Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Merged: Senate Inquiry

Old 30th Aug 2013, 02:48
  #1401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
If the new government is serious about changing the direction of aviation policy then create an aviation ministry and not lump it with transport and regional services. It is too easy for governments of all persuasions to palm off aviation policy under the transport umbrella and the Minister to claim that there are more important issues. The consensus seems to be that aviation policy started to deteriorate 25 years ago, doesn't that coincide with the absorbtion of aviation into the transport portfolio?

A Minister for Aviation will only need to focus on one thing and not be able to dodge thorny issues like Senate Inquiries. An aviation minister would also be able to keep his public servants in line and not given the "safety" runaround as an answer to all attempts to change the status quo. At least having a separate ministry would allow the Deputy PM to maintain the Transport and Regional Services portfolio and allow someone like Senator Fawcett to have a portfolio that matches his experience.

I still maintain that we won't see any changes until mid next year at the earliest. If I am wrong I will be pleasantly surprised.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2013, 03:58
  #1402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Great Southern Land
Posts: 74
The Coalition's policy for aviation is now available. The link below provides a download from Zippyshare; as it's been a while, please remember only click the large red "DOWNLOAD NOW" button on the top right corner of the page.

Coalition Policy for Aviation – 13 pages, 30 second download.

P18. a.k.a. Blind Freddy.
PAIN_NET is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2013, 04:34
  #1403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
The only firm commitment I can see is to decide on where to put the 2nd Sydney Airport! The rest of it is to promise to review the state of the industry with no timetable for a final report. Those holding their breath will need to hold a lot longer.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2013, 05:26
  #1404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Can't remember who asked, but yes the Screaming Skull is on the Fort Fumble Board. I have attached the original confirmation letter from the Chief Board Bureaucrat to the Minister for Mascot:

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/dep...pointments.pdf
004wercras is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2013, 10:40
  #1405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,383
We live in interesting times

I'm not sure of the exact amount, but Australia's regulator has squandered a quarter billion dollars or so over the past twenty years, allegedly "reforming" regulations. Replacing a modest number of pages into thousands to allegedly improve "safety". Have they achieved the stated goal? Compared with the worlds biggest aviation country nope!
NZ on the other hand expended around five million dollars and a few years and reformed theirs and from informed sources did a pretty good job, so much so that quite a few other countries around the globe chose to adopt them. Did they achieve their stated goal? Yep!
Todays Australian has some interesting articles, not a single job add for pilots though, same at the AFPAP websight except for three in NZ.

Encouraging for Mr.Truss to be calling for an inquiry into the regulator as part of the coalitions policy. It is now incumbent on us all to bombard his office to reinforce the industries displeasure at the current state of affairs and hold the coalition to account for their promises.
Also in the Australian.
The Kiwi's seem to have another thing right to, with a call to copy them on air services.

The telling piece I thought was Air New Zealand announcing a 156 % increase in profit, when our lot can only manage a token five million and a massive loss. One could be forgiven for imagining that things seem to be going rather well in aviation land over there. Of course it couldn't be that the burden and cost of over regulation here is so onerous that it is becoming impossible for industry to make a profit. Are we heading back to the old two airline days of the sixties and seventies when a ticket from Sydney to Melbourne was around five hundred bucks...what would that be in todays dollars? Oh well there goes the tourist industry along with the GA industry, does CAsA care? they don't have to!

Last edited by thorn bird; 30th Aug 2013 at 10:42.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2013, 23:04
  #1406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
What cracks me up is that there are still suckers around who appear to have forgotten the last three or so regurgitations of the same empty rhetoric.

A “review”.

A “restructure”.

A new “strategic direction”.

A “strengthened Board” with “aviation expertise”.

(With acknowledgement and apologies to HL Mencken): No political party ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the Australian public.

The future of aviation regulation and accident investigation in Australia will be determined by whoever has the balance of power in the Senate.

Last edited by Creampuff; 30th Aug 2013 at 23:04.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2013, 23:17
  #1407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 304
At least a positive sign. Although I think the comment about increasing the CASA Board from 4 to 6 totally misses the point. Its is not the size of the Board that matters but the quality of the directors, people who REALLY understand every corner of the industry AND can run a business... the current directors sadly continue to build on their own unimpressive record... time for complete change!
hiwaytohell is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 04:00
  #1408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,935
Folks,
Both Virgin and Qantas would have posted very different bottom lines, had there been no carbon tax.
Virgin publicly attribute a large percentage of loss to the carbon tax.

Another point about the comparison between the operations of Air NZ and Qantas --- having the right aeroplanes for the job, ie: fuel efficient, is a very telling factor, and ANZ will move further ahead in the efficiency stakes when, in the near future, they take delivery of B787-9s.

And when is Qantas going to see some fuel efficient aircraft in the fleet??

Creamie,
The first thing that is different, this time, is the intellect of Senator David Fawcett, and the acceptance, by Truss and others, that AMROBA's "iron ring" in CASA actually exists, and must be dealt with, if CASA is to be resurrected in some form that is not aggressively anti aviation.

There is a commitment to taking "the rules" away from CASA, a clear recognition that NZ have it right, and our regulatory direction is misguided, despite all the money that has been spent. the last actual "reform" saw the light of day in 1998.

Perhaps the second is that, this time, there is a recognition by the big end of town that their operations have been severely hit, cost wise, the saga of getting Part 145 approvals being the breaker.

We now have equality of enforcement, the majors are being shafted, not just GA.

The majors also know that the treatment of Tiger was unjustified, buy was and is symptomatic of an aggressive and ill-directed CASA.

If you are a turkey that votes for Christmas, vote Labor.

Tootle pip!!

The Coalition?s plan for Aviation | Liberal Party of Australia

As well a previous Pain.net post, there is a link here to the LNP policy.

Last edited by LeadSled; 31st Aug 2013 at 04:17.
LeadSled is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 05:30
  #1409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
So why do they need to have a “high level external review of aviation safety and regulations” by a “prominent member of the international aviation community”?

Why did Mr Truss announce that “a Coalition government would not proceed with changes until the review was completed.”?

What is it that the Coalition doesn’t already know about what needs to be done?

Why won’t the Coalition commit to making immediate changes to aviation safety and regulations, based on the formidable intellects and overwhelming pieces of evidence that are, apparently, already available to it?
Creampuff is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 05:57
  #1410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Why won’t the Coalition commit to making immediate changes to aviation safety and regulations
Why do anything, except wait for next weeks party?

The announcement appears to be at least something to look forward to, instead of looking back at the last six years of "hard labor".

That and the in house "regulatory review process" can stand alone on their respective merits and dismal legacy.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 11:23
  #1411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
Anyone want to take a guess at who the Aviation Expert will be that the new gummint will bring in to provide clarity on the current mess? I vote 1 Brian Aherne.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 11:33
  #1412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Wouldn't that be a conflict of interest? Ahernes wife/partner and her business partners litigated against CAsA and won a settlement. May be a little too close to the fire.
He also hasn't been very 'diplomatic' with his statements about a number of his former employers including CAsA, ATSB, SACL and the VIC Police helicopter wing.
And finally, aligning himself with Quinn? That won't do your reputation much good.

Last edited by 004wercras; 31st Aug 2013 at 20:21. Reason: Correction - ViC air wing
004wercras is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 13:05
  #1413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Q&A

At least Quinn & Aherne had the balls to face up to this publicly and in the Senate. Maybe it might help if more Ppruners go public rather than whinging here. It takes guts to put your name on the line as individuals not backed by corporations with endless funds. I'm about to do so!
Jinglie is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 13:15
  #1414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Aherne

004, exactly what were his "statements" about CaSa, SACL, ATSB, and the NSW Air Wing employees? General slander in my view knowing the guy. And I think he worked for the Vic Air Wing.

Last edited by Jinglie; 31st Aug 2013 at 13:53.
Jinglie is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 20:31
  #1415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Jinglie, out of curioisty, why not bring Quinn back instead? He has the higher level experience?
004wercras is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 23:46
  #1416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
If you saw the body language of Quinn and Aherne in the Senate my money would still be on Aherne as someone who could handle the pressure of public scrutiny. BTW I doubt either gentlemen will be picked.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2013, 23:55
  #1417 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Somehow I doubt either would want the poison chalice! When you read their submissions I think the bridges were burnt intentionally.
Jinglie is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2013, 00:48
  #1418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Jinglie, don't get me wrong mate, I like Aherne. And he would do a much better job in any position at CAsA than the arse clowns who currently inhabit the upper tier. I don't think he has the measured diplomacy for the role, that's all.
Quinn doesn't deserve another shot. The Screaming Skull simply finished the job that Byron didn't have the balls or the support to do, and that was show him the door. Quinn has the intelligence, but those who have worked in the higher levels of QF, EK or CAsA know exactly why he will never return He probably thinks he may get a guernsey, and he did have a particularly strong sponsor in Government (that's politics for you), but his day has passed.

It's going to take more that a restructure to fix decades of shite anyway. Until some accountability is introduced and the wrongs are all righted just taking a scalp or two will do little.
004wercras is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2013, 03:01
  #1419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
004, fair call. He wasn't shown the door, he opened it himself after being continually undermined by several fort fumbles senior managers, some who remain! Seeing the mess now, smart call.
Aherne would be brilliant in Beakers slot.
Jinglie is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2013, 03:35
  #1420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Yes Jinglie I agree, Aherne would easily fill the Beakers shoes. And yes he left the aforementioned organisations off his own back. The same dross that didn't accept his ilk are certainly still wandering the halls of Sleepy Hollow plying their trade. CAsA's iron ring will pineapple anybody that stands up to them, against them, or who won't polish their shoes or rectums with an eager tongue. The dross I speak of hold the Australian public, aviation industry, internal staff, senators, everybody basically in contempt.

I'm now starting to think that we may need an outsider from the CAA or FAA, NTSB.......Mary Schiavo comes to mind, thats one woman with giant nuts I like the scope of some of the activities she has headed and changes she has made, and she would never allow a Skull, Beaker, Mrdork or Albanese push her about.....f#cked if I know, just hope that Truss is willing to lay his plumbs on the line starting next weekend?

Last edited by 004wercras; 1st Sep 2013 at 03:37.
004wercras is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.