The Aviation Tax
 

I started talking on this topic elsewhere, however, I think it should be a new thread, so I'll repeat what I said ...

Dick,

While you await the Government's reaction (knee-jerk or otherwise), I have a suggestion for you. While you're on a roll, why not use your considerable network of contacts and resources to push the Government on the real issue.

In this forum, you are often thwarted by the response ... "we'll work any type of airspace asked of us... provided the appropriate resources, equipment and training are provided".

One of the reasons that those goodies aren't forthcoming is that the Government virtually pilfers large amounts of money from the Industry annually and spirits it away into consolidated revenue... never to be seen by the Aviation sector again.

Most years the "dividend" paid to consolidated revenue has been around the $100M mark. Last financial year, during the GFC, ASA managed to get a raincheck from the Government.

The Airservces Australia Act 1995 Part 5, Division 3, Paragraph 53(3) states:

ASA consistently over charges the Industry by around $100m annually. This looks, sounds and smells like a tax to me. If not, then it's consistently dismal financial management.

Could you imagine how $100m a year could be used? Perhaps provide equipment and training to enable the Radar Approach rating of Tower Controllers. Perhaps fund the training of additional Controllers to man low level surveillance airspace?

Your current Tasmanian stir may get the Minister to decree that ATC must be provided for all Jet RPTs or similar. What will then happen is that ASA will say that they don't have the resources to do that ... but they'll include it in their forward planning.

My challenge to you is ... if you really want to make a difference and ensure there's available resources for new Airspace and ATC initiatives ... help us get our money back.

The Minister, Mr Albanese, during his speech at Airservices' Waypoint 2010, had the cheek to claim that $800m paid by the us, the Industry, via Airnav charges was part of the Government's funding support of Aviation:

Does anyone else find this a bit rich?

If the Government gave the $100m back to the aviation industry it would have to put up other taxes to replace this loss from revenue.

I am happy to pay a higher tax but every politician tells me that most people are not.

Would you be happy to pay higher taxes so that AsA can operate without a payment to the Government?

Is there a list anywhere which shows how this $800 m is being spent?

Dick,

It's really not hurting me (as it's the big boys providing most of ASA's income) ... but it's the principle.

So, as long as Qantas, VB, JQ, Tiger et al are happy to pay for Billy Bogan's unemployment benefit at Byron Bay ... and you're happy not to have blanket controlled airspace ... then I'm happy.

But don't come bleating to us when there's not enough resources to provide what you or the Airlines want.

You should therefore get Smiths Dick to pay the taxes then.

and Government in the same sentence is a strange combination.

Australia is a second world country when it comes to infrastructure. "User pays" would be great here its "pay but don't get any use as its not available due staff shortges".. etc

This loss from revenue?????

Consolidated revenue takes a dividend as the sole shareholder of AirServices. Dividend...a return on investment?...why doesn't the sole shareholder INVEST in improving the business?

It's called cost recovery. That means "not for profit", and no profits should flow to consolidated revenue.

Slasher;

I was going to say something about your post above, but just read your public profile which proves it would be a futile exercise.:rolleyes:

Frank Arouet.....dunno what to say..... :confused:




um....





thank you? :}

Aussie aviation infrastructue is a joke compared to the taxes & cost recovery we pay.

Again, today diversions willy nilly due fog (BNE/SYD) yet every diverting aircraft is CAT3B capable. For the price of a few primary school shade cloths (Govt. price not real price:rolleyes:) we could have CAT3 at all major airports.

You are also hard put to find an alternate in the middle of the night for any resonably sized airliner due no RFF on duty.

What a joke.:yuk:

Here is your taxpayer dollars at work. A person of great experience of dealing with whingers and malcontents.

When will everybody understand the process of investigating the organisation who employs you is cursed with a vested interest. This process delays any complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman who will not take your matter on board until you have exhausted every other means of resolving the problem. CASA, in this means delays your complaint until it is stale.

From the CASA blurb;

CASA NEEDS MORE LAWYERS.:(

Question
 

New face to handle complaints

Does the above also cover internal complaints ? From what I hear there are a number of internal staff with a number of legitimate legal claims who are taking action with a number of solicitors (external)........