You got me wrong; I'm not suggesting that the roles be interchangeable, but the ORGANISATION of the operations could or SHOULD be amalgamated. (and the Minister for toe-nail clippings can be just as easily transported via available assets from Police et al as by chartering a 30 yr old PA31). (also, flying an injured patient out of a bush strip should NOT be any different organisationally to flying ministers hither and yon. The same imperatives and restrictions should - MUST - apply. "Can the mission be flown safely, legally and efficiently? Yes = go; No = NO GO. Patient condition, age, situation blah blah blah does not - or SHOULD NOT - enter into the equation.)
I can also categorically GUARANTEE that "AIDS infected junkie" (s) have and do routinely travel in medical aircraft. (& BTW, if you are involved in moving passengers by air, there is a fairly high possibility that you have also moved "AIDS infected junkie" (s) - they don't come with a hazard label.)
It is the ORGANISATION SAFETY CULTURE and mentality that needs to be assured; this can best be done with a single organisational approach. It is the ability of the 'whole of Government' to be able to access aircraft and crews that reflect this suitable SAFETY CULTURE, flying modern aeroplanes, that is vital.
As to the rotary-wing services, having money put in by community groups - laudable as it may be - does not excuse unsuitable aircraft and localised organisations lacking the SAFETY CULTURE that is required to operate these missions. If the missions are there in sufficient numbers to warrant the aircraft, then the aircraft should be a government owned and operated entity, with the SAFETY CULTURE of the best-practice organisations currently functioning. Certainly, community input never goes astray when paying the bills, but it cannot be the governing factor for the operation. Perhaps if the services WERE fewer, they could be better / more efficiently run and coordinated?
I reiterate that Qld is NOT a copybook to look at as the epitome of Government Aerial Operations. Certain parts of it perhaps, some areas definately; but not the whole.
Standardisation - why not? Need a pressurised twin turbine - go the KA200/350, for Aeromed, Executive, Police, General CHTR. Want short / rough field capabilities for aeromed or police ops? then its the C208. Need to be point A to point B in a hurry, executive-wise? The HS125 / Citation Ulta or whatever is the best available product. Gotta get a Chopper? The best available, IFR capable, twin turbine medium lift available, whatever the organisations collectively decide is the best thing. Decide on the fleet, standardise as much as possible across the users, and keep the fleet young. This would HAFTA be a better approach than the usual rag-tag collection.....wouldn't it?
As to the budget issue, if it needs to be done and air is the best way, then the best available should be the standard, not the cheapest available. If the cost makes it non-viable, then it didn't need to be done in the first place.
Cheers.