Bin done
 

Since the early sixties all pilots in this country have had an ASIO file, they are just going to charge for it now. :(

Fairly strong statement there, Ces......................

Care to elaborate?

Tis True
 

Read a book called " Australian Spies and their Secrets" by David McKnight. It's pretty heavy going at times but there is some very interesting stuff in there.

There has been comment from "Foreign Affairs" the content is accurate.

That would be about 35,000 pilots with a one line statement on a computer data base which says; HARMLESS or for others MOSTLY HARMLESS.

Of course Gaunty would have a l o n g entry.

The way the article is written is quite ambiguous when it comes to who pays for what. It reads as though all these checks will be paid for by the government out of its Ansett levy. This is quite clearly incorrect for pilots.

It looks like such a nice touchy feely story, 'Your Government Looking After You' sort of thing. To date we have not been able to get anyone from either the government or DOTARS to enunciate any reasons for these checks and why, if the government does consider pilots such a risk, why don't they finance such a program from either general revenue, or something like the Anset levy surplus. We are not being subject to expansive security checks to placate ourselves. The government is bringing in these measures to satisfy what it perceives is a risk to other citizens. What this risk is has not been defined.

Waving your arms about screaming the 'September 11 hijackers were pilots' is not quite the point.

What would be rather amusing to watch is the pilot body simply refusing to pay for such a pitiful measure. If no pilot working for main airlines coughed up it would send a very big message to all concerned.

dont worry, the Ansett/ security/ whatever we call it tax is never going to go away! if it draws too much criticism, they will just change its name again.

Interesting indeed.

Much as I hate to bring this up, in the aftermath of the '89 maelstorm, the Bodgie Government had all the non returning Pilots listed with Interpol as political dissidents.

This caused many major problems gaining employment worldwide, much of which was overcome once circumstances were explained. I will also add that my mates that went West at the time are still that, and I miss them as much as the ones that came back to our great little airline.

Who does one consider distributed this message? The girl guides perhaps?

ASIO MUST have been the vector to relay this poisonous information to the security services of the world.


Now they are handing them this gig? Be very careful guys and girls - they have no soul.

Best all

EWL - Preparing for the SWAT team this will probably draw.

all together? not
 

You mean like they stuck together in the pilot strike readmyacars? just like their sticking together now on Jetstar wages and conditions, I'm afraid the Pilot's Federation no longer has the solidarity or power of the AMA.

Don't even try to add an agenda to what I entered Cecil. It was a statement of fact and I do no believe I even eluded to unions now or then.

If you have a gripe with past and current unions, post it. Do not use someone elses genuine post to try to push a barrow so old that the wheel nut are rusted on.

The fact is that ASIO provided detrimental information regarding Australian Pilots to Interpol, tainting them all and attempting to deny good Pilots the opportunity to work overseas.

That was a gross misuse of power by the Bodgie, at the behest of his 2nd best mate - the Fat Man and should never have happened.

Thankfully, the degree of corruption was well known overseas and most carriers took their crappola with a grain of salt.

Best all

EWL

Before issue of SPL (and therefore before first solo). It can be a long wait :{

At the moment the checks are paid for by government. Soon (not sure when) CASA will start charging us for the "privilege". So... get in quick while it's still free. Download the form from CASA website and hey presto. :ok:

jet*1

Following the Bus Hijack in Athens, does this mean all bus drivers and passengers will under go security screening from now on ?

ASIO / ASIC Checks
 

How about this one.

All politicians, public servants, union boss's, managing directors, ceo's, airline boss's,legal eagles, migrants and of course, international crews, air and marine, to be subject to the asic checks, before any of our own Ozzy people, in the Aviation and Maritime services.

Cheers

robroy

oh the tempatation!!!

Mr Bruce Baird, who put his bit for the $200 security fee, is having a lovely chrissie party in the courtyard as i type this! and there are quite a few pollies around as well!!!

what are my chances of a favourable story in tomorrows paper?

Rural sector - read farmers, that handle certain types of fertiliser, are to have their employees checked out by ASIO for suitability in the role.

This will cost each farmer (employer) $1500. Which it seems, will then be picked up by govt.

1. Rural sector employers pay, why not Aviation sector employers?

2. At this point, it seems govt. will reimburse rural sector. Why not Aviation sector?

GA security effective
AOPA US has praised a US Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that "the small size, lack of fuel capacity, and minimal destructive power of most general aviation aircraft make them unattractive to terrorists and, thereby, reduce the possibility of threat associated with their misuse." The report concludes that continued partnerships between the GA industry and the government - such as AOPA's Airport Watch program - were vital to the long term success of efforts to enhance security at nearly 19,000 GA landing facilities. The report - "General Aviation Security: Increased Federal Oversight is Needed but Continued Partnership with the Private Sector is Critical to Long-Term Success" - was made after more than a year of study. It said: "The public/private partnership has been strengthened ... through the teaming of TSA (Transportation Security Administration) and general aviation industry associations," such as AOPA. AOPA US president Phil Boyer said: "This new GAO report confirms and adds validity to what AOPA and the GA industry has been saying ever since the September 11 attacks- GA airports are so many and so varied that a 'one-size-fits-all' security plan is just not feasible." Boyer said that the report was important as much for what it did not say as for what it did say. "It does not see the need for any specific physical security mandates at general aviation airports. Instead, the GAO's conclusions call for systemic changes within and better oversight by the TSA and the FAA. "The fact that several of the recommendations are either already in place or in the works shows that general aviation security is on the right track." As part of the study, the GAO visited 31 GA airports picked for their variety of physical characteristics and types of operations. The report found that most of the airport managers it interviewed had already established a number of security enhancements, using either airport revenue, or state or federal grant money to fund some the enhancements. It said many of the airport managers had sought effective enhancements such as creating or updating security plans, sharing those plans with tenants, or arranging for more patrols or an on-site presence of local law enforcement. Airport managers had been using risk assessment tools included in the TSA's Guidelines for General Aviation Airport Security . The agency developed the tools after consultations with and recommendations from general aviation industry representatives, including AOPA, who were part of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee's Working Group on General Aviation Security. The report cited the AOPA Airport Watch program, which it noted had already been implemented at many of the airports visited, including the use of signs and posters provided to the airports by AOPA, as well as training programs such as the Airport Watch video that illustrated the types of situations for which shows pilots and airport employees to be alert. AOPA developed Airport Watch in consultation with TSA, knowing that TSA needed to deal with the larger security issues at air carrier airports. As part of its contribution to Airport Watch, TSA provides a nationwide toll-free hotline (866-GA-SECURE), staffed 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for pilots and airport personnel to report suspicious activity. The report said many pilots have taken unilateral actions to prevent unauthorised use of their aircraft, such as using prop or throttle locks, or locking their aircraft in hangars. The GAO report criticised the FAA for not developing a standardised, documented way to review and revalidate security-related temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) in order to determine their effectiveness and whether or not they were still needed. It noted that the number of TFR violations was up since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, as was the number and severity of disciplinary actions - but 95 per cent of the violations involve either presidential security-related or national security-related TFRs, many of which are issued with limited advance notice. It also noted the economic hardships such TFRs cause, both for aviation-related businesses within, and aircraft trying to fly into, out of, or through the affected area. The GAO report cited a study which indicated that GA pilots, passengers, and businesses have lost more than $1 billion since the September 11 attacks due to increased costs, lost revenues and additional operating costs. The GAO said the FAA needed to develop and implement a method for reviewing and revalidating TFRs, especially those issued for indefinite periods, such as the Baltimore-Washington air defense identification zone (ADIZ). Boyer said: "AOPA worked closely with Congress on the Vision 100 FAA Reauthorization Act of 2003 to include language that requires the Department of Transportation to re-justify the need for the ADIZ to Congress every 60 days. "This new GAO report expands on that, urging the FAA to come up with a standardised method for evaluating whether or not a flight restriction should be established, and if it is, whether it should be continued." The GAO report stated that the TSA faced a significant challenge when trying to communicate warnings to the GA community. "Timely, specific, and actionable information are three key principles of effective risk communication," the report said. Part of the problem was the general, non-specific nature of much of the anti-terrorist intelligence
gathered: "The more detailed and specific the threat information, the more likely the information is classified, and, therefore, not available to those without appropriate security clearances." The task of risk communication is further complicated by the lack of an accurate, complete list of contacts for all of the approximately 5000 public use and 14,000 private use GA landing facilities. The GAO recommended -
* TSA should develop a risk management plan that helps airports assess vulnerabilities.
* TSA should apply risk communication principles including specific threat information.
* FAA should develop plan for reviewing and revalidating flight restrictions.
* TSA needs to better monitor foreign nationals learning to fly in the United States.
* TSA and FAA need to review process for issuing waivers to enter restricted airspace. Two of the recommendations - monitoring foreign national flight students and reviewing the waiver process - were included in a classified version of the GAO report. The TSA's alien flight training rule, which was issued after the GAO study was completed and on which AOPA was working closely with TSA to refine and repair problems in the regulatory language, may ultimately address the first of the GAO's classified recommendations. "When all is said and done, this is a very positive report for general aviation," said Boyer. "It proves that our approach - a cooperative effort that draws on the government's security expertise and the GA industry's aviation expertise - is the best approach for making sure terrorists won't be able to use our world-class general aviation system against us."

And then we get a punter in the local rag complaining in letters to the editor that the Office of National Security didn't take his concerns of light AND ultra-light aircraft buzzing around the Hazelwood powerstation seriously enough.:mad:

Concerned citizen wins over industry advice...especially if it dovetails with bureaucratic whitewash:(

Security Nonesense
 

Your comments are right ReadMyACARS:

The government, as in the aviation bureacracy, security agencies, etc., all have 'security' files on we pilots now.

So what is new with all this security checking ?????

It is just political nonesense in an era of terrorist threat.
I ask the boofheads in Canberra where is this threat likely to come from? Well common bloody sense tells me not from the pilot fraternity unless a pilot joins the jihad and decides to take some extreme action.
So the security checking should be done on the community at large and the general taxpayer should pay for it.

It is sheer lunacy and discrimination against a small group in society to pick us out and screw us.

What about truck drivers, van drivers, boaties, car drivers whoever.
Terrorism and acts of violence are a community issue and the community at large should pay for it.
We all need to lobby our local pollies and associations about this and NOW before they pass all this crazy legislation.

Yup, gotta get on the case...

See my post on http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...5&pagenumber=8

VHCU