ABC's Q&A filming in Tamworth June 6th - action please

[Horatio Leafblower]

Hi guys

Qand A is filming in Tamworth next week - let's make sure the media appreciates the Small Aircraft Industry (General Aviation) is being crushed.

Here's my question:

For Barnaby Joyce and Joel Fitzgibbon: The small aircraft industry provides critical connections for regional Australia yet both parties ignore the over-regulation of the Industry.
Recent industry rallies in Tamworth have been attended by Windsor, Joyce and Chester yet all parties stand by while CASA over-regulation crushes family businesses under administrative burden.
You move bad regulations for the benefit of Trucking and for Mining - yet ignore this critical service industry.

Please lodge your own question HERE (http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/ask-question.htm)

Please think about asking an 80-word question along the lines below, or simply cut and paste one of the longer ones below.

You might notice I have avoided using the phrase "General Aviation" because not many people in the general public know what "GA" is.... but they all understand what Small Aeroplanes are.

- Part 61 is a mess (discuss)
- Part 142 - applied to small aeroplanes - will crush charter businesses (...because... discuss)
- Small aeroplanes cannot absorb the same overheads as a A380 (safety managers, maintenance managers, risk assessments, etc etc etc)
- small aeroplane regulation cannot operate to the same level as big aeroplane regulation (because we cannot manage the same costs)
- small aeroplanes deliver freight, health services, justice services, social services, tourists and business people to regional communities yet Airport infrastructure privatisation and CASA regulations are starving us of a service critical to any small town's economy. Why is no party willing to reform aviation rules to help grow these services?
- New Zealand and the USA have much thinner rule sets allowing more freedom to Small Aircraft operators. Their Small Aircraft safety statistics are similar to, or better than ours. Why are we crippling our Small Aircraft industry with rule sets that are world's worst practice?
- Aviation Regulatory reform has taken more than 25 years and cost the Australian taxpayer more than $______bn, yet it is only half finished. Those parts that are finished have necessitated the issue of dozens of legislative exemptions to be workable, and Part 61 has had to be completely re-written. Who will commit to saving the small aircraft industry from this cost and regulatory burden?

If we can get 20-30 people posting onto the QANDA website questions such as these we have a chance of lifiting the profile of the issue.

Over to you guys. Please post here when you have uploaded a question so we have some idea how much impact we have made.

Again, you can post on the ABC's website HERE (http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/ask-question.htm)

[log0008]

Please make Part 61 the priority guys. IF ya really nice include a bit about CVD

[Horatio Leafblower]

Nice one Nibbles

[PLovett]

To add to Nibbles question, it should be asked why is the regulatory re-write required by ICAO compliance been used to massively increase the regulatory burden and cost when there is no quantifiable or demonstrable increase in safety. Generally, most GA operators know how to run a safe operation and that goes doubly for the airlines.

[tail wheel]

The regulatory re-write began in 1988, 28 years ago. Well over $400 million has been flushed down the CASA gurgler.

Is this indeed Australia's own "Never Ending Story"?

[chimbu warrior]

The regulatory re-write began in 1988, 28 years ago. Well over $400 million has been flushed down the CASA gurgler.

Is this indeed Australia's own "Never Ending Story"?

How stupid does Australia look when he Kiwis have had simple, practical and understandable rules for over 20 years, and no doubt enacted at a fraction of the cost.

Most Pacific island nations (including PNG) have adopted the NZ rules, so we are now surrounded by third world nations who have a far superior regulatory framework than Australia does.

[Duck Pilot]

Who from CASA (if anyone) is attending this does anyone know?

Concur with you Chimbu.

[CoftC]

For the last 27 years Australia has led the world in enabling Colour Vision Defective pilots to fly commercially at night and in poor weather conditions - without a single accident proven attributable to CVD, worldwide. If 1 in 12 males are born with some colour vision defect, why is CASA now discriminating against CVD pilots, particularly new applicants, denying them a career in Aviation through illegal testing with no statistical safety case whatsoever?

[log0008]

For the last 27 years Australia has led the world in enabling Colour Vision Defective pilots to fly commercially at night and in poor weather conditions - without a single accident proven attributable to CVD, worldwide. If 1 in 12 males are born with some colour vision defect, why is CASA now discriminating against CVD pilots, particularly new applicants, denying them a career in Aviation through illegal testing with no statistical safety case whatsoever?
Thank you CoftC, Its people like you who make want me to be a member of the aviation community. As a CVD person I have recently failed the first stage of testing for a class 1 and will be heading into Melbourne soon to see if i can some how pass the other tests available, which clearly do not have any application to flying a plane.

[gerry111]

I'm just refreshing the thread as it has become very quiet. The ABC Q&A programme is now less than a week away.


Where is 'aviationadvertiser'?

[Progressive]

How about
Why did CASA (in its rush to adopt EASA regs) introduce an Aircraft maintenance license system which did not provide a pathway for light aircraft maintenance engineers, leaving apprentices, employers and training providers in limbo for over 10 years (Since NPRM0604MS) and dividing the industry between qualifications?

[Tinstaafl]

Why did CASA choose to model its new regulations after JAR/EASA - a densely populated region with a relatively tiny general aviation industry compared to its very large airline industry, and arguably a system that is unnecessarily extremely expensive & burdensome without achieving any safer outcomes - instead of the USA's FARs, NZ regulations or even Canada's regulations? USA, NZ & Canada have an active industry at all levels and, except for NZ's size, are characterised by large areas of low population density that rely on non-large airline aviation services.

[thorn bird]

"Why did CASA choose to model its new regulations after JAR/EASA"

Tins,
Casa adopted EASA rules in name only. What they produced is nothing like EASA,
who do not even recognise our engineering standards.
It is interesting to note the Europeans have recognised their "one size fits all" regulations have been a disaster, especially for the GA sector in Europe, they have embarked on a rewrite of their regulations.
Even in the UK they have recognised they have killed off their GA industry with over regulation and are now actively attempting to "Foster and Promote" whats left of their GA industry.
Murky Mandarins in Australia have subverted Acts and directions to "Foster and Promote" even Murkier entities to the detriment of aviation. Our airports and those that control them are a prime example. Our aviation infrastructure is depreciating to third world levels while those entities sock away billions of tax free dollars in offshore tax havens. Is it coincidental that development sharks are also the biggest political donors?
I have heard Bankstown airport has again been sold, even as the last lot are engaged in a law suite war, fighting over the spoils one would imagine. The new owner, another development shark, considers he's bought a bargain. I wonder if he is aware of the levels of contamination that exist under Bankstown's airport soil?

[Horatio Leafblower]

Hi guys

I will be attending Q&A in Tamworth, I might even get to ask a question.

Make sure you log onto the Q&A website and lodge an Aviation Policy question so the buggers know that this IS an issue for rural/regional communities.

Cheers

[Clare Prop]

To add to thornbird's comment, why are these developers allowed to seize, without any compensation, lawfully acquired assets and force tenants to rent back properties they developed themselves (as required under the FAA) at vastly inflated prices?
When was the right to quiet enjoyment of a lease removed and replaced by allowing unconscionable behaviour towards tenants?
Does any minister have the guts to take this on and admit the privatisation of the airports has been a complete failure for all but an elite of developers and try to reverse some of the damage before it is too late?

[rutan around]

Horatio,
Do you know how to see all the questions submitted for the next Q&A? I just looked at the most recent 200 questions and couldn't see one relating to aviation. 200 questions only went back a couple of days. Has anyone submitted an aviation question more than a couple of days ago?

[Horatio Leafblower]

Rootin

No idea mate.
I think the ones on the QandA website are the ones APPROVED by the moderators...

Keep pushing guys!

[muddergoose]

Rutan,

I submitted last weekend but it was not included. Thinking about, ABC is into global warming, green energy and minimal carbon footprints. I don't think they would give two hoots about aviation until the time comes when it is not freely available to them for putting their stories together.

[Lead Balloon]

Alas, it appears all the aviation-related questions have been ... well ... there's no other word for it .... censored.

One only needs to read the many questions 'approved' for publication that have been asked by the likes of "Pedro" to see that the criteria for non-'approval' can't have much to do with the merits or validity of the question.

Either that, or the work experience kid who does the 'approval' had an appointment with the orthodontist and detention today. :confused:

[gerry111]

Lead Balloon,

I'll take that as a comment..

Who would have thought? :*

[le Pingouin]

Censored? Hardly. It might be hard to accept but GA isn't exactly foremost (somewhere far to the rear most likely, if anywhere) in the minds of most Australians - it's hardly surprising it's considered a fringe issue.

The problem is you're trying to create an issue that doesn't exist in the public mind, rather than address an existing one.

[Lead Balloon]

Bizarre reasoning, Le p.

So the ABC gets to decide what's a "fringe" issue and gag anyone who wants merely to post a question about it on a taxpayer-funded program website, in the hope that it might get a little more public intention.

Here's one of the 'approved' questions, dealing with an issue that must be important to many people:"all governments extort money by use of illegal speed measuring devices see Federal weight&measures /speed measuring devices it says the cameras must be tested every six months ===
what will you do to correct this rip off
under Federal law state steal from motorists" - peter bucknell I can't recall the last time anyone I know said anything about illegal speed measuring devices.

My theory continues to be that the work experience kid who 'approves' the question was on detention or at an orthodontist's appointment yesterday. A deliberate decision not to publish questions about an issue judged by the ABC as a "fringe" issue would be a breathtakingly inappropriate action, even for the ABC.

[rutan around]

Well I don't know if we have much chance of getting a question onto Q&A. As far as I can tell 4 people including myself have submitted a question and 4 others might have. I hope there are lots out there who have but are just keeping quiet or aren't posting on prune. As of a few moments ago 2,909 people had read this thread. If most of them put in a question re aviation - ANY question , we might be in with a chance.

The problem is there are only 30 to 40 thousand of us so the powers that be couldn't really give a s*#t . Aboriginals don't get much of a go and there are over 10 times as many of them. Campbell Newman sacked 21,000 people when he started and that's about half our number. If our numbers are small we have to be strong and loud. Get writing lads and ladies. After the election is too late.

[le Pingouin]

And I can't recall the last time I hear someone I know mention GA other than on here and at work!

If that's your theory then why did you mention censorship in the first place other than to rile people?

[Lead Balloon]

My original post mentioned alternatives. Either censorship or the work experience kid who 'approves' the questions was in detention or at the orthodondist.

You are the one suggesting that a deliberate decision has been made not to approve the publication of any question on the Q&A website about the 'fringe' issue of GA. If that is true, that is censorship. Plain and simple. As I said, it would be so breathtakingly inappropriate that I would not have considered even the ABC to have engaged in that behaviour.

If it is true, I will be writing to Media Watch. I would encourage anyone who sent in a question that has not appeared on the website (noting that the decision whether to ask a question during the actual event is a different decision) to also write to Media Watch.

My supplementary point is that if the 'filter' is on the basis of what's a 'fringe' issue and what's not a fringe issue, there are plenty of questions published about what are, in my opinion, fringe issues. There are plenty of questions that I would judge as being from the lunatic fringe. But that's just my personal opinion.

Which is kinda the point about the inappropriateness of censorship on the basis of the ABC's judgment of what's a 'fringe' issue ....

[le Pingouin]

"Filtering" is not "censorship" unless you're paranoid. Neither of us knows the real reason.

[Lead Balloon]

Yes, that's me: paranoid. :ok:

If it's 'filtering' on the basis of someone in the ABC's opinion of what's a 'fringe' issue, that's censorship.

It's OK to 'filter' defamatory and obscene material. It's not OK for a taxpayer funded broadcaster and website to decide that all questions about a particular subject matter that a group of people consider important is not deserving of publication.

But note the word "if".

[le Pingouin]

What if it's filtering on the grounds of "boring, uninteresting and irrelevant"? Again note the "if".

To quote the Oxford dictionary, censorship is: "The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security"

Just because you can't get your voice heard doesn't make it censorship.

[le Pingouin]

I should add that I personally don't find GA boring, uninteresting or irrelevant, but there's a whole world out there that does.

[muddergoose]

If you submitted a question to this forum do you think your question was better than any of the following that found their way onto the QandA site?

30 May 2016 10:23:16pm "Politicians talk but say nothing, bad case of verbal diarrhoea" - Hele


30 May 2016 10:33:31pm "Steve is not a Qld Labor Mp !!! Why is your title popping up on the screen incorrectly!!!" - D kennedy


30 May 2016 9:56:22pm "Someone has been telling Lambie how to dress and look ,could she please get an English teacher" - steve rogers


30 May 2016 9:46:27pm "Can Nick & Jacquie be our first President and First Lady ??" - Jim Ent


30 May 2016 5:54:00pm "do you have any fans that u kiss" - milcent mae felix


30 May 2016 5:48:57pm "Have all questions got to be in by Friday afternoon? Please explain!" - Phil Kelly
A quick look through the message writers show:

David Anderson x 9 Questions
Pedro x 9 Questions
John Woods x 9 Questions
Barnacle Bob x 5 Questions
Samuel Crane x 3 Questions
Andrew Kearny x 2 Questions
Marilyn Beech x 2 Questions

Le Pingouin is right.....

[gerry111]

Whether Lead Balloon or le Pingouin were correct is now irrelevant. Having wasted one hour of my life watching the programme, there were no questions from GA supporters. :sad:

[Sunfish]

you guys still don't get it.

you are using the wrong model of political processes.

That is: make noise>>>media listens>>>media broadcasts>>>voters listen>>>politicians listen>>>government makes CASA change.

This fails at every level for reasons I and others have patiently explained before, to whit:

1.The media are overwhelmed with people clamouring to be heard, GA is not sufficiently newsworthy.

2. The general public are not listening, there are too many messages.

3. politicians ignore voters except in marginal seats.

4. GA and aviation regulation is about as popular with government as prison reform, it s safer for governments to let CASA go its merry way.


Here's an idea; I live in the electorate of Indi. it's held by an independent, Cathy McGowan. She took it from Tony Abbots darling Sophie Mirabella who is standing again. It's going to be a tight race this time again. why not spend your energy working to keep Sophie out and do the same in every marginal seat held by the government until they finally react?

can you raise enough resources to letter drop Benalla,Shepparton,Wangaratta with a message about jobs investment and growth in aviation in those areas and a plea to vote for Cathy? Wang airport is partially closed, the flying club and school are gone for subjects for starters, Mansfield can't get permission to build hangars thanks to NIMBYs, what are the issues at shep and Benalla?????

This is a simpler model: threaten politicians reelection prospects>>>politicians kick CASA in the ass.

[Al E. Vator]

Good post Sunfish.

[Tankengine]

The issue at Benalla is that the council has raised the rental of hangars and other buildings by a factor of about ten!! It is a total rip-off.
:(

[OZBUSDRIVER]

31 March: Draft airport lease proposals available for comment


The Council has released a draft lease agreement for users of the Benalla Airport as part of the Benalla Airport Master Plan, and is seeking community and user feedback.

Under the Master Plan, the airport is currently undergoing a $1.64 million redevelopment, with $715,253 from the Federal Government through the National Stronger Regions Fund, $500,000 from the State Government through the Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund, $421,550 from the Council and $8,000 from Airport user contributions. The redevelopment will improve the site for all users and increase its potential for expanded commercial use.

Currently there are 24 lessees of hangar space at the Benalla Airport. One third of the current lessees pay $151.64, or $2.92 per week, and 79% of the lessees pay less than $465 a year, or $9 a week. The total income from the site in 2014-15 was $9180.

While consultation on the draft agreements is under way, the Council is seeking further information to benchmark costs at other comparable facilities.

“Notwithstanding the strong shared volunteer maintenance arrangements at the site, the airport still costs the Council and ratepayers more than $35,000 per annum to manage at a basic level, excluding staff costs to support the users of the site,” said CEO Tony McIlroy.

“Lease arrangements must be reviewed to ensure that we are operating with a business model that supports the future growth of the site, for the benefit of all users,” Mr McIlroy said.

“There has been limited capital investment in the site over an extended period and while this may not disadvantage current users it does not support growth or broadening the use of the airport and ensuring future generations of recreational flying can continue in the town. It also doesn't allow us to strengthen and diversify our tourism and employment at the site,” he said.

“We have received a number of submissions about the draft agreement and this and other feedback will be considered as we further develop the model, which will be brought to the Planning and Development Committee on Wednesday 20 April 2016.”

There will be further opportunity for community consultation in June and July.




Be realistic when you go after the local council over rents. You will be labelled as rich pilots looking out for a freebie if you go at this all wrong. Best to get in amongst yourselves and try and minimise the costs much past that $35K minimum that council has telegraphed. Then get in and help them promote the investment.

[mostlytossas]

I wish I could get hangar space for less than $500/ year.At Parafield the annual fee for outside hardstand is over $2000/year in a hangar more like $5000 if you can get it.

[Captain Dart]

Benalla is not Parafield. It is two hours drive from Melbourne. It floods, taxiways are poor and there is no power or water except for the hangars near what passes for a 'tarmac'. The fuel facility is from 'The Beverly Hillbillies'.

Most of the hangars at Benalla are privately owned but the owners lease the land underneath their own building from the Council. The initial proposed rental increase is to $10 per square metre per year for the dirt under your own building, twice that figure for any commercial enterprise. Plus an unspecified annual fee for common areas upkeep determined by Council and 20 million bucks insurance cover...for the dirt under your own building.

[Lead Balloon]

The Benalla Aerodrome document does not mention the economic benefits of having the aerodrome, apart from the direct rental income. I will bet that if the aerodrome were shut down, the cost to the local economy would be in excess of $35,000 PA plus "staff costs to support the users of the site".

But I think local councils should extend this concept to other transport modes. I reckon local councils should put up toll gates on all roads that are maintained by the council, and charge all non-ratepayers for using those roads. After all, it's user pays and those 'outsiders' contribute nothing to the local economy, do they. :rolleyes:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

What council says and what the GFA say are disparate arguments. Both cannot be right.

....and the hook...World Gliding Championships January 2017!

[gerry111]

"..all roads that are maintained by the council.."

That would need to be legally defined. In my local area there are many roads that are the responsibility of the council.

That doesn't equate to them being maintained.;)

[Tankengine]

The federal and state grants came about largely due to the upcoming World Gliding Championships which will contribute some millions of dollars to the local economy.
The council is going to build a fence nobody wants with the money! (And a few other small upgrades)
If it was up to me we would move the comps in protest. :(

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Anyone sat down with the council and tried to help them understand what will help and what will not, tankengine?

Not taking a side here, good understanding on what pr spin councils do on feel good stuff. Also understand what aerodromes get if they are fully involved in the process.

[Tankengine]

Ozbusdriver, I really don't know, I live in a different state.