More secrecy at Airservices – Waypoint 2008
Thread Starter
More secrecy at Airservices – Waypoint 2008
I had heard on the grapevine that Airservices would be holding its annual Waypoint industry and stakeholder forum on 25 and 26 June, and noted the dates in my diary. I heard nothing further.
On checking the Airservices website I found information on previous Waypoint forums, including information about the 2007 event with the proposed format and some issues for discussion. It listed the speeches of the 2007 Waypoint.
The information on the website states:
However there was no mention at all of the 2008 Waypoint, and it appears that this information is not available to all its stakeholders and customers at all.
My office phoned Airservices for information. They confirmed the event does start today at 2.30 pm at the War Memorial. My office was told that information was only put on the website after the event because it was by “invitation only.” Airservices would not provide further information on the content of today’s event, saying that information would have been provided to the invited participants.
Once again, Airservices appears to be “consulting” with a hand-picked group of people that they have chosen not to rock the boat.
I would like to go to the meeting – are there others?
Does anyone here have any information on this event?
On checking the Airservices website I found information on previous Waypoint forums, including information about the 2007 event with the proposed format and some issues for discussion. It listed the speeches of the 2007 Waypoint.
The information on the website states:
The two-day event provides all our stakeholders and clients with the opportunity to hear current and future agenda to remake our business. More importantly, it gives our stakeholders and customers an opportunity to express their views on issues of importance to the aviation industry.
My office phoned Airservices for information. They confirmed the event does start today at 2.30 pm at the War Memorial. My office was told that information was only put on the website after the event because it was by “invitation only.” Airservices would not provide further information on the content of today’s event, saying that information would have been provided to the invited participants.
Once again, Airservices appears to be “consulting” with a hand-picked group of people that they have chosen not to rock the boat.
I would like to go to the meeting – are there others?
Does anyone here have any information on this event?
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ssshhhhhhh !
If you promise to be a very good boy for the next twelve months, and not sulk every time someone disagrees with you, you just MIGHT get an invite to next eyars event.
If you promise to be a very good boy for the next twelve months, and not sulk every time someone disagrees with you, you just MIGHT get an invite to next eyars event.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Bed Fellows...........
Dick,
It seems that CASA and Airservices are in the same bed and singing the same tune................
I would go so far as to say, that they probably cross hire each other's managers, that way incompetence remains consistent throughout both departments
It seems that CASA and Airservices are in the same bed and singing the same tune................
I would go so far as to say, that they probably cross hire each other's managers, that way incompetence remains consistent throughout both departments
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
From the blurb you quoted it appears targetted at the aviation industry, not private pilots.
I'm not saying you don't have issues to raise but perhaps this has a different purpose.
Pera.
From the blurb you quoted it appears targetted at the aviation industry, not private pilots.
I'm not saying you don't have issues to raise but perhaps this has a different purpose.
Pera.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chad
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I seem to recall a time many years ago - back in the early 90's - when the then DoT/CAA/DCA or whatever - used to call a consultation meeting every year to ask the stakeholders what they wanted. A week later, they used to call the same stakeholders back and tell them what they were going to get!!
It seems to me that then new Waypoint process cuts out one of those meetings [thereby saving the stakeholders travel expenses] - Airservices no longer asks what you want - they just tell you what they think you want and how they're going to skin you for the cost of it!!
Dick - the only way to change this is to lobby the Government to legislate a service mentality into Airservices - and the most effective way to do that might be to mimick the UK legislation that gives their regulator some economic and service regulatory powers over NATS in addition to the safety regulatory powers.
Now, I have to say, I would NOT give our current version of CASA any such powers - they can hardly manage what they've got!! BUT, if the Government is serious about a CASA review, they should be thinking about including a structural provision for service regulation.
This would be an excellent platform for you to canvass, Dick - you of all people know the value of putting SERVICE back into AirSERVICEs Australia.
It seems to me that then new Waypoint process cuts out one of those meetings [thereby saving the stakeholders travel expenses] - Airservices no longer asks what you want - they just tell you what they think you want and how they're going to skin you for the cost of it!!
Dick - the only way to change this is to lobby the Government to legislate a service mentality into Airservices - and the most effective way to do that might be to mimick the UK legislation that gives their regulator some economic and service regulatory powers over NATS in addition to the safety regulatory powers.
Now, I have to say, I would NOT give our current version of CASA any such powers - they can hardly manage what they've got!! BUT, if the Government is serious about a CASA review, they should be thinking about including a structural provision for service regulation.
This would be an excellent platform for you to canvass, Dick - you of all people know the value of putting SERVICE back into AirSERVICEs Australia.
Thread Starter
Wellconcerned, you make some very good points.
One thing I don’t understand is the change in recent years where Airservices has hidden behind the false claim of “commercial-in-confidence” and has become almost a secret organisation. They are totally Government owned and a monopoly, and there is no reason why anything should be secret.
At the present time they have lots of projects on, and I understand some are failing. However nothing is said – it is all hidden. Some projects could even be successful.
As an example, the multilateration project in Tasmania appeared to me to be a good decision. However virtually nothing is said about it.
In the meantime, I understand the GRAS project is a complete failure and many millions of dollars are to be written off once the tough decision is forced on the Board.
Nothing is said about these projects so we have no idea what is actually going on. It is as if the people running the place lack the self-confidence to explain what is good and what is bad, ask advice, and be completely open.
One thing I don’t understand is the change in recent years where Airservices has hidden behind the false claim of “commercial-in-confidence” and has become almost a secret organisation. They are totally Government owned and a monopoly, and there is no reason why anything should be secret.
At the present time they have lots of projects on, and I understand some are failing. However nothing is said – it is all hidden. Some projects could even be successful.
As an example, the multilateration project in Tasmania appeared to me to be a good decision. However virtually nothing is said about it.
In the meantime, I understand the GRAS project is a complete failure and many millions of dollars are to be written off once the tough decision is forced on the Board.
Nothing is said about these projects so we have no idea what is actually going on. It is as if the people running the place lack the self-confidence to explain what is good and what is bad, ask advice, and be completely open.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chad
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
As far as I can find out, the UK legislation forces quite a high degree of accountability on UK NATS - their equivalent of Airservices. It also requires a high level of reporting against a number of parameters - AND it requires the service provider to actually provide a service to its customers.
I'm sure you can find some contacts there - or why not try asking the new CASA head of airspace - didn't he come from the UK - he must know the background to the UK legislation and should be able to give you some names of people to contact.
I think Germany has a similar requirement on their service provider - DFS.
Even the FAA [with the regulator built into the organisation] gives far greater reporting clarity - and opens its books for the customers to see.
As far as I can find out, the UK legislation forces quite a high degree of accountability on UK NATS - their equivalent of Airservices. It also requires a high level of reporting against a number of parameters - AND it requires the service provider to actually provide a service to its customers.
I'm sure you can find some contacts there - or why not try asking the new CASA head of airspace - didn't he come from the UK - he must know the background to the UK legislation and should be able to give you some names of people to contact.
I think Germany has a similar requirement on their service provider - DFS.
Even the FAA [with the regulator built into the organisation] gives far greater reporting clarity - and opens its books for the customers to see.
