Alberta Gov't Air Services boondoggle
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: Where the job is!
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alberta Gov't Air Services boondoggle
This editorial in the Medicine Hat News has exposed this scandal to further scrutiny by the public, opposition politicians, regulatory agencies, police and auditors. The scope of wrongdoing by the PC regime seems to have expanded. Various people have some answers to provide.
What have the accountable executives of Alberta Government Air Services got to say? As "accountable executives" they are just that - accountable! They are responsible for ensuring that their air operation operates legally and in full compliance with all laws and regulations, apart from any safety aspects. Was nobody minding the shop?
Where was the Transport Canada regulatory oversight? Again, was nobody minding the shop? The refusal of Transport Canada Civil Aviation to answer whether it is looking into the Alberta situation looks suspicious. Is something being covered up?
If the subject flights were illegal or had an element of illegality did that by extension invalidate the operator's insurance?
Who actually accepted the payments? After all the kerfuffle about wrongdoing and misuse of public assets - which after all is what the original fuss was about and why the refund payments were made - one would expect all parties involved, especially Progressive Conservative Party politicians and bureaucrats, to check carefully beforehand to ensure that all their subsequent actions were both legal and ethical.
Flights of fancy dog Alberta Tories ? Medicine Hat News
Flights of fancy dog Alberta Tories
BY MEDICINE HAT NEWS OPINION ON AUGUST 22, 2014.
Personal flights in Alberta government aircraft for which revenue is collected appears to contravene Alberta’s air transport license issued by Transport Canada.
“The Government of Alberta is registered as a Private Air Operator,” said a spokesperson for Transport Canada this week. “A Registered Private Operator is authorized to transport non-revenue passengers and goods. A Private Operator cannot operate for hire and reward.”
We already know revenue has been collected for a number of Alberta government flights — not initially but when the personal use of government aircraft was exposed in the media.
In the Auditor General Merwan Saher’s report, made public at the beginning of the month, there is confirmation former premier Alison Redford paid back $14,992 for the government aircraft charter she took to and from Ottawa when travelling to South Africa for the memorial service for Nelson Mandela. Another $1,532 was paid for travel by her daughter and her daughter’s friends, and $1,624 for a charter to Vancouver to attend a family funeral.
That would make those technically “revenue flights.”
The PC party has also agreed to reimburse government for charters that were for partisan purposes, where elected officials made use of the government aircraft charter to attend a PC party event.
“Transport Canada requires private air operators to register with the department and comply with the Canadian Aviation Regulations,” said a spokesperson for Transport Canada.
Whether Transport Canada is looking into the Alberta situation is not known.
Transport Canada has refused to answer that question.
So the very thing that was meant to kill all controversy about private use of government aircraft, just pay the money back and be done with it, could be tipping the scales in the direction of contravening Transport Canada’s regulations.
This week the government announced it will pay more attention to the appropriate use of the government fleet.
“Each of us knows the rules and it is up to each of us to make sure that we are adhering to those rules at all times — whether we’re taking planes we’re talking travel expenses or anything,” said Premier Dave Hancock.
The problem is Albertans thought they could rely on elected officials to do just that and then discovered they could not.
Talk is cheap at this point, believing and seeing is all together different, especially when it looks as though Transport Canada’s air operators license conditions have been contravened.
Gillian Slade is a News reporter. To comment on this and other editorials, go to Opinions ? Medicine Hat News)
What have the accountable executives of Alberta Government Air Services got to say? As "accountable executives" they are just that - accountable! They are responsible for ensuring that their air operation operates legally and in full compliance with all laws and regulations, apart from any safety aspects. Was nobody minding the shop?
Where was the Transport Canada regulatory oversight? Again, was nobody minding the shop? The refusal of Transport Canada Civil Aviation to answer whether it is looking into the Alberta situation looks suspicious. Is something being covered up?
If the subject flights were illegal or had an element of illegality did that by extension invalidate the operator's insurance?
Who actually accepted the payments? After all the kerfuffle about wrongdoing and misuse of public assets - which after all is what the original fuss was about and why the refund payments were made - one would expect all parties involved, especially Progressive Conservative Party politicians and bureaucrats, to check carefully beforehand to ensure that all their subsequent actions were both legal and ethical.
Flights of fancy dog Alberta Tories ? Medicine Hat News
Flights of fancy dog Alberta Tories
BY MEDICINE HAT NEWS OPINION ON AUGUST 22, 2014.
Personal flights in Alberta government aircraft for which revenue is collected appears to contravene Alberta’s air transport license issued by Transport Canada.
“The Government of Alberta is registered as a Private Air Operator,” said a spokesperson for Transport Canada this week. “A Registered Private Operator is authorized to transport non-revenue passengers and goods. A Private Operator cannot operate for hire and reward.”
We already know revenue has been collected for a number of Alberta government flights — not initially but when the personal use of government aircraft was exposed in the media.
In the Auditor General Merwan Saher’s report, made public at the beginning of the month, there is confirmation former premier Alison Redford paid back $14,992 for the government aircraft charter she took to and from Ottawa when travelling to South Africa for the memorial service for Nelson Mandela. Another $1,532 was paid for travel by her daughter and her daughter’s friends, and $1,624 for a charter to Vancouver to attend a family funeral.
That would make those technically “revenue flights.”
The PC party has also agreed to reimburse government for charters that were for partisan purposes, where elected officials made use of the government aircraft charter to attend a PC party event.
“Transport Canada requires private air operators to register with the department and comply with the Canadian Aviation Regulations,” said a spokesperson for Transport Canada.
Whether Transport Canada is looking into the Alberta situation is not known.
Transport Canada has refused to answer that question.
So the very thing that was meant to kill all controversy about private use of government aircraft, just pay the money back and be done with it, could be tipping the scales in the direction of contravening Transport Canada’s regulations.
This week the government announced it will pay more attention to the appropriate use of the government fleet.
“Each of us knows the rules and it is up to each of us to make sure that we are adhering to those rules at all times — whether we’re taking planes we’re talking travel expenses or anything,” said Premier Dave Hancock.
The problem is Albertans thought they could rely on elected officials to do just that and then discovered they could not.
Talk is cheap at this point, believing and seeing is all together different, especially when it looks as though Transport Canada’s air operators license conditions have been contravened.
Gillian Slade is a News reporter. To comment on this and other editorials, go to Opinions ? Medicine Hat News)
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Canada
Age: 65
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carrier.
This has nothing to do with a Transport Canada Rule for a private air carrier but a reporter with a hate on against the PC Gov't of Alberta. The Gov't air service is used to transport Gov't employee's on Gov't business. This is not some private corporation that's charging to fly people to Vancouver because they have a couple of empty seats on a corporate flight. I'm also willing to bet money on the fact that Transport Canada would laugh of someone suggested that they investigate this issue. As a side note the money that Alison Redford paid back was for taking her daughter on the Gov't plane. Alison Redford violated so many Gov't policies that she should be sued by the province to recover far more money then she's paid back.
Roybert
This has nothing to do with a Transport Canada Rule for a private air carrier but a reporter with a hate on against the PC Gov't of Alberta. The Gov't air service is used to transport Gov't employee's on Gov't business. This is not some private corporation that's charging to fly people to Vancouver because they have a couple of empty seats on a corporate flight. I'm also willing to bet money on the fact that Transport Canada would laugh of someone suggested that they investigate this issue. As a side note the money that Alison Redford paid back was for taking her daughter on the Gov't plane. Alison Redford violated so many Gov't policies that she should be sued by the province to recover far more money then she's paid back.
Roybert
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wherever I go, there I am
Age: 43
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed. On the surface, this article looks like nothing more than a reporter coming up with their own conclusions...so no different than most air operators!
The fact that Ms. Redford paid back the money it cost the government to have her daughter travel with her, in my opinion, does not constitute "hire and reward." It is certainly not "revenue" as the reporter claims.
I put this into the same category as a reporter uncovering a rock, finding a worm, and coming to the conclusion that the Department of Agriculture is using worms to destroy crops in order to do...something.
The fact that Ms. Redford paid back the money it cost the government to have her daughter travel with her, in my opinion, does not constitute "hire and reward." It is certainly not "revenue" as the reporter claims.
I put this into the same category as a reporter uncovering a rock, finding a worm, and coming to the conclusion that the Department of Agriculture is using worms to destroy crops in order to do...something.
Is it still the case that someone can fly a privately registered aircraft and have someone share the costs with them without being accused of running a chisel charter?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: Where the job is!
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More chisel charters by Province of Alberta, Air Transportation Services have been exposed:
Alberta PC leadership candidate repays costs of daughter?s flights, calls for audit of cabinet ministers | National Post
Alberta Finance Minister Doug Horner asked to resign over report he took wife on 23 government flights | National Post
There should be a public inquiry to establish the full extent of this scandal with witnesses being required by subpoena to appear and testify under oath!
Meanwhile, Transport Canada Civil Aviation has a duty and responsibility to investigate this air operator but has refused to confirm to the media that it is doing so. This failure to confirm it is taking action raises all sorts of suspicions. eg Is there some sort of collusion?
Alberta PC leadership candidate repays costs of daughter?s flights, calls for audit of cabinet ministers | National Post
Alberta Finance Minister Doug Horner asked to resign over report he took wife on 23 government flights | National Post
There should be a public inquiry to establish the full extent of this scandal with witnesses being required by subpoena to appear and testify under oath!
Meanwhile, Transport Canada Civil Aviation has a duty and responsibility to investigate this air operator but has refused to confirm to the media that it is doing so. This failure to confirm it is taking action raises all sorts of suspicions. eg Is there some sort of collusion?
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Canada
Age: 65
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carrier
Not sure why this is bothering you so badly but based on your logic, then Canadian Gov't should be investigated as well. I believe that the trip to Nelson Mandela funeral was charged back to the province for Redford and her Assistant that went on the trip with her.
Bottom line I believe is that Gov't Air Services aren't subject to the rules regarding Charter Operations.
Roybert
Not sure why this is bothering you so badly but based on your logic, then Canadian Gov't should be investigated as well. I believe that the trip to Nelson Mandela funeral was charged back to the province for Redford and her Assistant that went on the trip with her.
Bottom line I believe is that Gov't Air Services aren't subject to the rules regarding Charter Operations.
Roybert
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wherever I go, there I am
Age: 43
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't call a guy who takes his daughter with him on a last minute work trip because he can't find a daycare scandalous. As for Doug Horner...he is entitled by the legislature to take his wife on 4 trips a year. 23 flights in 7 years is just under 4 trips per year. He was entitled to 28 trips in that time. That means he only used 82% of his entitlement. Again, not scandalous.
Redford was one thing, these guys are in a different league. Certainly nothing worthy of the "government cover-up" moniker.
Redford was one thing, these guys are in a different league. Certainly nothing worthy of the "government cover-up" moniker.
