roles within the aviation industry—he was previously a commercial pilot for over 30 years. For the past 10 years he has been a board member of the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) during a period of significant structural and governance reform of the Authority. He is a member of the International Safety Review Team which most recently conducted an independent safety review of Air France following their loss of an A330 aircraft. He is also Chair of Air Safety Support International (a UK Government company charged with helping deliver aviation safety oversight for British overseas territories).

Add the Australian author to that mix and we have one of the world’s best review teams that could be assembled. Their recommendations should be adopted as proposed.

3. Mr Forsyth currently works as an independent consultant to the aviation industry and has served on a number of Boards, including as Chair of Airservices Australia, Chair of the Safeskies Conference, Vice President of the Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia (South Eastern Section) and President of the Royal Aeronautical Society Australian Division. He previously worked for Qantas for over 30 years in technical and management roles including: Manager of the Melbourne Maintenance Base; General Manager, Regional Airlines; and Executive General Manager, Aircraft Operations.

The aviation inexperience that now exists in the Public Service, including CASA, should have grasped these recommendations and implemented them exactly how these 3 eminent persons suggested in the full report. Sadly, 60 months after the release of the ASRR, the industry has seen little or no change to government practices or regulatory structure in their interaction with the industry.

However, ‘Sir Humphrey’ must have visited, as the Public Service ASRR Recommendations progress report , dated 25 August, 2016, informs the Minister that extraordinary progress has happened and they have completed many of the recommendations. Read this report – almost completed???

A review of the report last Friday, 10-12, by myself and other association leaders did not agreed with the progress report and could only accept that maybe 3 or 4 recommendations may have been completed. This is a "public service" trying to sound as though they are making progress when in fact, they are not. This is a systemic problem within the public service when aviation is the focal point. Read any review recommendations in the last couple of decades and you will see similarities in the recommendations that confirm permanent change as recommended was not achieved.

The problem that CASA, and Infrastructure, has when publishing such a report, is that their creditability immediately slips further into the ravine, and trust and respect takes another battering.

For the progress report to be placed on the Infrastructure’s website, then, not only CASA, but other government departments, including CASA’s Board, must have accepted the report.

"Sir Humphrey Appleby" quote: Yes, yes, yes, I do see that there is real dilemma here. In that, while it has been government policy to regard policy as a responsibility of Ministers and administration as a responsibility of Officials, the questions of administrative policy can cause confusion between the policy of administration and the administration of policy, especially when responsibility for the administration of the policy of administration conflicts, or overlaps with, responsibility for the policy of the administration of policy."

Because of that progress report, the public service has to now stifle the complaints by industry by brandishing those that speak up, on behalf of the industry, as radicals not supported by industry.

The current government is relying on such a dedicated public service to placate the constituents because they are too frighten to take the action that is required by proposing legislation that their foes in Parliament could stop, just to embarrass the government. A political dilemma.

What a mess we have ended up with and what a mess the new CEO/DAS of CASA has to confront.

How do you change the philosophy after more than a generation of wrong direction? Some of those employed will never change their approach because they simply do not know the difference between safety and compliance. A person that is safe may not be compliant with written requirements but a compliant person may not be safe. Which is the better person to be working in the industry? This is where the person doing regulatory oversight has to apply discretion and encourage improvements.

Are CASA staff taught how to apply discretion when safety is being practiced but compliance is not 100%? It may, and probably means the regulatory requirement needs to be amended, not the prevention of a safe practice.

It is also disappointing to read the progress report provided to the Minister by the public service – it confirms to industry that all public service levels that supported the progress report know they can mislead the Minister but, to their misfortune, they cannot fool this industry anymore.

If you wanted to turn a failing company around, you normally clear out the obstructionists to change and create a team without silos. Sounds easy, but you also need a mean streak to make changes. - P2: In other words clear out the dross... Wink  
Yes miniscule there is a ticking noise coming from that elephant... Big Grin
[Image: BSA08jvCYAAzOLS.jpg]
MTF...P2 Cool
Reply

Part II - Yep all's good in aviation for 2016

{Reference post: 4D in denial & a bureaucracy obfuscating - 2016 summary of ASRR progress

(12-12-2016, 06:21 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  YES miniscule - all is good in aviation.  Dodgy

Quote:[Image: dc50c9cdcea67d167c60ca482f04cd61.jpg]

1. Lack of political support for jobs in General Aviation


The real reason general aviation, i.e. aviation sectors other than the major airlines, cannot achieve its growth potential and add to the Australian economy is the lack of political support in this country for an industry that could create many jobs and careers, especially for rural Australia.

The government defines general aviation as: "General aviation commonly refers to that part of the aviation industry that engages in activity other than commercial air transport activity. This may include small charter operators, aeromedical operators, agricultural aviation businesses, aviation-based fire-fighting services, training and aerial work such as aerial photography and surveying. It also includes private, business, recreational and sports aviation activity."

These are all operational sectors that ignores the ICAO classification of Activities that also lists: "Airport Services, Air Navigation Services, Civil Aviation Manufacturing, Aviation Training, Maintenance and Overhaul, Regulatory Functions and Other Activities (e.g. Design Activities)" ..that are common to both Commercial Air Transport and General Aviation. Regulatory Reform now means adopting one of either the FAA, Canada or the EASA system that is most applicable to the Australian needs. Each adopted provision must be reviewed to determine compatibility to other Australian Federal legislative systems and integration with other government departments and agencies promulgated requirements.

What actual benefits and jobs have been created by this reform?

Nearly 4,000 aircraft on the CASA Aircraft Register do not fly.

That means there is really only 12,000 active aircraft.

BITRE Stats state that private aircraft average less than 30 hrs per annum.

Low hours caused by public service inflicted ‘red tape’ and operating requirements.

The falloff in participation started with government creating the Civil Aviation Authority in 1990 with appointment of non-regulatory experienced management with every review and restructure, almost annually at one stage, increased; as regulatory experienced, internationally recognised and respected aviation experienced regulators were knowingly replaced to improve "management".

The aviation industry is conceptually focused on adapting to change as new aircraft and products are brought into service regularly. However, North America modernised their aviation regulatory systems in the last decade or so and these changes were not adopted which left Australia stranded with a system introduced in 1990s that was as flawed as was the CAA’s 1988 approach. In fact, the change from Air Navigation Regulations to Civil Aviation Regulations in 1988 was a disaster for aviation as operator after operator closed. Its effect was so bad it created another government parliamentary review that created CASA in the mid 1990s.

How many reviews has this industry and its regulator, now called CASA, been through since the Hawke/Keating economic reform was commenced? How many recommendations implemented?

We all know that the most honourable "Sir Humphrey Appleby" could think up "political speak" to satisfy (mislead) a Minister whilst doing nothing to implement. Looking at some past episodes clearly identifies the problem in Australia. Government endorsed recommendations from enquiry after enquiry over the decades have not been fully or, in some cases, partially implemented, because of the administrators of policy inane "we know best" attitude.

The ASRR report and the Government Response will not be supported, or understood, by CASA. They will do the minimal and tell government that they have implemented the recommendations.

NOTHING HAS CHANGED to bring benefits to aviation in the last 3 decades. The industry has had more red tape added to it where the FAA, for instance, has made changes to improve productivity, remove red tape, and improve safety so the FAA can provide improved regulatory oversight.

Look at the international authors of the ASRR report – two internationally acclaimed aviation management experts that government and CASA should have been thankful they provided such expertise behind each recommendation. Sadly, the ‘Sir Humphries’ are still in charge and little has been achieved. Harmonisation by adoption is what the ASRR is really recommending. Bring Australia and CASA up to the standards of mature aviation countries. Two eminent international authors:

1. Mr Spruston has wide-ranging experience in oversight and regulation of the aviation sector with the Canadian Government. He has also been extensively involved in the development and implementation of criteria for reviewing aviation safety regulatory performance as part of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP). Formerly Director General of Civil Aviation at Transport Canada, Mr Spruston was until recently, the Director General of the International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) based in ICAO headquarters in Montreal, Canada. He has previously held senior positions with Transport Canada including Director General of Aircraft Services, and Regional Director of Air Navigation Services in the Pacific Region.

2. Mr Whitefield has held senior positions in both regulatory and operational roles within the aviation industry—he was previously a commercial pilot for over 30 years. For the past 10 years he has been a board member of the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) during a period of significant structural and governance reform of the Authority. He is a member of the International Safety Review Team which most recently conducted an independent safety review of Air France following their loss of an A330 aircraft. He is also Chair of Air Safety Support International (a UK Government company charged with helping deliver aviation safety oversight for British overseas territories).

Add the Australian author to that mix and we have one of the world’s best review teams that could be assembled. Their recommendations should be adopted as proposed.

3. Mr Forsyth currently works as an independent consultant to the aviation industry and has served on a number of Boards, including as Chair of Airservices Australia, Chair of the Safeskies Conference, Vice President of the Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia (South Eastern Section) and President of the Royal Aeronautical Society Australian Division. He previously worked for Qantas for over 30 years in technical and management roles including: Manager of the Melbourne Maintenance Base; General Manager, Regional Airlines; and Executive General Manager, Aircraft Operations.

The aviation inexperience that now exists in the Public Service, including CASA, should have grasped these recommendations and implemented them exactly how these 3 eminent persons suggested in the full report. Sadly, 60 months after the release of the ASRR, the industry has seen little or no change to government practices or regulatory structure in their interaction with the industry.

However, ‘Sir Humphrey’ must have visited, as the Public Service ASRR Recommendations progress report , dated 25 August, 2016, informs the Minister that extraordinary progress has happened and they have completed many of the recommendations. Read this report – almost completed???

A review of the report last Friday, 10-12, by myself and other association leaders did not agreed with the progress report and could only accept that maybe 3 or 4 recommendations may have been completed. This is a "public service" trying to sound as though they are making progress when in fact, they are not. This is a systemic problem within the public service when aviation is the focal point. Read any review recommendations in the last couple of decades and you will see similarities in the recommendations that confirm permanent change as recommended was not achieved.

The problem that CASA, and Infrastructure, has when publishing such a report, is that their creditability immediately slips further into the ravine, and trust and respect takes another battering.

For the progress report to be placed on the Infrastructure’s website, then, not only CASA, but other government departments, including CASA’s Board, must have accepted the report.

"Sir Humphrey Appleby" quote: Yes, yes, yes, I do see that there is real dilemma here. In that, while it has been government policy to regard policy as a responsibility of Ministers and administration as a responsibility of Officials, the questions of administrative policy can cause confusion between the policy of administration and the administration of policy, especially when responsibility for the administration of the policy of administration conflicts, or overlaps with, responsibility for the policy of the administration of policy."

Because of that progress report, the public service has to now stifle the complaints by industry by brandishing those that speak up, on behalf of the industry, as radicals not supported by industry.

The current government is relying on such a dedicated public service to placate the constituents because they are too frighten to take the action that is required by proposing legislation that their foes in Parliament could stop, just to embarrass the government. A political dilemma.

What a mess we have ended up with and what a mess the new CEO/DAS of CASA has to confront.

How do you change the philosophy after more than a generation of wrong direction? Some of those employed will never change their approach because they simply do not know the difference between safety and compliance. A person that is safe may not be compliant with written requirements but a compliant person may not be safe. Which is the better person to be working in the industry? This is where the person doing regulatory oversight has to apply discretion and encourage improvements.

Are CASA staff taught how to apply discretion when safety is being practiced but compliance is not 100%? It may, and probably means the regulatory requirement needs to be amended, not the prevention of a safe practice.

It is also disappointing to read the progress report provided to the Minister by the public service – it confirms to industry that all public service levels that supported the progress report know they can mislead the Minister but, to their misfortune, they cannot fool this industry anymore.

If you wanted to turn a failing company around, you normally clear out the obstructionists to change and create a team without silos. Sounds easy, but you also need a mean streak to make changes. - P2: In other words clear out the dross... Wink  

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, this AM Binger in the Oz writes on another indicator pointing towards GA industry decimation:

Quote:Allianz to shut aviation cover
[Image: 875fb64a444871fa48ea8178562bcc9e]12:00amMITCHELL BINGEMANN
Allianz is pulling its aviation insurance business out of Australia, closing the books on $20 million in policies.

Quote:Insurance giant Allianz is pulling its aviation insurance business out of Australia, closing the books on the $20 million worth of insurance policies it holds in the market and leaving the fate of six roles within the division up in the air.

The closure next year will put in doubt some 3000 aviation-related insurance policies that Allianz underwrites in the Australian market. These policies include liability insurance for airport operators, aircraft hull insurance, hangar insurance, drone policies and ground handler cover.

The company will continue to offer insurance for large commercial airlines and aircraft operators through its London office.

“Allianz Global Corporate and Speciality Pacific will commence placing existing aviation business written out of Australia into run-off, effective 1 January 2017,” Willem van Wyk, the chief of Allianz Global Corporate and Speciality Pacific, wrote to staff in late November.

“The move comes as part of a strategic review of the local market and allows AGCS Pacific to focus on building upon its successes in the global corporate segment.”

A spokesman for Allianz refused to answer questions about the closure of the insurance unit — including reasons for shutting down the business, the value of policies held and what will happen to impacted staff — saying he could not “fully answer” questions provided by The Australian.

But the spokesman did confirm that Allianz’s aviation insurance arm would shut down by January 1.

“AGCS will continue to work closely with brokers and clients during the transition period and the run-off of its existing business. Only five positions are impacted by AGCS’s change in strategy. The staff impact will be staggered over 2017, although opportunities for redeployment may also be identified where appropriate.”

The closure points to the continued decline of the nation’s once-thriving general aviation sector, which has been progressively smothered by the cost of red tape.

It comes after Allianz has progressively pulled out of aviation insurance around the world through closures of its Singapore, Brazil and Chicago aviation insurance offices.

“This is not just about Allianz pulling out of the market because of the declining economics of the business model. It’s also about the decline of general aviation in Australia,” a source within Allianz told The Australian.

“Realistically there is too much underwriting capacity in Australia for the general aviation sector, which is clearly not a boom industry. And frankly, the way the regulator behaves is resulting in general aviation’s decline and is a reason why the industry is in such bad shape.”

Earlier this year the aviation regulator conceded it needed to do more to reduce the red tape and costs strangling Australia’s general aviation sector.

The concession came in response to calls from the general aviation sector for a government lifeline after data showing massive declines in the number of new pilots and aircraft entering the industry was presented to the Civil Aviation and Safety Authority.

AOPA executive director Ben Morgan said Allianz’s withdrawal was emblematic of the struggles facing the industry.
This is despite Boeing predicting that there will be a need for quarter of a million new pilots in the Asia-Pacific region by 2035 
Quote:Virtual reality technology to speed up pilot training as demand grows
Robyn Ironside News Corp Australia Network

SOARING demand for air travel in the Asia-Pacific region will create the need for an extra 248,000 pilots by 2035.

Aircraft manufacturer Boeing has released its annual Pilot and Technican Outlook forecasting huge numbers of jobs to be created in the aviation industry.

It is anticipated 111,000 additional pilots will be needed by Chinese carriers, or 5600 a year, plus 62,000 in Southeast Asia.

Although demand is much smaller in the Oceania region, an extra 13,000 pilots should still be required by Australian, New Zealand and South Pacific airlines in the next two decades.

[Image: 49def322d7975967af85afa85aa13e0c]
Pilot training in a Boeing flight simulator. Picture: Thomas Hanser, BoeingnoSource:Supplied

Vice-President of Boeing Flight Services Sherry Carbary said the aircraft manufacturer was working closely with airlines, regulators and flight schools to train new pilots and technicians.

“We are seeing a lot of poaching — a lot of airlines that are willing to pay more than the market to get the captains and to get the first officers that they need,” said Ms Carbary.

“So far it’s been OK, the United States had a surplus of pilots, Europe had a surplus of pilots; the question is when does that surplus extinguish itself and then what happens next.”

[Image: ba40a8f65e088d4359285ff0a41d62e8]
Virtual Reality technology is being developed by Boeing to assist in the training of pilots and technicians. Picture: AFP/Christof StacheSource:AFP

To support the demand for training, Boeing is investing in virtual reality-based training solutions, that will put trainee pilots into a virtual cockpit without the immediate need for an expensive flight simulator.

“You’re actually seeing the aeroplane, you’re seeing the flight deck, you’re seeing the training manuals, you’re seeing everything you need to make a decision,” said Ms Carbary.

“I think that will if not accelerate the training, it will certainly change the training experience.”

She said the use of new technology would also help attract more young people to the aerospace industry.

“That’s what they’ve grown up on. They didn’t grow up sitting in a classroom reading a book and so I think this is going to take us to a whole new level of training,” Ms Carbary said.

“But I think it’s too early on to say (if virtual reality will replace simulators).”

[Image: d8a1996aa8c2a712dab4cbbf8bd22a5a]
Qantas’s pilot recruitment drive is going gangbusters: Picture: Peter ThomasSource:Supplied

Australian airlines have recently stepped up pilot recruitment, with Qantas seeking an additional 170 pilots and Jetstar recruiting for its Cadet Pilot Program.

The Flying Kangaroo has already filled some positions, from the more than 500 applications received.

The Jetstar program is the only jet aircraft pilot cadetship offered in Australia with just 12 cadets being taken initially, and another 20 next year.

On completion of the program, operated in partnership with Swinburne University of Technology, the cadets will become First Officers on Jetstar’s Airbus A320 aircraft, or Second Officers on Jetstar’s Boeing 787s.

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

If Boeings stats are correct that will be great for the NZ economy. You see they still have GA, and strange as it may seem a lot of pilots start out in GA! There won't be GA left in Australia, which is a pity, because job growth equals more revenue for Uncle Malcolm. Oh well, too bad I guess. But good news for our friends across the ditch.

But hang on, we do have a roaring 'pregnant with 5 kids' unemployment force here in Australia that get paid quite well, 75% of big business don't pay tax and and we are going to start taxing backpackers so I'm sure we will weather the  next financial crisis quite well.

Planes, Pilots, bah humbug, who needs them anyway! And besides, in 10 years time Il deuce will have put VA into a coffin and Onestar will be paying Captains $15k per year, so who needs it.
Reply

(12-12-2016, 06:21 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  YES miniscule - all is good in aviation.  Dodgy

The word is that last Friday the members of TAAAF had a meeting in Can'tberra to discuss the bureaucracy progress (or lack of) in implementing the government supported ASRR recommendations. Courtesy of the AMROBA latest newsletter, KC gives a summary of what I believe can be regarded as the general sentiment amongst TAAAF membership: 

Quote:[Image: dc50c9cdcea67d167c60ca482f04cd61.jpg]

1. Lack of political support for jobs in General Aviation


The real reason general aviation, i.e. aviation sectors other than the major airlines, cannot achieve its growth potential and add to the Australian economy is the lack of political support in this country for an industry that could create many jobs and careers, especially for rural Australia...

...It is also disappointing to read the progress report provided to the Minister by the public service – it confirms to industry that all public service levels that supported the progress report know they can mislead the Minister but, to their misfortune, they cannot fool this industry anymore.

If you wanted to turn a failing company around, you normally clear out the obstructionists to change and create a team without silos. Sounds easy, but you also need a mean streak to make changes. - P2: In other words clear out the dross... Wink  

Update 15/12/16: "Dear Minister Chester.."  Dodgy

Courtesy of AAAA CEO Phil Hurst TAAAF Communiqué

Quote:15 December 2016

AUSTRALIAN AVIATION ASSOCIATIONS FORUM MEETING
TAAAF Communiqué

The Australian Aviation Associations Forum has written to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, the Hon. Darren Chester MP, asking that he engage directly with the industry, through the Forum, to development a National Aviation Policy.

Forum participants met in Canberra last week and have again highlighted the value of
Government creating a new partnership with industry, as outlined in the Forum’s 2016
aviation policy.

While welcoming recent wins for common sense, the Minister’s response to TAAAF policies is disappointing given the years of policy neglect of the aviation portfolio.

Based on the Minister’s response, TAAAF members feel that he has not adequately responded to TAAAF’s 60 page policy document which was released in April 2016.

The problems are well known. Further reviews are neither actions nor outcomes. Solutions are required. Ministerial policy leadership is essential.

The task of changing the culture within CASA continues to represent a significant challenge.

Despite Ministerial support, a positive Board and a new Director of Aviation Safety, some CASA officials continue to undermine progress and, as a result, the ASRR Report
recommendations are, at best, only partially implemented two years on.

Industry needs Government leadership in a sector that promises significant growth and
opportunity over the coming decade. We must move expeditiously to harmonise our regulatory environment with international best practice.

Australia is an outlier among aviation nations because of our refusal to adopt ICAO models or best regulatory practice from countries such as the US, NZ or Canada. Instead, we persevere with the implementation of regulations that are unique, costly and complex.

Governments of both persuasions have had consistent advice from industry regarding these issues and yet jobs and growth continue to be damaged by regulation and a policy vacuum.

The Forum calls yet again for the Minister to meet with TAAAF to agree on concrete, shortterm actions to get the industry moving again.

The TAAAF Aviation Policy 2016 provides a wide range of realistic expert advice on aviation issues and TAAAF participants recommend the policies to the Government for further consultation and implementation.

The full TAAAF policies are available from TAAAF participant websites. The full list of
TAAAF participants is attached.
_________________________________________________________________________
Media Contact: Greg Russell Chair E: grerussell@yahoo.com PH : 0427 707 733
MTF...P2 Cool
Reply

[Image: Chester-the-charlatan-Transport-Minister.jpg]

Chester the charlatan Transport miniscule - Confused

Over on the Rev Forsyth's thread, the Ferryman said:
(12-16-2016, 06:09 AM)kharon Wrote:  Me too mate, me too.

P2 - "Call me cynical but IMO I think this is another attempt at political and bureaucratic distraction/obfuscation because today there was a serious collective industry shot across miniscule 4D's manicured and coiffured front end.."


Quote:The FORSYTH  Panel recommends that:

1. The Australian Government develops the State Safety Program into a strategic plan for Australia’s aviation safety system, under the leadership of the Aviation Policy Group, and uses it as the foundation for rationalising and improving coordination mechanisms.

2. The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development plays a stronger policy role in the State Safety Program


Maybe I’m just thick; it maybe that I’m too limited in my imagination to understand the DDDD – NFI – D grand plan to save aviation. Maybe the plan is too far reaching for my limited understanding – but I fail, miserably, to see what stopping Westfield building a shopping complex on short final to Big Smoke International has to do with the SSP; or the Forsyth recommendation.

What I see is a minister desperate to be ‘seen’ to be doing something and a department grabbing a piece of low hanging fruit, giving it a polish, a long winded blurb saying SFA and touting it to the media as a big deal.

When you actually strip away the word weasels work – what have you got left. Well, it seems that the control of building ‘within the airspace’ around aerodromes is going to become another ‘panel’; making more work, but essentially another slow down of progress and another layer of bureaucratic red tape.

“Infrastructure found a number of regulatory gaps ranging from outdated regulatory approaches failing to provide suitable transparency and accountability for Commonwealth decision-making and/or creating uncertainty where regulations were absent or ambiguous, to regulatory overlap due to legacy regulations still being in force, and considerable scope for improvement in regulatory oversight,” the discussion paper said.” No! well I  never: well, duck me, who’d have ever been able to work that one out. Don’t that paragraph sound great, a masterpiece of obfuscation, which the miniscule can claim as his own and use, as it says bugger all of any value, but hell, it sounds good. They do not manage to convey the notion that this is and has been their responsibility and that the cock up is purely of their making. Funny about that.

“The current airspace regulations under the Airports Act need to be modernised and streamlined to enable the future safe and efficient growth of these nationally important transport hubs in conjunction with facilitating appropriate urban density policies of State, Territory and Local governments,” the paper said.

Thirty years ago, similar words were penned about the civil aviation regulations. Ahem. Still waiting for those minister. I love this bit - “[need] to be modernized”. Indeed they do, but notice the word “need”, not “will”.  Rephrased to “will be modernized” implies that something that needed to be 'done' will, indeed, be 'done' in a timely, cost effective manner. Yes, yes, I know, dream on.

There’s more, if you can stomach it; like the notion that the approach paths for a runway which may  be, scheduled or  built in 10 years time will be protected from developers. I can just hear it; “where is this runway to be built?; how long will it be?, how wide will it be?, in which direction will it be aligned?, will the flight paths cross noise sensitive areas, because if it does, we will arouse the local residents, who’d rather have a new shopping complex and apartment block than aircraft noise, to a frenzy of protest". " Now then, councillor, may I introduce you to my lovely sister, sit, have a drink".  This; much closer to reality than the M-NFI blather.  

This latest piece of departmental flummery typifies the ‘Chester’ approach; flash, slick, full of hot air, sounding wonderfully complex, deep and incisive; but signifying nothing. A word weasel confection, making something which bears little relation to the Forsyth recommendation sound as if ‘he of NFI’ is actually doing something useful.  There is a massive amount of solid, sane advice available from industry regarding Forsyth; and this pile of fluff is what the M-NFI chooses to support. Pathetic, cheap, lazy, dumb, dishonest and nasty.

Toot toot.
In contrast today in the Oz Binger helps TAAAF bang the drum for calling 4D M-NFI out on recognising the parlous state of the aviation industry... Wink :
Quote:
Quote:Alliance calls for forum
[Image: 258bc33afab03bd4f85a78c43746ea38]12:00amMITCHELL BINGEMANN

The Australian Aviation Associations Forum this week wrote to Transport Minister Darren Chester urging a meeting.

An alliance of the major aviation associations has called on the government to convene an urgent meeting to voice concerns about the failings of government policy to halt the decline of general aviation in Australia.

The Australian Aviation Associations Forum this week wrote to Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester urging the meeting and formation of a National Aviation Policy to address the shortcomings and structural changes in the industry that are smothering it under reams of red tape.

More than 15 associations lend their names to the letter that demands Mr Chester and the government take action.

Since the TAAAF policy release, the government and the aviation regulator have extended the deadline for a hi-tech navigation system known as ADS-B and the deadline for compliance to fatigue management rules. A review of the problems facing general aviation has also been launched.

But the TAAAF is fed up with reviews and deadline delays and wants immediate action from the government.

“While welcoming recent wins for common sense, the Minister’s response to TAAAF policies is disappointing given the years of policy neglect of the aviation portfolio,” said TAAAF chairman Greg Russell.

TAAAF in April told the government it was imperative the Civil Aviation Act be rewritten to align with international standards and that action must be taken to ensure education and aviation training remain on par with global best practice.
  
Totally related and in a rare return from a well deserved retirement, tendentious aviation blogger Phearless Phelan brushes off his keyboard to write this pointed piece on the historical record of the failed RRP:
Quote:[Image: cropped-Aircraft3.jpg]
Restoring Trust?

Leave a reply

Paul Phelan, Dec 16, 2016
Highlighting the fracture of industry/regulator relations clearly and repeatedly, the government-commissioned Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR) Panel used the word “trust” or one of its derivatives no fewer than 26 times throughout its discussion, analysis and recommendations.
Continue reading →

To which off one of the PAIN email chains Sandy made this excellent OBS & summation Wink :
Quote:Thanks Stan,

My comment copied here.

I first started reading the author’s commentary on the regulation of general aviation some thirty years ago. These were articles written in aviation magazines. They exhibited the same qualities as this one; careful assembly of factual elements detailing the problems facing the GA industry, the causes and the reforms necessary to prevent a forecast decline. The decline has, in recent times, become more savage than could have been imagined back, say, in the eighties or nineties. It could be added that the structure of CASA as an independent corporate body has contributed to its abject failure. The method of political control, an occasional statement of expectations from the Minister, has clearly failed. The secretive CASA Board of Management obviously cannot live up to its title, and the fatuously named Director of Air Safety cum CEO seems to have virtually unlimited power.

While the author here alludes to some hopeful words from Mr. Carmody, no substantive reform measures have been actually been made. Measures that could be made practically overnight if there was sufficient willpower, remembering how quickly PM Hawke got foreign pilots to get our airlines flying during that famous pilot’s ‘dispute’. Measures such as car driver medicals, independent instructors and relief from unnecessary and super expensive aircraft maintenance requirements. Not to mention the parlous state of airport management, especially the disastrous policies inflicted on our secondary airports.

Unfortunately history teaches us that the feather bed of Aviation House is such that any alleviation for GA will result in less power and perks, an inverse to the fortunes of aviation that will not happen without concerted political mandate.


Sandy

No doubt much MTF...P2 Cool
Reply

(12-16-2016, 09:31 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  [Image: Chester-the-charlatan-Transport-Minister.jpg]

Chester the charlatan Transport miniscule - Part II Confused

Reference quote from LMH via Aunty Pru CMTP: Final LMH for 2016  

Quote:...TAAAF is not a bunch of mugs pushing barrows with their own names on them; they are the single united voice for aviation that Darren Chester himself lamented the lack of at the Tamworth rally in May. They are gaining strength with numbers and together have the industry experience and street cred that the government lacks at most levels. So, their call for a national aviation policy is far from a cry in the wilderness; it's a roar from the bleachers that should not be ignored...

Not many people will know this but Aunty Pru has delegated me with the most unenviable task of monitoring DDDD_MNFI's office media webpage, his personal website and his social media tweets etc. Now at about the same time as Hitch was publishing his last LMH for 2016, DDDD_MNFI released a presser that IMO personifies the true deceit and lengths that M&M's hand-puppet will go to save face and avoid embarrassment.

Via DDDD_MNFI (note the headline - Dodgy ):
Quote:Government reducing regulatory burden on aviation industry
Media Release
DC234/2016
16 December 2016

  • Future requirements for Aviation Rescue and Fire Fighting Services (ARFFS) to be based on safety risk assessment
  • The modernised regulatory framework will adopt a more systems and outcome-based approach to regulation
  • Existing ARFFS regional airport operations will continue to operate under current arrangements.
The Federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester outlined a number of changes to improve Aviation Rescue and Fire Fighting Service (ARFFS) regulatory arrangements at Australian airports, and confirmed existing firefighting and rescue services will remain in place at regional airports.

Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester said following consideration of public and industry submissions to the Regulatory Policy Review, the Australian Government will make better use of risk assessments to inform future decisions about the allocation of ARFFS resources.

“We are committed to maintaining a safe aviation environment while seeking to reduce the future regulatory burden on industry and improve service delivery,” Mr Chester said.
“Future decisions about the establishment and disestablishment of ARFFS at Australian airports would be based on safety risk reviews undertaken after certain ‘trigger’ events occur.

“The Australian Government has no plans to close ARFFS at regional airports.

“In relation to existing ARFFS locations at our regional airports, these will continue to operate under current arrangements which is appropriate as several of these ARFFS operations and facilities have only been established in the last few years,” Mr Chester said.

“Stakeholders will have the opportunity to comment on the detail of the changes when amendments to the relevant Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and the Manual of Standards are drafted next year.

“Any future assessment of ARFFS will be underpinned by a robust safety management system which will reduce costs to the aviation industry and the travelling public.
“The final decision on the requirement for an ARFFS would rest with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA),” Mr Chester said.

Further information on the outcomes of the Regulatory Policy Review are available online: infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/arffs/index.aspx
    
Much like DDDD_MNFI's non-acknowledgement of the TAAAF Communique the day before and considering this is such a 'big' initiative by the Turnbull government, bizarrely 4D doesn't self promote this announcement on his twitter (don't mention the "A" word) account - wonder why that is... Huh Rolleyes


No further comment required but there will be much, much MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)