Love it “K”:
Anyway – the hot rumour is, our Wodger has a weport drafted which eloquently explains it all away; so it may be truthfully said four years later we made such a good effort and are so compliant that the Federal Minister for Transport is now staring down the barrel of the AAT system. Even if the case is not good enough to stick; there's a funny, bitter sweet irony and a good dose of poetic justice involved. The LNP must be drooling in delight. Mac Comical – I'm loving it.
And how embarrassing indeed for Albo to be going to the AAT on a matter that was picked up in the FAA audit and is yet to be effectively addressed by certain members of his circus troupe. And what was it that was stated on Airports in the ‘Great White Elephant Act’? Well let’s get a feel for the ‘Airport Planning and Development’ section in the GWEA:
Conditions for aviation infrastructure investment will be optimised by:
· removing the requirement for a Major Development Plan assessment for high priority, low impact aviation facilities;
· providing the Australian Government Minister with discretion to reduce the public comment period around Major Development Plans where the material features of the proposed development have already been addressed in Master Plan consultations; and
· the development of national airport safeguarding measures, which will ensure that airport operations are subject to minimal unnecessary constraints from nearby construction and development.
And from the 'Safeguarding airports' section (this is particularly relevant in light of DF's continued campaign):
· work with state and territory governments and authorities to strengthen arrangements to protect airspace around airports:
– address potential risks to aviation safety arising from inappropriate developments in the vicinity of aerodromes;
– ask that all states and territories put in place statutory powers and regulations to prohibit unauthorised construction that penetrates the published OLS and PANS-Ops surfaces for all airports;
– strengthen requirements for notice of proposed developments in areas where protected airspace might be affected a proposed structure, by cranes or other equipment used during construction, plumes or other gaseous emissions;
– extend the coverage of operational airspace safeguards to all registered airports and aerodromes including incorporating requirements for notification to CASA and Airservices Australia of potentially impacting developments;
– prevent unnecessary interference to aviation technical facilities, such as radar, from new buildings in the vicinity of airports;
– prevent unnecessary lighting and other pilot distractions from off-airport sources; and
Well if the Archerfield case is an example of the GWEA in action then ‘god help us’ and Albo needs to ‘please explain’!
Oleo:
Aagh yes, It was not me Senator, I know nothing, I wasn't here then, I was in Montreal, I was in a different position, I had a bad case of crotch rot...........Bollocks. Cromarty is one of Team Skulls top management players and is another 'used car salesmean'.
Thought you might pick up on those statements Oleo but you missed this one from the Minister rep Senator Carr:
Senator Carr: It is a bit unfair to put it to these officers. A decision was made and signed off, as I understand, by Minister Anderson at the time of the previous government. It really is a bit difficult to pursue the matter with officers some years later.
And then this classic line of government obfuscation (the GWEA) which totally sh#t canned the last inquiry:
Senator Carr: Be fair. The minister put out a white paper on these issues, the first that had ever actually been produced by the Commonwealth. It outlined the procedures with regard to planning for development around airports. You have raised some issues with regard to one site, which the department has undertaken to have a look at. But I do think we have to get this in context; none of this work was ever done before.
Senator FAWCETT: My point is that this is not just around Archerfield. It is also around the Sydney Basin, and this is a clear indication that what has been put in place in terms of a process is not being applied, monitored or audited. My question is: what checks and balances are in place from the department to make sure that the processes that are laid down are actually being followed and adhered to? What independent body audits or checks the application of these processes?
“Nothing to see here…move along”...or..."the answers are in the GWEA!"
Alrighty back to those FAA NCNs…..