Merged: Senate Inquiry
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish,
We all sincerely hope it never happens, and you can bet your bottom dollar that all those that can prevent such an event have agreed on a common way to "cross their fingers".
We all sincerely hope it never happens, and you can bet your bottom dollar that all those that can prevent such an event have agreed on a common way to "cross their fingers".
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TICK TOCK Bloody Hell
Qantas planes in 'near-miss' over Great Australian Bight
Updated 5 minutes ago
Map: SA
Evasive action has been taken by the pilots of two Qantas aircraft to avoid hitting each other over the Great Australian Bight.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has confirmed the apparent "near-miss" between two aircraft about lunchtime.
CASA said evasive action was required when the aircraft got too close to each other.
Qantas confirmed two of its aircraft were involved, but denied there was any near-miss.
Airservices Australia, which manages air traffic controllers, said it was aware of the incident but could not make any further comment.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has been notified of the incident but says it is waiting for more information before deciding whether to investigate.
It is understood one flight had been heading from Sydney to Perth and the other from Perth to Sydney.
and Ben Sandilands:
Two Qantas jets involved in serious mid-air 'near miss' | Plane Talking
Updated 5 minutes ago
Map: SA
Evasive action has been taken by the pilots of two Qantas aircraft to avoid hitting each other over the Great Australian Bight.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has confirmed the apparent "near-miss" between two aircraft about lunchtime.
CASA said evasive action was required when the aircraft got too close to each other.
Qantas confirmed two of its aircraft were involved, but denied there was any near-miss.
Airservices Australia, which manages air traffic controllers, said it was aware of the incident but could not make any further comment.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has been notified of the incident but says it is waiting for more information before deciding whether to investigate.
It is understood one flight had been heading from Sydney to Perth and the other from Perth to Sydney.
and Ben Sandilands:
Two Qantas jets involved in serious mid-air 'near miss' | Plane Talking
Last edited by Up-into-the-air; 20th Sep 2013 at 04:38.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dry as dust.
It's a funny old world we live in; the world of the media is even stranger. There's a neat little Chris Merritt article tucked away in legal section of 'The Australian' which should be making headlines and discussed on those endless, dreary current affairs TV shows. The old adage "a burn on your arse don't hurt me none" seems appropriate. The - 'Rule of Law Institute' - has been chipping away at this issue for a while and I noticed a couple of similar articles in overseas publications recntly; but I guess if you are not one of the minority group who have been affected by this insidious, underhanded method of perverting or circumventing the law then there is no need to consider the matter......The Australian article reproduced on - ProAviation.
Phelan - This article appeared in the Legal Section of the Australian. Due to its relevance to the numerous actions being supported by ProAviation, we have copied it here. Should you wish to comment on or relate your own experiences with CAsA and the Model Litigant Directions, please comment below or contact us directly at [email protected] Alternatively write to the editor, The Australian.
Chris Merritt – THE Abbott government has been urged to overhaul the rules governing the conduct of federal agencies in court so the organisations with the worst behaviour can be identified.
The Australian - Research by the Rule of Law Institute has revealed a surge in breaches of the government’s legal services directions – which cover the conduct of federal agencies in court as well as the way in which they buy legal services.
The Australian - Research by the Rule of Law Institute has revealed a surge in breaches of the government’s legal services directions – which cover the conduct of federal agencies in court as well as the way in which they buy legal services.
Last edited by Kharon; 20th Sep 2013 at 20:35.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DSS-46 (Canberra Region)
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay folks. There are a small number of contributors on this thread that seem compelled to respond in tongues, sea shanties or riddles that many of our members have difficulty following.
This is a public forum - it's not a secret vehicle for a select few to slag out people in the spotlight at the moment. Please consider other members attempting to follow this thread and post accordingly.
TID
This is a public forum - it's not a secret vehicle for a select few to slag out people in the spotlight at the moment. Please consider other members attempting to follow this thread and post accordingly.
TID
sea shanties
"I dips me lid to the most wise TID!"
is no longer appropriate?
Given the new gummints program of reducing the number of departments I don't think that we are going to get a separation of aviation from the transport and regional services portfolio anytime soon. As for the former Minister now spruiking for Tony Abbot's old job I think his disdain and contempt for the Senate Inquiries(s) will have little bearing on whether the rankin file will elect him.
Last edited by Lookleft; 21st Sep 2013 at 04:42. Reason: I love the smell of smug vindication in the morning!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feathers-and the ruffling thereof.
Actually, shanty is considered slang by maritime experts; they are a sea chanty (chantey)...
Not sure whether it's the colossal arrogance, the amateurish attempt at literary criticism, the incredible presumption that a person may be told what to write, let alone how it must be presented; the thinly veiled misuse of 'moderation'; or, perhaps it's just the backhanded assumption that most readers are 'thick as' which I find most disappointing.
The previous, closed Senate thread finished with 831,340 views, this current one runs at 270,074. Since 0930 EST, Friday 30 October the thread has 19,947 views, about 900 a day.
I'd say the 'aunty shanty' mob were out voted, out gunned and most definitely out of order...Have a nice day y'all....
The freedom to not read any published article still exists - thank the gods....
Wiki:The term shanty most accurately refers to a specific style of work song belonging to this historical repertoire, however in recent, popular usage, the scope of its definition is sometimes expanded to admit a wider range of repertoire and characteristics, or to refer to a “maritime work song” in general.
The previous, closed Senate thread finished with 831,340 views, this current one runs at 270,074. Since 0930 EST, Friday 30 October the thread has 19,947 views, about 900 a day.
I'd say the 'aunty shanty' mob were out voted, out gunned and most definitely out of order...Have a nice day y'all....
Wiki - Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship. It occurs in a variety of different contexts including speech, books, music, films, and other arts, the press, radio, television, and the Internet for a variety of reasons including national security, to control obscenity, child pornography, and hate speech, to protect children, to promote or restrict political or religious views, and to prevent slander and libel. It may or may not be legal. Many countries provide strong protections against censorship by law, but none of these protections are absolute and it is frequently necessary to balance conflicting rights in order to determine what can and cannot be censored.
Last edited by Kharon; 21st Sep 2013 at 21:08.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DSS-46 (Canberra Region)
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's really quite simple, Kharon - there is no freedom of speech anywhere on PPRuNe, because the laws of defamation and slander still apply.
Take a moment to refresh your memory on the rules you agreed to when signing up.
I'm constantly getting messages asking what the thread is about and what all the code means. So I'm dealing with these complaints. You don't have to like it - the mod team have to make decisions on how threads are moderated (if at all).
I've made a simple and reasonable request. Whether you choose to follow this request is up to you
"No further correspondence will be entered into".
Take a moment to refresh your memory on the rules you agreed to when signing up.
I'm constantly getting messages asking what the thread is about and what all the code means. So I'm dealing with these complaints. You don't have to like it - the mod team have to make decisions on how threads are moderated (if at all).
I've made a simple and reasonable request. Whether you choose to follow this request is up to you
"No further correspondence will be entered into".
The MLR the new AG & Truss response??
Kharon:
Love the title of the Merrit article..."Let's name, shame agenciesbehaving badly"...but honestly where would you start??
Perhaps Ms Burns has the solution for Senator Brandis..."Ms Burns said the Attorney-General's Department should be required to disclose the exact nature of each breach of the legal services directions as well as identifying the agency involved, what they had done wrong and what action had been taken"...
&...." The agencies at fault should be required to provide a statement outlining what redress had been provided to the parties adversely affected by their conduct.
She also urged the new government to introduce a formal system of dealing with complaints about the courtroom conduct of government agencies instead of relying on the agencies to report their own shortcomings.
She was concerned that the large number of alleged breaches still under investigation suggested that many matters had been carried over from the previous year.
Ms Burns said the institute would like to see the commonwealth's obligations under the model litigant rules enacted as legislation"...
But how much of the current malaise and lack of accountability by government agencies is as a result of the previous shambolic ALP administration??
Hmm..either way the new AG has definitely got his work cut out for him, it will be interesting to see if he has the ticker to even tackle the problem much like Truss and the PelAir Senate report..
...latest from Plane talking:
Gee Ben is like a dog with a bone on this one...
The - 'Rule of Law Institute' - has been chipping away at this issue for a while and I noticed a couple of similar articles in overseas publications recntly; but I guess if you are not one of the minority group who have been affected by this insidious, underhanded method of perverting or circumventing the law then there is no need to consider the matter......
Perhaps Ms Burns has the solution for Senator Brandis..."Ms Burns said the Attorney-General's Department should be required to disclose the exact nature of each breach of the legal services directions as well as identifying the agency involved, what they had done wrong and what action had been taken"...
&...." The agencies at fault should be required to provide a statement outlining what redress had been provided to the parties adversely affected by their conduct.
She also urged the new government to introduce a formal system of dealing with complaints about the courtroom conduct of government agencies instead of relying on the agencies to report their own shortcomings.
She was concerned that the large number of alleged breaches still under investigation suggested that many matters had been carried over from the previous year.
Ms Burns said the institute would like to see the commonwealth's obligations under the model litigant rules enacted as legislation"...
But how much of the current malaise and lack of accountability by government agencies is as a result of the previous shambolic ALP administration??
Hmm..either way the new AG has definitely got his work cut out for him, it will be interesting to see if he has the ticker to even tackle the problem much like Truss and the PelAir Senate report..
...latest from Plane talking:
Adelaide near hit by two A330s: How to calibrate its seriousness?
It doesn’t matter whether the vertical separation between the two Qantas A332s involved in Friday’s near hit just west of Adelaide was 990 feet or 90 feet, or whether they were 1000 feet or 10,000 feet apart in lateral separation.
What matters is that a TCAS or traffic collision avoidance system RA or resolution advisory was generated and that one of the jets was cleared by an AirServices Australia ATC officer to climb up through the flight level occupied by the other oncoming jet.
The technical media is well aware that on provisional data, the vertical separation between the two airlines, carrying a total of more than 600 seats, was less than 700 feet, which is just as bad as 990 feet or 90 feet. The rules concerning safe separation between airliners are set to the levels specified for carefully considered and universally endorsed reasons.
A further matter of interest, but at this stage impossible to rate as a material factor until it is fully investigated, is whether or not the TCAS unit in one of the Qantas A330s was functioning properly, or at all. It may have been, it may not have been, we don’t know, but we, through the investigation will find out.
If in fact there was a previously unrecognised or undetected fault in one of those units there will of course be an airworthiness alert or advisory, and that type of unit will be urgently inspected and if necessary corrected world wide, as this is one of the positive consequences and contributions that air safety investigations bring to airline operations.
Such speculation is however ahead of where the investigation is likely to be for the immediate future, and it may be false speculation. The speculation was caused by a media report that a pilot on a third airliner overheard the communications related to the near hit, in which one Qantas captain is claimed to have said he didn’t know the other Qantas plane was ‘there’.
The wording of the ATSB notification also supports the interpretation that the RA was, for whatever reason, only responded to by one of the jets involved in the incident. Without prejudice to anyone involved, there are other possible reasons as to why that may have been the case than TCAS equipment issues.
This is what the brief notification says in relation to that RA.
The ATSB has commenced an investigation into a loss of separation between an Airbus A330, registered VH-EBO (EBO), on a scheduled passenger service from Sydney, New South Wales, to Perth, Western Australia, and an Airbus A330, registered VH-EBS (EBS), on a flight from Perth to Sydney. The LOS occurred about 10 NM (19 km) west of Adelaide, South Australia at 1213 Eastern Standard Time on 20 September 2013.
Airservices Australia advised that EBS was cruising at flight level (FL) 390. The flight crew of EBO were cleared to climb from FL 380 to FL 400 and the aircraft commenced the climb. Soon after, the controller cancelled the clearance and the aircraft descended back to FL 380. The flight crew of EBS received a resolution advisory alert from their aircraft’s traffic collision avoidance system.
The investigation will take time, but one might expect the new minister reponsible for aviation will direct the ATSB that it will take less time than until September next year! One might expect that new minister to sort out a number of festering issues at the ATSB as well as its intention to take 12 months to deal with a truly serious issue that could have killed over 600 people through the avoidable destruction of two Qantas airliners, but that is just an observation as to where the minister’s priorities and sense of urgency might lie.
He might also direct it to fix its disgraceful Pel-Air accident report, and to find a new chief commissioner who would command the confidence of the Senate when it comes to giving testimony to a Senate inquiry, especially if he were to be briefed on those matters by SA Liberal Senator, David Fawcett.
In the meantime the correct calibration of the seriousness of this incident in the public and political mind of Australia might be the persistent inability of AirServices Australia to put competent and properly trained air traffic controllers into positions where they are responsible for the lives of at times many hundreds of Australian and foreign users of airspace under their control.
This is not a matter that can be left until this investigation is completed. It requires remedial action now.
If we can stop the boats, surely we can stop airliners being sent across each other’s bows.
It doesn’t matter whether the vertical separation between the two Qantas A332s involved in Friday’s near hit just west of Adelaide was 990 feet or 90 feet, or whether they were 1000 feet or 10,000 feet apart in lateral separation.
What matters is that a TCAS or traffic collision avoidance system RA or resolution advisory was generated and that one of the jets was cleared by an AirServices Australia ATC officer to climb up through the flight level occupied by the other oncoming jet.
The technical media is well aware that on provisional data, the vertical separation between the two airlines, carrying a total of more than 600 seats, was less than 700 feet, which is just as bad as 990 feet or 90 feet. The rules concerning safe separation between airliners are set to the levels specified for carefully considered and universally endorsed reasons.
A further matter of interest, but at this stage impossible to rate as a material factor until it is fully investigated, is whether or not the TCAS unit in one of the Qantas A330s was functioning properly, or at all. It may have been, it may not have been, we don’t know, but we, through the investigation will find out.
If in fact there was a previously unrecognised or undetected fault in one of those units there will of course be an airworthiness alert or advisory, and that type of unit will be urgently inspected and if necessary corrected world wide, as this is one of the positive consequences and contributions that air safety investigations bring to airline operations.
Such speculation is however ahead of where the investigation is likely to be for the immediate future, and it may be false speculation. The speculation was caused by a media report that a pilot on a third airliner overheard the communications related to the near hit, in which one Qantas captain is claimed to have said he didn’t know the other Qantas plane was ‘there’.
The wording of the ATSB notification also supports the interpretation that the RA was, for whatever reason, only responded to by one of the jets involved in the incident. Without prejudice to anyone involved, there are other possible reasons as to why that may have been the case than TCAS equipment issues.
This is what the brief notification says in relation to that RA.
The ATSB has commenced an investigation into a loss of separation between an Airbus A330, registered VH-EBO (EBO), on a scheduled passenger service from Sydney, New South Wales, to Perth, Western Australia, and an Airbus A330, registered VH-EBS (EBS), on a flight from Perth to Sydney. The LOS occurred about 10 NM (19 km) west of Adelaide, South Australia at 1213 Eastern Standard Time on 20 September 2013.
Airservices Australia advised that EBS was cruising at flight level (FL) 390. The flight crew of EBO were cleared to climb from FL 380 to FL 400 and the aircraft commenced the climb. Soon after, the controller cancelled the clearance and the aircraft descended back to FL 380. The flight crew of EBS received a resolution advisory alert from their aircraft’s traffic collision avoidance system.
The investigation will take time, but one might expect the new minister reponsible for aviation will direct the ATSB that it will take less time than until September next year! One might expect that new minister to sort out a number of festering issues at the ATSB as well as its intention to take 12 months to deal with a truly serious issue that could have killed over 600 people through the avoidable destruction of two Qantas airliners, but that is just an observation as to where the minister’s priorities and sense of urgency might lie.
He might also direct it to fix its disgraceful Pel-Air accident report, and to find a new chief commissioner who would command the confidence of the Senate when it comes to giving testimony to a Senate inquiry, especially if he were to be briefed on those matters by SA Liberal Senator, David Fawcett.
In the meantime the correct calibration of the seriousness of this incident in the public and political mind of Australia might be the persistent inability of AirServices Australia to put competent and properly trained air traffic controllers into positions where they are responsible for the lives of at times many hundreds of Australian and foreign users of airspace under their control.
This is not a matter that can be left until this investigation is completed. It requires remedial action now.
If we can stop the boats, surely we can stop airliners being sent across each other’s bows.
Originally Posted by Sandilands Quote
The wording of the ATSB notification also supports the interpretation that the RA was, for whatever reason, only responded to by one of the jets involved in the incident. Without prejudice to anyone involved, there are other possible reasons as to why that may have been the case than TCAS equipment issues.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the thread!
Albo is on Q&A next week! Who is going to ask the obvious question regarding the Senate Report he ignored? I suggest a bombardment of email questions from Ppruners and hopefully one of the IOS can be there in person.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jinglie
Back to the thread!
Albo is on Q&A next week! Who is going to ask the obvious question regarding the Senate Report he ignored? I suggest a bombardment of email questions from Ppruners and hopefully one of the IOS can be there in person.
Back to the thread!
Albo is on Q&A next week! Who is going to ask the obvious question regarding the Senate Report he ignored? I suggest a bombardment of email questions from Ppruners and hopefully one of the IOS can be there in person.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lights, camera, bullsh#t
Jinglie, anybody in the audience who even dare to just think about asking the creator of great white elephants a question relating to his obsfucation over aviation matters automatically gets classified as an IOS.
Nonetheless it would be great to see Phelan, Sandilands or Gobbledock grilling Albo.
Halfmanhalftelevisionshow, perhaps somebody will ask The Minister for Mascot who is it that; a) styles his hair, and b) who his dentist is?
WARNING: Any IOS who attend Q&A and are sitting in the front 5 rows please ensure you bring a raincoat, as the lickspittle and pooh will be flowing more faster and furiously than a politician at a taxpayer trough!
Nonetheless it would be great to see Phelan, Sandilands or Gobbledock grilling Albo.
Halfmanhalftelevisionshow, perhaps somebody will ask The Minister for Mascot who is it that; a) styles his hair, and b) who his dentist is?
WARNING: Any IOS who attend Q&A and are sitting in the front 5 rows please ensure you bring a raincoat, as the lickspittle and pooh will be flowing more faster and furiously than a politician at a taxpayer trough!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm constantly getting messages asking what the thread is about and what all the code means
It's now binned!
However, all readers of this thread can always do what I did and read from the beginning to get a full understanding.
I've seen this sort of thing before here on PPRune where somebody clicks onto the last page and has a moan about not being able to pick up the thread. May I be so bold to suggest those of such persuasion do please go to the first page to at least get some idea what it's all about, (that's if the title isn't enough), and with a short read you should be "full bottle" on all the nomenclature.
Happy reading.
Frank quote: "Happy reading"
Frank:
Sound advice Frank..
..and perhaps to have a fully rounded and informative understanding of the subject matter the avid readers amongst us may wish to refer to the previous (closed) thread from about page 20 (see here):
Previous Senate Inquiry thread from page 20
Maybe not a best seller but still hours and hours of absorbing reading in that lot and can guarantee you will be adequately informed!
May I be so bold to suggest those of such persuasion do please go to the first page to at least get some idea what it's all about, (that's if the title isn't enough), and with a short read you should be "full bottle" on all the nomenclature.
..and perhaps to have a fully rounded and informative understanding of the subject matter the avid readers amongst us may wish to refer to the previous (closed) thread from about page 20 (see here):Previous Senate Inquiry thread from page 20
Maybe not a best seller but still hours and hours of absorbing reading in that lot and can guarantee you will be adequately informed!
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My previous request stands. Post in a manner which everyone understands, or expect the post to be moderated
How does one quantify 'post in a way that everyone understands'? That's like expecting all students in the same class to equally understand the taught theories of quantum physics exactly the same way? Not all will get it!
The senate inquiry process itself is not understood by all. I have been flying for many many years. I can assure you that some of my acquaintances who still fly for mainline carries (as I once did) do not understand the complexities and farcical nature of the regulator in a way that a pilot in perhaps GA or private business would understand. Is that a crime? Is that a non compliance with Pprune rules?
I understand the term political correctness and won't put up an argument, but to
place a caveat on terminology, phrases or a little sideways banter is a joke.
Last edited by 004wercras; 24th Sep 2013 at 01:35.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lesson in tautology or hypocrisy - 2001
This is just way too funny! A snippet below (my bolding) from almost 14 years ago in which the Minister for White Elephants discusses the inaction of the Liberals over Sydney airport, its capacity, the need for another airport, CAsA and safety! Yet what did Albo and his beloved Labor achieve in 6 years (2007 – 2013)?? GROUNDHOG DAY! And this bloke wants to be the new opposition leader?
'2001 An Aviation Odyssey'
Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (no. 2) 2000: Second Reading
7 February 2001
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (7.23 p.m.)I am pleased to support the amendments moved by the shadow minister to the Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2000, which is concerned with CASA and safety in the operation of airports in Australia. Of course, we all know that the situation of CASA and air safety is a mess under this government. Its own appointments have said that it is a mess. Those people who have been put on the board are well-known government supporters such as Dick Smith have indeed been very critical of the operation of these organisations.
Tonight I particularly want to take the opportunity to express my concern, on behalf of my constituents in Grayndler, about air safety and the operation of Kingsford Smith airport. The Kingsford Smith airport is an airport which has reached its time limit. It is full. Anyone who flies in and out of Sydney airport knows about the time delays, which occur because, frankly, the number of movements is at breaking point. Indeed, I moved a private member’s bill, seconded by the member for Watson, in this House to ensure that there was a cap of 80 movements per hour at Sydney airport. That also resulted in guarantees of slots for regional airlines from New South Wales into Kingsford Smith airport. That was not a technical issue; that was an issue in part about safety. We believe that, when aircraft are flying over the most densely populated area of Australia, that is, the inner suburbs of Sydney, 80 movements are about all that Sydney airport can take. Yet, what we have seen in the past year are numerous breaches of the capacity interestingly enough, not while the Olympics were on at Sydney airport. I say that to dismiss any potential criticism made by, for example, the Daily Telegraph journalist Piers Akerman who suggested that it was all Olympics related. Indeed, there were more aircraft movements in and out of Sydney airport over the December-January holiday period than there were during the Sydney Olympics. And that says a lot about the pressure which is being placed on Sydney airport.
My concern, as a member of the Sydney Airport Community Forum, is that when we have questioned those people concerned with aviation safety it is apparent that what those bodies do when they look at safety concerns is to take into account the safety of the people in the aircraft; they take no account whatsoever of the safety of people on the ground. God forbid any accident with an aircraft coming down, but if one does come down, and they do, from time to time, better it come down where there are no people than in an area which is the most densely populated in Australia. That is why we have seen the real plan come out with regard to Kingsford Smith airport. No matter how much people might prevaricate over the issue of a second Sydney airport and the need for it and governments of both persuasions have prevaricated for decades about doing what needs to be done, the reality is that Sydney airport is now at its limit. It is now breaching the cap of 80 movements. Pressure has now been placed on the curfew also, which has been breached at Sydney airport. That is why the government’s absurd decision, which says, `No, we won’t build a second airport for Sydney, but we will reserve the land around Badgerys Creek because we know we will have to do something down the track and, in the meantime, we will stop regional airlines flying in and out of Sydney airport and move them to Bankstown,’ is the worst possible option.
When confronted by this, the National Party representatives in regional New South Wales, including the leader, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, said, `No. We won’t force them to move out of Sydney airport to Bankstown.’ No, of course they won’t, they will just price them out. That is what will occur. That is what was in the briefing given by Bankstown Airport Limited to country federal MPs, state MPs and mayors in January of this year. In spite of the fact there were a number of National Party representatives at that meeting, not one of them brought to the attention of their constituents the fact that they were about to be treated as second-class citizens and discriminated against and moved to Bankstown. The Bankstown airport option is bad for regional New South Wales because it treats them as second-class citizens. It is bad for the people around Sydney airport because it means that jet movements will increase as the propeller and regional flights are moved out. It is bad for the people around Bankstown, including those people in south-western Sydney, who will suffer from aircraft noise.
Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (no. 2) 2000: Second Reading « anthonyalbanese.com.au
Perhaps the IOS and Q&A panel can ask Herr Albo what he actually achieved while he was mincing around the halls of parliament and why he thinks he should be the new leader?
'2001 An Aviation Odyssey'
Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (no. 2) 2000: Second Reading
7 February 2001
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (7.23 p.m.)I am pleased to support the amendments moved by the shadow minister to the Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2000, which is concerned with CASA and safety in the operation of airports in Australia. Of course, we all know that the situation of CASA and air safety is a mess under this government. Its own appointments have said that it is a mess. Those people who have been put on the board are well-known government supporters such as Dick Smith have indeed been very critical of the operation of these organisations.
Tonight I particularly want to take the opportunity to express my concern, on behalf of my constituents in Grayndler, about air safety and the operation of Kingsford Smith airport. The Kingsford Smith airport is an airport which has reached its time limit. It is full. Anyone who flies in and out of Sydney airport knows about the time delays, which occur because, frankly, the number of movements is at breaking point. Indeed, I moved a private member’s bill, seconded by the member for Watson, in this House to ensure that there was a cap of 80 movements per hour at Sydney airport. That also resulted in guarantees of slots for regional airlines from New South Wales into Kingsford Smith airport. That was not a technical issue; that was an issue in part about safety. We believe that, when aircraft are flying over the most densely populated area of Australia, that is, the inner suburbs of Sydney, 80 movements are about all that Sydney airport can take. Yet, what we have seen in the past year are numerous breaches of the capacity interestingly enough, not while the Olympics were on at Sydney airport. I say that to dismiss any potential criticism made by, for example, the Daily Telegraph journalist Piers Akerman who suggested that it was all Olympics related. Indeed, there were more aircraft movements in and out of Sydney airport over the December-January holiday period than there were during the Sydney Olympics. And that says a lot about the pressure which is being placed on Sydney airport.
My concern, as a member of the Sydney Airport Community Forum, is that when we have questioned those people concerned with aviation safety it is apparent that what those bodies do when they look at safety concerns is to take into account the safety of the people in the aircraft; they take no account whatsoever of the safety of people on the ground. God forbid any accident with an aircraft coming down, but if one does come down, and they do, from time to time, better it come down where there are no people than in an area which is the most densely populated in Australia. That is why we have seen the real plan come out with regard to Kingsford Smith airport. No matter how much people might prevaricate over the issue of a second Sydney airport and the need for it and governments of both persuasions have prevaricated for decades about doing what needs to be done, the reality is that Sydney airport is now at its limit. It is now breaching the cap of 80 movements. Pressure has now been placed on the curfew also, which has been breached at Sydney airport. That is why the government’s absurd decision, which says, `No, we won’t build a second airport for Sydney, but we will reserve the land around Badgerys Creek because we know we will have to do something down the track and, in the meantime, we will stop regional airlines flying in and out of Sydney airport and move them to Bankstown,’ is the worst possible option.
When confronted by this, the National Party representatives in regional New South Wales, including the leader, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, said, `No. We won’t force them to move out of Sydney airport to Bankstown.’ No, of course they won’t, they will just price them out. That is what will occur. That is what was in the briefing given by Bankstown Airport Limited to country federal MPs, state MPs and mayors in January of this year. In spite of the fact there were a number of National Party representatives at that meeting, not one of them brought to the attention of their constituents the fact that they were about to be treated as second-class citizens and discriminated against and moved to Bankstown. The Bankstown airport option is bad for regional New South Wales because it treats them as second-class citizens. It is bad for the people around Sydney airport because it means that jet movements will increase as the propeller and regional flights are moved out. It is bad for the people around Bankstown, including those people in south-western Sydney, who will suffer from aircraft noise.
Aviation Legislation Amendment Bill (no. 2) 2000: Second Reading « anthonyalbanese.com.au
Perhaps the IOS and Q&A panel can ask Herr Albo what he actually achieved while he was mincing around the halls of parliament and why he thinks he should be the new leader?