Whilst I think that the rhetoric from both camps is a little laced with sarcasm I think one must look a little broader than just a monopoly protectionist.
The Singaporeans barely tolerate us. The arguement that it will provide a reduced price is theoretical not practical. Unforunately this indistry like many others is governed by those think tank economists who look at a graph, modelled on the real world but with none of the dynamics or politics of it thrown in. Thus to them the move either positive or negative. They take into account nothing otherthan the cold economic theory.
Would I trust them,not on your life. Look at our manufacturing sector, textiles clothing and footwear, even our rural sector. All scouged by the logic that more competition is a better thing. It may be on a computer model, but for those displaced workers i don't think so. Why is is that under the guise of competition policy do we need to give away advantage. Why are our industries the fall guys for a high brow admirable plan that none of the world actually follows. Most nations protect vast slabs of their economy. There was a time when air routes were considered a national asset.
If Singapore is so concerned by the fares that the poor old Aussie battler is paying, how about they start looking at the thinner routes not already flown or abandoned by others to show their real concern for the plight of australians.
The little island state is a grubby two bit dictatorship, that smiles through a shiny highly polished veneer, all the while covering up the tainted, tacky, dodgy and sleezy interior.
Ive said it before, QF management need to be held accountable, they need to provide direction for their staff, but I don't think that allowing Singapore access to one route will give them the wake up call that Sunfish and others allude to. Let's not forget we are 35,000 employees that don't need our noses cut off to spite our faces.
