Scrubba # above "Hoody is right where he needs to be right now –etc.
Good point, agreed. Hood was mentioned only to highlight the stark differences between department attitudes. It's timely and 'proper' that ASA have someone to straighten out the mess left behind. The only cloud I can see is that of fiscal embuggerance; ASA need to spend some dollars. There is an example of some of the problems Mrdak, Staib and Hood have to deal with. See –
Hansard - Turn 60 - pages 74 to 76. This Edwards joker is banging on about a department not making as much profit, not about how ASA can recover. Not about how can we sort out the situation where an event like this–
Airservices loose two A330 – (Ben Sandilands), can occur while not only does the Senator expect ASA to fix that up and still make 'more' profit. Makes you wonder, don't it?
Senator EDWARDS: Being a good business operator, when I heard that the division had made $62 million last year I said, 'How do we get into that business?' I found out we could not, because it is a monopoly. So, what we have now is a forecast of a 30 per cent drop in net profit to that division. I am sure the Treasurer will be very interested to know that and the reasons why. So, let's pre-empt him and see if we can find out why.
Read that one again, carefully. What is this man saying about himself?
Senator EDWARDS: With all due respect to what I thought was going to be a short answer for Senator Sterle so that he could get on with his questions, could you actually flesh out—you just have short notes there—what changes in accounting principles have led you to this on all of those? Can you provide a reasonably fulsome explanation as to those points which you have made with me as to why you are going to be short on last year's result? Since you have given me increased revenues, you may quite rightly be trying to draw a correlation between increased revenues meaning that more people on the ground had to do more work. As a proportion of wages spent to profit earned from last year, are we going to be in an appropriate performance quartile or area that you are happy or not happy with? As chief executive officer you are accountable for profitability.
Senator EDWARDS: I am not trying to jump in on this one, but we do need an explanation. If you could provide a fulsome report in a timely manner and not just prior to the next estimates as to what it is, we will have a discussion. It will be very evident to you if there is some line item in there that is going to create a problem, and I am sure you will be able to address it. But obviously now that we have tackled the issue, let us get the answers as to why that is showing up the way it is. A 30 per cent fall in profit without an explanation out there in private land would be a significant event.
Nope, Hoody can have that job. How would you like to deal with the arrogance and greed on display in the quoted paragraphs. The same idiot would be howling the bloody roof down if 'his' aircraft had a close call one dark and stormy. Air Traffic Control is not a cash cow for politicians to milk, it's an essential service, the management of which has become a hell of a mess. So perhaps the gummint will just have to bite the bullet and withstand a loss of 10 million or so, just in case we bump a couple of aircraft together; saving a few pennies here and few pennies there. Why should the ASA be driven to make a profit and why should they be browbeaten about a profit loss? Shee-it, an inquiry into a mid air will cost a lot more than the loss of a profit percentage for a couple of years; just while the boys and girls sort it all out.
“For the want of a nail the shoe was lost,
For the want of a shoe the horse was lost,
For the want of a horse the rider was lost,
For the want of a rider the battle was lost,
For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost,
And all for the want of a horseshoe-nail.”
(Benjamin Franklin).