Tamworth industry rally - friday 6 may 2016
Finished his gig at the Reserve Bank and drives his own Seneca
That said, the Glenn Stevens idea is an excellent one.
Can we get Tony Windsor and Nick Xenophon to support the review/Enquiry? Would GS be up for it?
Also please stop talking about another, can't believe it, another enquiry, I'm feeling ill. Back to my Baron upgrade mods and forget about the miseries of Can'tberra. Cheers.
Wren460...in defence of another enquiry.
Henry Bosch was a non flying economist and look where we ended up.
I think GS would be an "honest broker" with no vested interest nor beholden to the government. Even if it took five years and it resulted in finally bringing the OLC to heel and the wholesale change of direction for regulation of GA it would be worth every last cent...I would even hope he didn't know Dick Smith but that would be near impossible
Henry Bosch was a non flying economist and look where we ended up.
I think GS would be an "honest broker" with no vested interest nor beholden to the government. Even if it took five years and it resulted in finally bringing the OLC to heel and the wholesale change of direction for regulation of GA it would be worth every last cent...I would even hope he didn't know Dick Smith but that would be near impossible
Wren460 refers, I think, to the Forsyth Saga which we all applauded when announced, and about which we all seem to forget.
...I too forgot.
I'm going to go run a nice warm bath. Has anyone seen my razor?
...I too forgot.
I'm going to go run a nice warm bath. Has anyone seen my razor?
...just look at what public pressure over Uber has done for the Taxi industry
Before we move we have to make sure we are on he right side of the narrative. We want hard working Aussies. Find people with red dirt under their finger nails. A good human interest story. As much as a lot of the people (like Dick) are fighting the good fight, I would say we want to avoid the rich private "fly boys" being the front and centre story. Look at what has caused the most headaches so far in the election campaign, a guy on benefits trying to treat his kids, a single mum trying to educate her kids, and the panama papers. We have two Aussie battlers who get the electorates sympathy (and whatever you now think of the "Q&A hero", he obviously had the public's sympathy at first, which is why The Australian ran so hard at him) and we have a story about a rich guy doing potentially dodgy rich things. We want to frame ourselves in that first group, not the second.
So as I said, find an honest, hard working, Aussie, preferably a mum or dad, preferably a self made man or woman, maybe even if we can hit the jackpot something in their family history like parents or grandparents being immigrants. Get them in front of cameras. The message will get better traction that way.
Lest we have another incident where a silver haired A380 captain takes 60 minutes out on his yacht in the middle of a pilots strike.
Edit: Additionally, don't dismiss parties you don't like. For many of you that will be the Greens, for some the ALA, others Lambie or whatever. You may not like their politics but minor parties WILL be getting in this election, and whatever BS pledges the Tele is making Turnbull and Shorten sign up to now, the majors WILL work with them. That is how our system works. The Greens and Nick X WILL be getting multiple seats across both houses of parliament, Lambie, ALA, LDP, Family First, KAP, all have decent enough chance of getting a gurnsey. Create dialog with them. Even if you don't like their other policies even pinko tree hugging greens or old racist right wing nutters in the ALA (my attempt at bipartisan bias :P) can see Part 61 is a cluster F. Work with them to see that.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Representation
Several excellent ideas being proposed here.. Particularly like the idea of demonstrating GA's value to the country.
From what I can see, lobby groups seem to have enormous influence on policy development. Who really represents GA?? Is there a group that we need to all be supporting or alternatively is it time for a new body?? Either way we need to support it financially or with our time.
Realistically this is part of a long term plan to change the tide. I think we'll struggle as a disparate group to oppose a government regulator with paid employees who have made an industry of regulation which clearly has a benefit to the regulator.
From what I can see, lobby groups seem to have enormous influence on policy development. Who really represents GA?? Is there a group that we need to all be supporting or alternatively is it time for a new body?? Either way we need to support it financially or with our time.
Realistically this is part of a long term plan to change the tide. I think we'll struggle as a disparate group to oppose a government regulator with paid employees who have made an industry of regulation which clearly has a benefit to the regulator.
Last edited by bw2004; 13th May 2016 at 01:37.
Additionally, don't dismiss parties you don't like. For many of you that will be the Greens, for some the ALA, others Lambie or whatever. You may not like their politics but minor parties WILL be getting in this election, and whatever BS pledges the Tele is making Turnbull and Shorten sign up to now, the majors WILL work with them. That is how our system works. The Greens and Nick X WILL be getting multiple seats across both houses of parliament, Lambie, ALA, LDP, Family First, KAP, all have decent enough chance of getting a gurnsey. Create dialog with them. Even if you don't like their other policies even pinko tree hugging greens or old racist right wing nutters in the ALA (my attempt at bipartisan bias :P) can see Part 61 is a cluster F. Work with them to see that.
Very good advice, IMO.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe this bloke?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hardy_(aviator)
Current position would expect he is clean.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hardy_(aviator)
Current position would expect he is clean.
Oz,
You must be kidding??
We have just has the ASRR.
Over the years was have had an inquiry about annually, including a number of Royal Commissions, I think Seaview was the last. I have personally read every report from "Lane" on, and virtually all the transcripts of Morris, Seaview and Monarch. I attended 20+ sitting days of Morris.
The Morris Inquiry was the longest Commonwealth inquiry since Federation.
It is a testimony to the resilience of the "Iron Ring" that it has remained impervious to all of the above ---- why would more time wasting on an inquiry by Glen Stevens ( a good bloke, by the way, and his father was a QF Flight Engineer) make the slightest difference.
The Iron Ring is so effective that it got rid of Leroy Keith. when Leroy started making real change --- he was "set up".
In my opinion, Mr. Skidmore has been captured by the Iron Ring, and sadly, Geoff Boyd and the Board are precluded from any real control.
Tootle pip!!
PS: The PAP/CASA Review Part 91 was completed in 1998 (not long after CASR Parts 21-35 went into law). it was actually a little bit shorter than the FAA or NZ equivalents. I still have a hard copy somewhere.It was blocked by then Iron Ring.
You must be kidding??
We have just has the ASRR.
Over the years was have had an inquiry about annually, including a number of Royal Commissions, I think Seaview was the last. I have personally read every report from "Lane" on, and virtually all the transcripts of Morris, Seaview and Monarch. I attended 20+ sitting days of Morris.
The Morris Inquiry was the longest Commonwealth inquiry since Federation.
It is a testimony to the resilience of the "Iron Ring" that it has remained impervious to all of the above ---- why would more time wasting on an inquiry by Glen Stevens ( a good bloke, by the way, and his father was a QF Flight Engineer) make the slightest difference.
The Iron Ring is so effective that it got rid of Leroy Keith. when Leroy started making real change --- he was "set up".
In my opinion, Mr. Skidmore has been captured by the Iron Ring, and sadly, Geoff Boyd and the Board are precluded from any real control.
Tootle pip!!
PS: The PAP/CASA Review Part 91 was completed in 1998 (not long after CASR Parts 21-35 went into law). it was actually a little bit shorter than the FAA or NZ equivalents. I still have a hard copy somewhere.It was blocked by then Iron Ring.
Last edited by LeadSled; 15th May 2016 at 07:59.
One substantial but largely unheralded recent victory for GA was a result of the community's response to CASA's knee-jerk after the tragic accident that occurred during an Angel Flight near Bendigo a while ago.
The community worked out that the amount of good done by Angel Flight and other "community service" activities far outweighed the very rare accidents. The community grasped the concept that no activity is risk free, and going to hospital by road or not at all may be riskier than going by light aircraft.
This filtered upwards to the people who actually make the decisions in aviation regulation. And that's not CASA.
GA has to remind the community of the value to the community of GA away from the big cities.
The major parties and the public service in Canberra are now 'the protected'. Almost none of the mess they create for GA has any substantial effects on them. They don't care. Literally: they don't care. Because they don't have to. Individually and personally some of them may, but they're part of a machine that's evolved for only one reason, and it isn't to promote the public interest. They want to keep their job? They do what the machine demands.
Ask yourself: How did Bill Heffernan, or David Fawcett, or Fiona Nash, or Jan McLucas, or Ian MacDonald, or Glen Sterle - or any other of the people who've expressed strong opinions in senate inquiries - actually vote on the floor of the Senate to change anything about what they'd heard or found.
It's a machine that's evolved to protect itself. At your expense. And it's fine tuned to take advantage of the false dichotomy between "one side" - Labour - and "the other side" - the Coalition.
So far as GA is concerned (at least) everyone needs to understand this: The major parties are the same side.
Another inquiry is always welcome. More activity, more crumbs for the chooks in industry to pick at, more excuses for inaction, more hard-hitting recommendations, more questions at Estimates, more credulous fools thinking: "Finally, this time"...
More ... pantomime.
The more Members of Parliament there are who represent their community, the less remote the chances that decisions will be made in the interests of the community.
I don't particularly care whether a candidate's green, red, blue, pink, gay, straight, vegan, omnivore, carnivore, left, right, centre, illiterate, educated, male, female, any one or more of the letters in LGTBI, religious, agnostic or whatever. I just want to know that they're not wearing a party straightjacket. Then I have a remote chance of working out whether what they say has any potential connection to how they may vote on the floor of the Parliament.
The community worked out that the amount of good done by Angel Flight and other "community service" activities far outweighed the very rare accidents. The community grasped the concept that no activity is risk free, and going to hospital by road or not at all may be riskier than going by light aircraft.
This filtered upwards to the people who actually make the decisions in aviation regulation. And that's not CASA.
GA has to remind the community of the value to the community of GA away from the big cities.
The major parties and the public service in Canberra are now 'the protected'. Almost none of the mess they create for GA has any substantial effects on them. They don't care. Literally: they don't care. Because they don't have to. Individually and personally some of them may, but they're part of a machine that's evolved for only one reason, and it isn't to promote the public interest. They want to keep their job? They do what the machine demands.
Ask yourself: How did Bill Heffernan, or David Fawcett, or Fiona Nash, or Jan McLucas, or Ian MacDonald, or Glen Sterle - or any other of the people who've expressed strong opinions in senate inquiries - actually vote on the floor of the Senate to change anything about what they'd heard or found.
It's a machine that's evolved to protect itself. At your expense. And it's fine tuned to take advantage of the false dichotomy between "one side" - Labour - and "the other side" - the Coalition.
So far as GA is concerned (at least) everyone needs to understand this: The major parties are the same side.
Another inquiry is always welcome. More activity, more crumbs for the chooks in industry to pick at, more excuses for inaction, more hard-hitting recommendations, more questions at Estimates, more credulous fools thinking: "Finally, this time"...
More ... pantomime.
The more Members of Parliament there are who represent their community, the less remote the chances that decisions will be made in the interests of the community.
I don't particularly care whether a candidate's green, red, blue, pink, gay, straight, vegan, omnivore, carnivore, left, right, centre, illiterate, educated, male, female, any one or more of the letters in LGTBI, religious, agnostic or whatever. I just want to know that they're not wearing a party straightjacket. Then I have a remote chance of working out whether what they say has any potential connection to how they may vote on the floor of the Parliament.
