AOPA's Project Eureka - Or, Is There A Transport Economist In The House?
Thread Starter
AOPA's Project Eureka - Or, Is There A Transport Economist In The House?
I have finished reading AOPA's Project Eureka document and I am sorry to have to mark it 4/10, despite the excellent and cogent work that has gone into it.
I am sad to say that it is going to be ignored by the Public Service, as it should be, for one major failing.......
Nowhere in the document is there an attempt to put the sector in its context within the Australian economy in terms of jobs, investment and growth. Fail - you forgot to tell politicians why you matter to Australia in terms they can understand. Failing that, you cannot tell politicians what your proposal will create in terms of new jobs, new investment and increased growth. It is impossible to "sell" your proposals to anyone because you have not provided your potential champions with any positive ammunition to go into battle with on your behalf!
I have attempted a bit of desk research on this subject on your behalf to try and answer the questions that your report MUST answer if you are going to get any traction:
How big is the GA/RA sector? What is its contribution to the economy in terms of jobs and GDP? What has been the trend over the last Ten years?
The Department of Industry Australian economy report 2015 says you are part of "enabling services" in the services sector - 445 billion in output which has grown 40-60% in the last Ten years (p60) did GA grow by 50% in that period??? if it did then AOPA and GA has no problem, if it didn't perhaps you do.
If you had grown by the transport growth rate, how big would GA now be in terms of jobs growth and investment??? the difference between average and actual might be attributed to poor regulation. Examples of higher costs please, lots of case studies needed.
If regulations were changed, how many new jobs can you deliver? How much new GDP, tax revenue and investment? I need these numbers to convince the rest of my colleagues that it is worth listening to you and actually doing something for you!
There is plenty of evidence for efficient regulation, for Instance "Australia needs to adopt world leading regulatory practices that do not stymie value creating activity" Dept Ind. 2015 ,P77.
"command and control regulation most restrictive"p88.
There is ample understanding of what CASA has done, but you fail to make any economic case for rollback.
IATA statistics are no good to you but the BITRE annual reviews contain the necessary data in my opinion to show what has happened to you in economic terms, maybe the Forsyth review and submissions as well. I am doing this on an iPad, I have more than enough work to do so I can't do the economic analysis myself, hence the title of this thread - Is There A Transport Economist in The House?
I am sad to say that it is going to be ignored by the Public Service, as it should be, for one major failing.......
Nowhere in the document is there an attempt to put the sector in its context within the Australian economy in terms of jobs, investment and growth. Fail - you forgot to tell politicians why you matter to Australia in terms they can understand. Failing that, you cannot tell politicians what your proposal will create in terms of new jobs, new investment and increased growth. It is impossible to "sell" your proposals to anyone because you have not provided your potential champions with any positive ammunition to go into battle with on your behalf!
I have attempted a bit of desk research on this subject on your behalf to try and answer the questions that your report MUST answer if you are going to get any traction:
How big is the GA/RA sector? What is its contribution to the economy in terms of jobs and GDP? What has been the trend over the last Ten years?
The Department of Industry Australian economy report 2015 says you are part of "enabling services" in the services sector - 445 billion in output which has grown 40-60% in the last Ten years (p60) did GA grow by 50% in that period??? if it did then AOPA and GA has no problem, if it didn't perhaps you do.
If you had grown by the transport growth rate, how big would GA now be in terms of jobs growth and investment??? the difference between average and actual might be attributed to poor regulation. Examples of higher costs please, lots of case studies needed.
If regulations were changed, how many new jobs can you deliver? How much new GDP, tax revenue and investment? I need these numbers to convince the rest of my colleagues that it is worth listening to you and actually doing something for you!
There is plenty of evidence for efficient regulation, for Instance "Australia needs to adopt world leading regulatory practices that do not stymie value creating activity" Dept Ind. 2015 ,P77.
"command and control regulation most restrictive"p88.
There is ample understanding of what CASA has done, but you fail to make any economic case for rollback.
IATA statistics are no good to you but the BITRE annual reviews contain the necessary data in my opinion to show what has happened to you in economic terms, maybe the Forsyth review and submissions as well. I am doing this on an iPad, I have more than enough work to do so I can't do the economic analysis myself, hence the title of this thread - Is There A Transport Economist in The House?
Good point Sunfish. Governments live on stats and forecasts. A narrative, no matter how well written, doesn't get their attention like the "numbers'!
Volume 2 should be stats driven!
Volume 2 should be stats driven!
