Charlie Foxtrot India
Thanks, you know I cant help myself.
I think we need to understand the original point made by me and supported by
Paul Phelan PS Mathematics 101
when he says.
The math doesn't work however, when the involvement results from a political directive. This time we're blaming the wrong people. And given their level of interest, I wouldn't be expecting much more from our alternative govenment either. Gotta go, I can feel an editorial coming on.
Even were they to have "known this would happen" when they opened Pandoras Box, and I am still arguing that it did not become "known" until a fair way through the process, (I said earlier there are still a large number of unforeseen wrinkles bubbling to the surface) in the absence of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the reply from Government would have been the same.
"We have made a committment to the travelling and set a date, it is not negotiable."
To their credit they listened to their Agencies and industry before Christmas and recognised that though the date for the receiving of applications is set in stone, there was overwhelming evidence and they granted an extension to the time for which they should be displayed in order to give the Agencies the time to finalise the processing.
The airport owners face significant financial penalties and loss, should their processes and responsibilities be later found wanting.
They must approach the management of their airports security with the utmost diligence, their fiduciary and legal responsibilities demand it.
So apart from the connectivity issue between Govt Agencies, their security obligations and concerns MUST also be satisfied, they are the places after all where you are required to wear you ASIC, they are working hard on to minimise the impact on themselves and therefore you.
They are entitled to do this in a orderly fashion and that too takes time.
Not surprisingly we have seen here, angry posts by PPRuNers who had not applied by the advertised date.
There is no excuse, except for exceptional circumstances.
I do recognise your specific plight in regard to your flying holiday and overseas pilot training market and the damage and issue were mentioned specifically yesterday by both myself and the airport operator and taken on board. They were already very much aware, but powerless in the face of the Govt directive.
Compensation? that question when raised specifically in relation to you and the other operator was met honestly with the response that it was way above their pay grade and it is. Out of the 190 something airports affected there are only a handful that have suffered such. It's little solace but its been about the big picture.
BTW you can stop calling me Shirley
Paul Phelan again;
This time we're blaming the wrong people.
the wizard of auz
What was the name of the station near you out the back of nowehere, that that Japanese cult (was it the Moonies or Mooners.
) used to make their Sarin gas and did they fly in and out of Oz with it.
sorry
Sunfish no, it was an Airports and Regional Industry meeting. The had their own meeting with the Minister, where they were also told it was not negotiable and they apparently as have many others suggested some ways that it could be fixed.
There is already a new process with new staff using the lessons of the past including connectivity, well in train for the future which I understand will be announced at an appropriate time, it will not address the current issue which is receiving competent high level attention, first things first.
QSK? correct.
There are however many more people beyond pilots who need an ASIC and the access card usually related to there employment at that particular airport.
Your point has in fact been very widely canvassed amongst the aiport owners.
It is not available to DOTARS to
"tell" the individual airport owners what they should/can and shouldn't/cannot do on their own airports, beyond
requiring a Transport Security Plan that they can approve or not approve according to the regulations governing them.
The owners will respond and configure their airport according to what they individually believe is the best and most cost efficient means available to them, it's intended use and within the limits of the funding
provided by Government and their own often limited resources.
Whether the manner in which they choose to configure their airport encourages or discourages its use beyond RPT or whatever is a local ownership decision and must be fought at that level.
So hands up all those who supported the sale of Commonwealth/FAC airports.
