Albanese does nothing on Sydney Airports

[Howard Hughes]

Anthony Albanese memorial bike rack?

[garrya100]

How about the Hi-Speed Rail Transfer Terminal for the Outer West. That solves the problem of the 'A' word altogether

[neville_nobody]

As todays SMH editorial points out Albanese is just another bureaucratic mouthpiece creating activity without actually doing anything. Everything he accused the Howard government of doing he now does himself.

I'll throw a conspiracy theory out there that the 'the powers at be' don't really want a second airport at all and they will strangle any opportunity by any means in creating one. Dunno how else you could make the decisions that being made by governments on this issue

Superficially clever but deeply cynical and damaging for the state. That sums up how federal Labor and its Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese, have obstructed progress on a vital second international airport for Sydney.

A government-commissioned study out this week shows yet again that a new airport is needed ''sooner rather than later'' to relieve the congested, costly and unsustainable one at Mascot.

Albanese's response - ordering yet more taxpayer-funded research into a demonstrably unsuitable site - reflects a lack of political courage to overcome his party's opposition to commonsense. It also reeks of disdain for everyone who would benefit from 30,000 new jobs and a $6 billion economic boost in the next two decades.

The latest report proves - this time by time-consuming and convoluted process of elimination -that the Commonwealth-owned Badgerys Creek site in the south-western suburbs is the only efficient, profitable and achievable option.

The RAAF base at Richmond as a spillover site for domestic flights would not happen for years and ''can only ever provide ancillary capacity for Sydney''. So the report tells everyone what was already known: there are only two possible greenfields sites and one, Wilton, is a dud.

Along with myriad environmental, construction and cost risks, the report says: ''The aviation industry is not convinced that an airport at Wilton is close enough to its primary market to make the case for the kind of investment needed to bring it into service''.

That leaves Badgerys Creek. It can connect to the new south-west rail, create thousands of jobs for the western suburbs and spur growth there. The noise will affect about 8200 people at capacity in 2060, when technology will have dulled the impact significantly. The Mascot airport affects 130,000 people now.

Badgerys Creek delivers the greatest benefits with the lowest costs. It is the industry's clear preference and, ironically, Albanese's. Yet Albanese insists all research be done to keep ruling out Wilton and Richmond is a viable alternative when, in fact, his approach is a cover for his party's protection of nervous Labor MPs in the region. Albanese cannot force the issue without jeopardising his status in the ALP.

In his early career, Albanese saw Badgerys as an answer to his inner-west constituents' hostility to aircraft noise. He opposed his party's prevarication on the issue during the Hawke and Keating years. And he made hay when the Howard government did nothing to address Sydney's looming need for more aviation capacity.

''Quite frankly, we've had study after study after study,'' the then backbencher Albanese told the ABC in 2000. ''What we actually need is the government to bite the bullet and get on with building a second airport for Sydney.''

Trouble was, in January 2004 Labor changed its policy to ditch Badgerys Creek. Two months later Albanese said: ''We do not want the problems of aircraft noise visited on anyone.'' When he became federal Transport Minister after the 2007 election, he stalled by commissioning green papers and white papers into the aviation industry. But they said next to nothing on where and how a second airport should be built.

Three years on, he commissioned another report, this time at vast expense and with state government bureaucrats on its steering committee for added sheen. The resulting 3200 pages released last year demonstrated what Albanese and everyone had known all along.

But Albanese still could not - or rather would not - advocate Badgerys.

Neither has Premier Barry O'Farrell, who likewise fears losing votes. Some Liberals in western Sydney councils are skirting around support for Badgerys but will undertake detailed community consultation only if the federal government rules out Wilton. All have failed to explain to their parties and the people that Badgerys Creek is a no-brainer.

Shadow treasurer Joe Hockey is among many federal Liberals who want it but Tony Abbott fears a voter backlash. In March he indicated Badgerys was not on the radar. Rather, ''down the track'', fixing transport problems ''means better use of Sydney Airport, it means better use of Bankstown and Richmond and, yes, it means better use of other airports too''.

What a convenient excuse for Albanese to hide behind: the ''we must have bipartisanship''. To quote the Albanese of 13 years ago: what we need is the government to bite the bullet and get on with building a second airport for Sydney.

[Keg]

OK with only 7000' of runway they might not be able to go very far, but surely at least a 767-size aircraft (so 787?) could happily do trips as far as Adelaide out of Richmond? Keg??

With 2000m, we could probably do PER depending on the temperature. Wellington was shorter and we'd quite easily do WLG-SYD without too much wind. Not sure what obstacles exist that may make it a bit harder with an engine failure at V1 but presuming nothing significant then RIC- anywhere on the J curve would be easily doable on the 767.

Realistically though, RIC is not a solution. Any government that tries to make it a solution to anything related to civil ops has just demonstrated their complete incompetence with anything more complex than 3rd grade maths and should be dealt with appropriately at the subsequent election.

[neville_nobody]

Max reckons a new airport will be a waste of time and money.....

Sydney Airport's outspoken chairman, Max Moore-Wilton, claims a second airport for the city would become a ''white elephant'' and cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

Weeks before Australia's largest airport is to release its 20-year vision, Mr Moore-Wilton questioned Qantas and Virgin Australia's willingness to use a second airport.

He also encouraged the listed entity's 35,000 shareholders to lobby their MPs and communities in support of its vision to cater for travel demand over the coming decades.

The airport will release a draft master plan next month, which will detail a $1 billion-plus makeover of the domestic and international terminals. It wants to break the divide between the terminals, allowing passengers to more easily catch connecting flights.
Advertisement

But it has backed away from plans to put Virgin and its alliance partners at one terminal, and Qantas and its partner airlines at another, because of resistance from Australia's second-largest airline.

Speaking at its annual meeting on Thursday, Mr Moore-Wilton said the draft master plan would outline the reasons why the airport should remain the country's principle airport. He again emphasised the airport's ability to handle increased demand over the longer term, and questioned the need for a competing airport.

''For a government, any government to spend several billions of dollars to replace and compete with that asset [Sydney Airport] unnecessarily would be a complete and utter waste of money,'' he told shareholders. ''Billions of dollars are a scare commodity - heaven knows there are many other things that need to be done in terms of Australia's infrastructure than building white elephants.''

Mr Moore-Wilton said he had yet to see a business plan that showed a new airport would be able to cover the cost of building it.

''To some extent, the people who still say there needs to be a second airport believe that you are in a static framework,'' he said, pointing out Sydney Airport had doubled passengers over the past 10 years while the number of flights required to meet that demand had remained the same. It has first rights to operate a second airport within 100 kilometres of the CBD.

The Macquarie Group-backed airport raised its forecasts for distributions this year as it banks on increased growth spurred by foreign budget airlines and the effect of alliances such as Qantas and Emirates. It is forecasting a distribution of 22.5¢ per security this year, up from 21¢ last year.

Read more: Second airport cast as white elephant

[Wally Mk2]

Ya gotta love this guy MMW as if he would in agrreance to build another airport, white elephant or not he might be yr typical businessman (we all know a good proportion of them are as shifty as a cart load of Monkey's!) but he ain't that dumb !
Also love the statement they are going to invest a $1Billion+ make over............for the terminals, love that get more money coming in from pax handling car parks shop leases etc but zip to handle the pax once they have blown their money!
There's over 2500 hrs per year wasted at Syd Airport (that's over a 1/4 of the year) just 'cause of the few communities scattered around the drome whom benefit from little A/C noise.
Australia, the "back-wood" country! Although I did love the Movie Deliverance, reminds me so much of the way this joint is run!

A 2nd Drome for Syd??..yeah I'd like to see that!
Wmk2

[Trent 972]

Thirty One years ago I moved to Sydney to start an airline job and in the market to buy a house. My dilemma as to where I should buy was, within suitable travel time of Kingsford Smith, or out near the mooted 2nd Sydney Airport Site.
Seeking the counsel of an old captain who had made a bit of money in the Sydney real estate market, his advice was "There will be no 2nd Sydney airport before I retire and probably none before you retire".
He was right.
I can see retirement coming over the hill and the 2nd Sydney airport is probably just as far away as it was 31 years ago.

[denabol]

Good for a laugh on a Friday.

Guess who'se NOT building a second Sydney Airport | Plane Talking

[neville_nobody]

Sydney airport plan is out. Terminals align with airlines. Don't understand that with a curfew and no new runways how they can expand. 0600-1000 is chaos now building a flash new terminal doesn't change that.

A long way to go: Congestion problems around Sydney Airport will likely continue despite plans to ease problems. Photo: Brendan Esposito
Sydney Airport boss Kerrie Mather has been true to her word.

For months, she has been telling all and sundry to expect an "evolution rather than a revolution".

She was, of course, referring to her grand plans to develop the country's least-loved airport over the next 20 years.

The need to spell out those plans is a legal requirement. Every five years, the airport has to release its development plans for the next two decades.

Advertisement
The latest incarnation of those released on Wednesday include for the first time a plan to try to tackle what is quickly becoming the bane of any traveller's experience of Kingsford-Smith - a car trip there to catch a flight.

Mather's plan is a step in the right direction: a new ring road around the two domestic terminals - T2 and T3 - within the next five years, and a new thoroughfare to the international terminal.

The privately owned airport is also pushing for better use of trains and buses. And at long last, it plans a public bus facility at T2 and T3.

A central part of Mather's plan to free up the roads is to break the divide between what are now the domestic and international terminals.

By making the three passenger terminals suitable for domestic and international flights, Mather reckons it will reduce unnecessary trips to the other side of the airport via Airport Drive to catch a connecting flight.

But the question is whether it will all go far enough to reduce road congestion?

If history is any guide, the answer is probably not.

Importantly, the airport also requires buy in from the airlines to get its plans off the ground any time soon.

Firstly, Qantas has to agree to sell back the leases on T3 and its jet base well before they expire in 2019 to free up land for terminal expansions.

Then there's the question of which terminals the airlines will use.

Virgin Australia has made it well known that it has no intention of shifting its entire operations to what is now the international terminal. It believes such a move would put it at a huge disadvantage to its arch rival.

In all of this, it is important to remember the underlying politics. The plans are aimed at convincing us that Sydney Airport is capable of handling surging demand for air travel for decades to come, and to delay as long as possible the push for another airport which would break the incumbent's monopoly.

On the former, the verdict was in last year when a joint federal-state study declared that the existing airport would be full by 2027.

Of course, Sydney is not alone.

Congestion at airports is a growing problem around the world, particularly in Europe. At an airline conference in Cape Town this week, executives took aim at their pet target: London's Heathrow Airport.

Even Dubai Airport - the home of Qantas alliance partner Emirates - is quickly hitting its limits.

But that knowledge will be cold comfort to Sydneysiders hoping for a revolution.

Ads by Google

MGSM Conference Centrewww.conferences.mgsm.com.au
Executive Hotel & Conference Centre Conference venue in Sydney


Read more: Sydney Airport congestion problems set to continue

[Sarcs]

IATA slap down for Albo and co

Press Release No.: 43
Date: 3 July 2013
Securing Australia’s Aviation Future


IATAContentBox1


Sydney – The International Air Transport Association (IATA) has called for urgent policy attention to infrastructure and taxation issues to ensure the continued development of aviation connectivity in Australia.


“Aviation has always played a key role in Australia. It binds the continent together and connects the island to its major trading partners. Combined with tourism, aviation supports over 6% of Australia’s GDP and 7.4% of the workforce. That’s A$75 billion in business and 800,000 jobs. There is a lot at stake and we need to get the policies right. Infrastructure and taxation are at the top of the list,” said Tony Tyler, IATA’s Director General and CEO, in an address to the National Aviation Press Club in Sydney.

Infrastructure

IATA urged the government to bring clarity to the future development of Australia’s hub capacity by making a decision on the construction of a second airport for Sydney.

“At some point, Sydney airport will reach its maximum potential. Even Sydney Airport’s draft master plan acknowledges that. We have about two decades to select a site, sort out all of the necessary approvals, acquire the land, upgrade surface transport, get the airport built, and, of course figure out how to pay for it all. That is not a lot of time for such a mammoth and important project,” said Tyler. Sydney Airport had published its draft master plan which shows that it can accommodate a doubling of traffic by 2033. Sydney is Australia’s major aviation hub and the busiest airport in the Southern hemisphere.

“Australia needs to do business with Asia. But that’s going to be difficult if it does not have the airport hub capacity to facilitate the needed connectivity,” said Tyler. He noted that major new aviation infrastructure developments have taken place across Asia in the last two decades - new terminals in Singapore and Taipei, new runways and terminals in Tokyo and Delhi; and whole new airports in Seoul, Osaka, Nagoya, Hong Kong, Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur—and a massive airport construction program across China.
“Further procrastination will only lead to missed opportunities for economic growth. The challenge is to break out of the endless cycle of studies, make a decision and get on with it,” said Tyler.

IATA also expressed concern for plans to pre-finance capacity expansion at Brisbane. “We would not consider pre-financing for other major infrastructure projects. Imagine trying to charge users of an existing secondary road for a super highway the benefit of which others will eventually enjoy. You couldn’t do it. Not only is this common-sense, but the concept is embedded in principles for infrastructure development agreed through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The government needs to take a firmer stance in encouraging the airport to align its plans with ICAO principles,” said Tyler.

Taxation

Tyler also called on the government to reconsider the economic damage being done by the Passenger Movement Charge (PMC). The PMC was originally designed to fund Australia’s border agencies, including customs and border protection, quarantine and immigration. Last year, it was increased to A$55 per passenger which exceed the cost of funding these agencies. It is estimated that about A$800 million will be collected in the 2012-2013 fiscal year.

“The PMC is effectively a tax that adds about 3.5% to the cost of travel from Australia. If it were removed we would expect a 2.5% boost to traffic. That would add A$1.7 billion to the Australian economy and generate some 17,000 jobs. So the Australian economy has more to gain from removing the PMC than from keeping it in place,” said Tyler, who referred to a new IATA study on the economic benefits of abolishing the PMC.

“This illustrates the critical importance of thorough cost-benefit analysis for all policy decisions. I urge the government to re-evaluate the overall economic impact of making connectivity more expensive than it needs to be,” said Tyler.






Read Tony Tylers Speech

[004wercras]

Well there you have it. Even IATA, a branch of ICAO, have had to voice their concern over the postulation on Sydney by successive incompetent Australian governments!
Mind you, Tyler and Herr Skull know each other quite well from the old CX days, maybe ESSO will go and work for IATA once he finally leaves the protected walls of Fort Fumble?

But what a never ending farking disgrace Australian aviation has proven to be;
• Decades of bureaucrats time spent playing with themselves instead of building a new Sydney airport.
• Decades of bureaucrats time spent playing with themselves rather than undertaking regulatory reform.
• Decades of bureaucrats time spent playing with themselves while CAsA and ATSBollocks descend down into the mire to an all time low standard that makes even Ethiopia look like a quality aviation outfit.

And what's with all these media interviews with Albo of late? Do the interviewers, cameramen and sound guys wear raincoats, because the amount of lickspittle that this buffoon is spraying about is incredible!

[Lookleft]

Err IATA is not a branch of ICAO. Is interest in safety is driven purely by profits for its member airlines.

[004wercras]

Err IATA is not a branch of ICAO. Is interest in safety is driven purely by profits for its member airlines.

For your benefit I retract the word 'branch'. The rest of your post is crap. IATA is not just about profit generation.

The Postal History of ICAO

[Lookleft]

Interesting article Oleo, I didn't realise just how much into philataleley ICAO and IATA are.

[004wercras]

Well there you go Lookleft Lyon, you are never to old to learn something new, even at your age, so i am glad you enjoyed the article.
The next link will contain information on how to eat mashed potato and mashed pumpkin without your teeth, you will enjoy it, plus there is a centerfold of your idol John Howard posing nude on a Chieftain

[Lookleft]

Oleo are you threatening to remove my teeth? Some of that old P&D background coming to the fore! I'm happier to be a John Howard supporter than a left wing looney, you still got those signed "It's time" t-shirts framed at the Comrades Cavern?

BTW you have no idea who I am

[Seabreeze]

Apparently Hong Kong is planning to build another runway now (a third) and presently have > 1000 movements a day with only TWO runways. Rumour is it will take more than a decade.

Sydney airport can't match with 3 runways.

The Mrdak report is excellent, but our 'leaders" deserve at best the french revolution solution, because they are inept and incompetent.

The minister for every f**ing thing (and on the side the deputy PM) couldn't manage a p**ss in a dunny. He is too busy mouthing off at the opposition to do anything worthwhile about the 2nd SY airport
and,
MMW is the fattest p*g at the trough. With only one lane on the upramp to international departures at SY, the road system is a joke, and simply reflects the capability of SY airport management.

Can you believe this: I will say again for those who don't know.
Australia's busiest international airport has only ONE traffic lane leading to departures drop off.

If we had a fifth column trying to scupper Australia's future they couldn't do worse than these two.

[Wally Mk2]

'Breezy' there's a method in their madness there at Syd drome. You see with just one dep rd ramp they drip feed in the departing pax so they can drip feed them out into planes with a T/off rate of one per hour, if yr lucky!

We all know Syd is a joke, might as well laugh at the joint as there's little else it's good for!!! BN is SY's apprentice, learning fast!!

Wmk2

[TIMA9X]

If we had a fifth column trying to scupper Australia's future they couldn't do worse than these two

It's been the same for as long as I can remember on both sides of the political fence. Now that Albo has more on his plate, (keeping the side together for the election) and that he comes from a airport sensitive seat I doubt we will be seeing much action in the near future, again it's all the other stuff going on, same old same old..

[TIMA9X]

Albo is at it again

Coupled with the usual anti "heart string choir" Albo says the second Sydney Airport is now a priority if he gets re-elected.