AOPA "The Election" (merged)
Creamie, M’ old mate,
To clarify, entrenched entities trying to use ( in this case) Safety Regulation (or “Quarantine regulations” to prevent import competition) I can understand . I would suggest that there isn’t an Australia/New Zealand Standard that does not have commercial influences in the final document, however well disguised.
What I never understand, because it is not the way I think or do business, is why anybody would opt for “additional” regulations that objectively have nothing to do with air safety, but everything to do with CASA MANAGING the business of the Australian aviation industry, rather than REGULATING SAFETY as required to achieve the desired air safety outcomes.
And I will never, for the life of me, understand why anybody should opt for a situation where a public servant has commercial control over their business decision making, when they are presented with the opportunity to take that control (which they do not now have) into their own hands.
Given the efficiency of the AUF operation, including it’s schools, versus the tyrannical complexity of the CASA present approach to GA Training Schools and their AOCs, why isn’t it in the interests of aviation as a whole to recognize that the future of light private aviation is the AUF way, and not the dying “traditional” approach to GA.
Part of the AOPA credo is “----- without unnecessary cost and restriction”, would AOPA be doing it’s members a favour supporting “---- unnecessary cost and restriction” when the AUF is showing the way to operate at a much lower level of regulatory intervention.
Aviators are voting with their feet, and there are no credible figures to show the AUF flying operations are any “less safe” than directly comparable operations conducted under the “traditional structure”.
So, just what crime has AOPA been committing, advocating lower costs and easier entry for potential pilots, and easier and cheaper ways for existing pilots to keep flying.
Tootle pip !!
To clarify, entrenched entities trying to use ( in this case) Safety Regulation (or “Quarantine regulations” to prevent import competition) I can understand . I would suggest that there isn’t an Australia/New Zealand Standard that does not have commercial influences in the final document, however well disguised.
What I never understand, because it is not the way I think or do business, is why anybody would opt for “additional” regulations that objectively have nothing to do with air safety, but everything to do with CASA MANAGING the business of the Australian aviation industry, rather than REGULATING SAFETY as required to achieve the desired air safety outcomes.
And I will never, for the life of me, understand why anybody should opt for a situation where a public servant has commercial control over their business decision making, when they are presented with the opportunity to take that control (which they do not now have) into their own hands.
Given the efficiency of the AUF operation, including it’s schools, versus the tyrannical complexity of the CASA present approach to GA Training Schools and their AOCs, why isn’t it in the interests of aviation as a whole to recognize that the future of light private aviation is the AUF way, and not the dying “traditional” approach to GA.
Part of the AOPA credo is “----- without unnecessary cost and restriction”, would AOPA be doing it’s members a favour supporting “---- unnecessary cost and restriction” when the AUF is showing the way to operate at a much lower level of regulatory intervention.
Aviators are voting with their feet, and there are no credible figures to show the AUF flying operations are any “less safe” than directly comparable operations conducted under the “traditional structure”.
So, just what crime has AOPA been committing, advocating lower costs and easier entry for potential pilots, and easier and cheaper ways for existing pilots to keep flying.
Tootle pip !!
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the scenario I described above is so then I do not resile from any of my comments.
Seems like I got it right the first time.
It is no wonder that AOPA smells to high heaven in the places where it counts.
The gauntlet stays down until this fiasco is resolved and the villains brought to account.
Sounds dramatic, you bet your a&se.
Lets see what the magazine brings, but there is yet more to come this week besides and with any luck the Emperors will be found naked, despite their best efforts not to be.
Creampuff
Gaunt doesn’t like McKeown. However, that’s based on Gaunt’s understanding of who’s responsible for the push to reduce the number of Board members. Perhaps he may change his mind.
The whole thing is sounding increasingly like the Monty Pythonesque Press Conferences given by the Iraqi Minister for Information on the progress of the war from his perspective.
The members deserve much much better than this.
Your friend has some strange idea that the Board has the right to choose someone that will work well and be agreeable to the majority of the board.
Funny, I thought that the members chose those whom they wished to represent them, and if there are differences then that is a healthy sign.
The Board elects the President, so if you feel threatened, 15 nominations is threatening, as President, then why wouldn't you reduce the numbers on the Board in the hope that the top 9 elected will contain the majority you need.
The formidable people skills you so kindly attribute to me do not include, having to stand with my back firmly up against the wall to protect myself against my "colleagues" whilst engaging, engagingly
with those whom we seek to inform and persuade to our views.FIG but not that good.
--------------------
Spread your arms,
Take a deep breath
And trust your cape.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LeadSled old boy !
You remind me of Hamilton, rambling on and on about something which would might make good sense in another forum, but little to do with the subject matter under discussion!!
Piple tootle to you ! ! :
You remind me of Hamilton, rambling on and on about something which would might make good sense in another forum, but little to do with the subject matter under discussion!!
Piple tootle to you ! !
:
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA THE BUSINESS MANAGER
Creampuff and LeadSled
Some good points tween you two and while perhaps not all election related certainly confirms why AOPA cannot lobby over lunch but, rather, needs to use the full membership base to apply pressure to our elected MPs to help aviation foster.
I saw the I think Spanish Nomad equivalent at Avalon - I think it is called the CASA? - undoubtedly coz Spain got on with building it while our Nomad floundered in paper. Talking of that, I read in a February Aviation Paper that GA are thinking of moving Airvan certification to the USA - coz of the problems getting it sorted out in Oz.
I suppose, on the brighter side, you cannot have accidents if nothing is flying coz people are too busy doing paperwork or grounded coz it wasn't done.
Will AOPA ever reach a stage of maturity that will allow it to lobby to regulate the new category of GA in the current NPRM? On current behaviours, not in my lifetime.
Cheers
Some good points tween you two and while perhaps not all election related certainly confirms why AOPA cannot lobby over lunch but, rather, needs to use the full membership base to apply pressure to our elected MPs to help aviation foster.
I saw the I think Spanish Nomad equivalent at Avalon - I think it is called the CASA? - undoubtedly coz Spain got on with building it while our Nomad floundered in paper. Talking of that, I read in a February Aviation Paper that GA are thinking of moving Airvan certification to the USA - coz of the problems getting it sorted out in Oz.
I suppose, on the brighter side, you cannot have accidents if nothing is flying coz people are too busy doing paperwork or grounded coz it wasn't done.
Will AOPA ever reach a stage of maturity that will allow it to lobby to regulate the new category of GA in the current NPRM? On current behaviours, not in my lifetime.
Cheers
Brianh, you are certainly correct in your last comments, however again as you correctly say it does NOTHING to address the problems at hand.
The obsession that some including Hamilton have in regard to CASA being the "baddy" is one of the reasons that AOPA has not progressed at all over the past few years in regard to sensible and mature discussion with the regulator or the Minister. It is said that poor old Bill looses sleep worrying about CASA… geeeze get a life Bill, it aint really that bad, its just that you think it is and that you are the only person that can fix that. You just have to look at all the babble and boring editorials that he has written over the past years vs the achievements and one can see the problem. Bill is well past his use by date and should retreat whilst he can without any more egg on his and the industries face. . Remember those comments about REX not lasting 6 months? He got it wrong big time and really what business was it of AOPA? He just does not know when to keep his mouth shut! He wont get my vote.
The salvation of AOPA is with a totally new and revitalized Board that can set priorities in the management of the associations day to day affairs and put forward representatives that can regain the much needed respect of not only the bureaucracy but others in the industry itself.
And after the change of available vacancies on the board from 11 to 9 AFTER the nominations closed is a good reason NOT to vote for McKeown either. That is not the way to gain any respect or confidence in his ability control his ego and to stop the rot. He won't get my vote either! (Always easy to start at the bottom and work up! – that’s 2 crossed off before the ballot paper has arrived!)
Certainly there is merit in the Murphy proposal for state Chapters, but I suggest that is unlikely to mature until such time as the organisation as a whole gets back on its feet with respected leadership.
The obsession that some including Hamilton have in regard to CASA being the "baddy" is one of the reasons that AOPA has not progressed at all over the past few years in regard to sensible and mature discussion with the regulator or the Minister. It is said that poor old Bill looses sleep worrying about CASA… geeeze get a life Bill, it aint really that bad, its just that you think it is and that you are the only person that can fix that. You just have to look at all the babble and boring editorials that he has written over the past years vs the achievements and one can see the problem. Bill is well past his use by date and should retreat whilst he can without any more egg on his and the industries face. . Remember those comments about REX not lasting 6 months? He got it wrong big time and really what business was it of AOPA? He just does not know when to keep his mouth shut! He wont get my vote.
The salvation of AOPA is with a totally new and revitalized Board that can set priorities in the management of the associations day to day affairs and put forward representatives that can regain the much needed respect of not only the bureaucracy but others in the industry itself.
And after the change of available vacancies on the board from 11 to 9 AFTER the nominations closed is a good reason NOT to vote for McKeown either. That is not the way to gain any respect or confidence in his ability control his ego and to stop the rot. He won't get my vote either! (Always easy to start at the bottom and work up! – that’s 2 crossed off before the ballot paper has arrived!)
Certainly there is merit in the Murphy proposal for state Chapters, but I suggest that is unlikely to mature until such time as the organisation as a whole gets back on its feet with respected leadership.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The turmoil at AOPA continues .....
AOPA is about to get its 4th Treasurer in as many months.
From usually reliable sources it appears that barrister Marjorie Pagani resigned yesterday as Treasuer & Secretary (but remains a board member and candidate).
The resignation was apparently triggered by the dodgy board meeting where it was decided to cut back the number of board positions AFTER the nominations had been received. One can only speculate that the motive was designed to improve Hamilton's chances of having the numbers on the new board to give him an executive position. It seems that acting president Chris McKeon became a little carried away with his chairing duties and stiffled debate to make sure that Hamilton's team got their way.
Additionally, Pagani as Company Secretary has accused McKeown of tampering with the statutory meeting notices she prepared for the AGM without her knowledge. This included directing
that the AOPA (standard) notice to proxy-givers that they were entitled to attend at the meeting, be deleted, because he wanted to "not encourage attendance by those who have put a proxy in".
The acting president also attempted to censor the Treasurer's Report (published in the AOPA Magazine, April edition) as he did with a letter to the editor under my name in the same edition. It would be sad if Chris McKeown wants to take AOPA back to the dark days when every word of the Magazine had to be approved by the president and that dissention from the rank and file was not tollerated.
I would hope that Marjorie will make a post clarifying this and perhaps Mr McKeown may also care to comment.
These are serious allegations and the members deserve better.
Russell
From usually reliable sources it appears that barrister Marjorie Pagani resigned yesterday as Treasuer & Secretary (but remains a board member and candidate).
The resignation was apparently triggered by the dodgy board meeting where it was decided to cut back the number of board positions AFTER the nominations had been received. One can only speculate that the motive was designed to improve Hamilton's chances of having the numbers on the new board to give him an executive position. It seems that acting president Chris McKeon became a little carried away with his chairing duties and stiffled debate to make sure that Hamilton's team got their way.
Additionally, Pagani as Company Secretary has accused McKeown of tampering with the statutory meeting notices she prepared for the AGM without her knowledge. This included directing
that the AOPA (standard) notice to proxy-givers that they were entitled to attend at the meeting, be deleted, because he wanted to "not encourage attendance by those who have put a proxy in".
The acting president also attempted to censor the Treasurer's Report (published in the AOPA Magazine, April edition) as he did with a letter to the editor under my name in the same edition. It would be sad if Chris McKeown wants to take AOPA back to the dark days when every word of the Magazine had to be approved by the president and that dissention from the rank and file was not tollerated.
I would hope that Marjorie will make a post clarifying this and perhaps Mr McKeown may also care to comment.
These are serious allegations and the members deserve better.
Russell
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cogwheel
That'll teach me to ignore my instincts wont it.
There is another little matter that seems to have been lost in the to and fro.
I understand that there are some who who have nominated who entertain the idea that as they have not lodged a formal resignation, in the event that the vote goes against them, they can reclaim their position.
It would be a pity if they raised that publicly, or even hinted at it as an idea, it would further consign AOPA credibility to the ranks of the joke Third World dictatorships.
I exhort you, do not even think about it, you would not believe the amount of ignominy or egg that will be applied to your and as collateral damage, to AOPA and the industries face.
Although I think/hope the world out there would see it for what it was.
antechinus
What a crying shame.
And why for the life of me would you want to discourage people from coming to the AGM for ANY reason.
I thought we were trying to increase participation NOT reduce it.
I guess the more manipulative amongst us feel more comfortable if their are fewer spectators to their antics.
One must recognise that whilst some people assign their proxies to someone they feel can better express their view and has a better grasp of the procedural rules, it doesn't mean that they dont want to participate with their presence.
Any way you read it the "I did it for the sake of AOPA" defence is no longer available to them.
That'll teach me to ignore my instincts wont it.
There is another little matter that seems to have been lost in the to and fro.
I understand that there are some who who have nominated who entertain the idea that as they have not lodged a formal resignation, in the event that the vote goes against them, they can reclaim their position.
It would be a pity if they raised that publicly, or even hinted at it as an idea, it would further consign AOPA credibility to the ranks of the joke Third World dictatorships.
I exhort you, do not even think about it, you would not believe the amount of ignominy or egg that will be applied to your and as collateral damage, to AOPA and the industries face.
Although I think/hope the world out there would see it for what it was.
antechinus
What a crying shame.
And why for the life of me would you want to discourage people from coming to the AGM for ANY reason.
I thought we were trying to increase participation NOT reduce it.
I guess the more manipulative amongst us feel more comfortable if their are fewer spectators to their antics.
One must recognise that whilst some people assign their proxies to someone they feel can better express their view and has a better grasp of the procedural rules, it doesn't mean that they dont want to participate with their presence.
Any way you read it the "I did it for the sake of AOPA" defence is no longer available to them.
Last edited by gaunty; 7th Apr 2003 at 08:45.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And some prominent AOPA members accuse CASA of running a dictatorship!
These shananigans justify my feelings that at present, I wouldn't waste the time of day on the organisation, and it seems many past members are in agreement with me.
If a non-member makes a comment about AOPA, they're told to take a flying leap. Great marketing!
And it seems current members are regarded in the same light. Great representation!
In the simplest terms, keep this method of leadership going and when you look around from your seat on the horse to address your troops, there won't be anyone behind you.
These shananigans justify my feelings that at present, I wouldn't waste the time of day on the organisation, and it seems many past members are in agreement with me.
If a non-member makes a comment about AOPA, they're told to take a flying leap. Great marketing!
And it seems current members are regarded in the same light. Great representation!
In the simplest terms, keep this method of leadership going and when you look around from your seat on the horse to address your troops, there won't be anyone behind you.
Last edited by Lodown; 7th Apr 2003 at 10:17.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been informed today of a piece of correspondence between Marjorie Pagani and Bob Murphie which in it's rawest sense can only be construed as an attempt to intimidate him.
I Think it imperative that a few facts be known.
Firstly axiom chooses to remain annonomous simply because he has possibly burnt a few bridges with CASA and does not want the threat of legal action being taken. On this forum, it is possible to air grievances that would otherwise be more restrained.
Bob Murphie, on the other hand is in the process of trying to mend bridges with CASA and in the course of events he sees an opportunity to help AOPA get a measure of strength as a viable and popular opposition to some things CASA would have us put up with.
CASA without opposition (as in a government of the day), is capable of doing things to GA in particular that can only have a negative effect and most of these issues have been aired.
Secondly, It is axioms concerns, now brought forth with murphie being put on legal notice by Ms Pagani that epitomises the very problem with aviation in the GA sector today.
To have to incur legal expense to protect himself from perceived defamations brought about by his soliciting support for a popular motion is tantamount to the very thing that everyone is complaining about. It is after all an election isn't it and he is running in the race.
There are four people that he and I have identified as trying to "whiteant" the project and this has been taken in the text that it is Marjorie. We still believe that there could be 12 more months of "whiteanting".
The text was to some published AOPA representatives and went as follows.
" I have contacted you because you have a published interest in regional affairs of AOPA. This interest is the basis for my proposal (attached) and I ask you to read it and give support.
If you cannot support the idea, can you at least let me know why, because I need all the input I can gather to make the draft a final.
As you probably are aware, I am a nominee also, but win or lose I am prepared to give 12 months of my time to give this a go.
If it works out without too much "whiteanting" it can be promulgated next year. If it doesn't, at least I and my supporters can say we tried.
I only have 4 reps email address at present, and I apologise if I have left the others out. Perhaps you can onforward or advise I will send same to them in due course."
Highly offensive:
Murphie is at the verge of throwing the whole thing in, and, is contemplating the thing through as I write this.
This sort of thing is rot and should not be the subject of any personal legal attack by someone with published legal expertise and leaves a question mark on the natural justice and rights to equal representation.
As far as axiom is concerned, this forum and the thread of an AOPA election authored by the moderator, leaves one in no doubt that any thing posted here is legitimate political comment and a legitimate platform to air and discuss nominees and their promises. As such, axiom rejects any attempt by Ms Pagani to make a public statement of apology to her, and her reference and assertions that axiom is some sort of a coward and speaks as Murphie.
All axiom has asked for was for all the personalities involved to itemise their achievements or promises so we, the members can make an objective judgement as to who's camp we support.
Hamilton has, the others haven't.
Until this is done, axiom will not publically "nail his flag to anyones mast". He can only make judgements on the availability of these testimonials.
This obviously makes him a Hamilton "lackey". Struth!
I fear the damage done to Murphie's attempt at unification is terminal.
Well done.
I Think it imperative that a few facts be known.
Firstly axiom chooses to remain annonomous simply because he has possibly burnt a few bridges with CASA and does not want the threat of legal action being taken. On this forum, it is possible to air grievances that would otherwise be more restrained.
Bob Murphie, on the other hand is in the process of trying to mend bridges with CASA and in the course of events he sees an opportunity to help AOPA get a measure of strength as a viable and popular opposition to some things CASA would have us put up with.
CASA without opposition (as in a government of the day), is capable of doing things to GA in particular that can only have a negative effect and most of these issues have been aired.
Secondly, It is axioms concerns, now brought forth with murphie being put on legal notice by Ms Pagani that epitomises the very problem with aviation in the GA sector today.
To have to incur legal expense to protect himself from perceived defamations brought about by his soliciting support for a popular motion is tantamount to the very thing that everyone is complaining about. It is after all an election isn't it and he is running in the race.
There are four people that he and I have identified as trying to "whiteant" the project and this has been taken in the text that it is Marjorie. We still believe that there could be 12 more months of "whiteanting".
The text was to some published AOPA representatives and went as follows.
" I have contacted you because you have a published interest in regional affairs of AOPA. This interest is the basis for my proposal (attached) and I ask you to read it and give support.
If you cannot support the idea, can you at least let me know why, because I need all the input I can gather to make the draft a final.
As you probably are aware, I am a nominee also, but win or lose I am prepared to give 12 months of my time to give this a go.
If it works out without too much "whiteanting" it can be promulgated next year. If it doesn't, at least I and my supporters can say we tried.
I only have 4 reps email address at present, and I apologise if I have left the others out. Perhaps you can onforward or advise I will send same to them in due course."
Highly offensive:
Murphie is at the verge of throwing the whole thing in, and, is contemplating the thing through as I write this.
This sort of thing is rot and should not be the subject of any personal legal attack by someone with published legal expertise and leaves a question mark on the natural justice and rights to equal representation.
As far as axiom is concerned, this forum and the thread of an AOPA election authored by the moderator, leaves one in no doubt that any thing posted here is legitimate political comment and a legitimate platform to air and discuss nominees and their promises. As such, axiom rejects any attempt by Ms Pagani to make a public statement of apology to her, and her reference and assertions that axiom is some sort of a coward and speaks as Murphie.
All axiom has asked for was for all the personalities involved to itemise their achievements or promises so we, the members can make an objective judgement as to who's camp we support.
Hamilton has, the others haven't.
Until this is done, axiom will not publically "nail his flag to anyones mast". He can only make judgements on the availability of these testimonials.
This obviously makes him a Hamilton "lackey". Struth!
I fear the damage done to Murphie's attempt at unification is terminal.
Well done.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blurred Vision
Axiom,
I don't really comprehend what you are on about. Was it that lovely bottle of Shiraz I enjoyed over lunch or do you have a dose of the Hamiltons?....
Russell
I don't really comprehend what you are on about. Was it that lovely bottle of Shiraz I enjoyed over lunch or do you have a dose of the Hamiltons?....
Russell
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
axiom
Top of page 2 is the only profile I can find and it sure ain't Hamilton.
Eeerm I don't suppose we could have a look at yours,
so to speak. 
It is simply not possible for anybody to a "whiteant" a properly constituted Notice of Motion lodged within the required time before a meeting, without breaking the lcorporations law.
If it does not or cannot catch the "regular" method of communication, in this case say the April AOPA then short of spending around $4,000 to mail each of the members directly then the next AOPA in May may suffice if that is considered to have been published in time.
In any event whether or when it is formally adopted this month or that, given the importance of the concept, which I also believe is supported by Marjorie and many others including myself, perhaps less haste is the order of the day and we should get some basic housekeeping done first.
It would be a pity if Murphies Motion were to become a casualty of the current byzantine politics being played out.
When a motion is adopted as a resolution, I think that's how it goes, is when you really find out who is playing which card to whom.
I would encourage your "mate" to keep going but him getting all "legal" will not help your mates or our AOPAs i.e., cause.
I suspect that there may be an EGM fairly shortly after the AGM which might be a more approriate Forum.
Anyway I look forward to sinking a jar or three with you at the Bridge.
Top of page 2 is the only profile I can find and it sure ain't Hamilton.
Eeerm I don't suppose we could have a look at yours,
so to speak. It is simply not possible for anybody to a "whiteant" a properly constituted Notice of Motion lodged within the required time before a meeting, without breaking the lcorporations law.
If it does not or cannot catch the "regular" method of communication, in this case say the April AOPA then short of spending around $4,000 to mail each of the members directly then the next AOPA in May may suffice if that is considered to have been published in time.
In any event whether or when it is formally adopted this month or that, given the importance of the concept, which I also believe is supported by Marjorie and many others including myself, perhaps less haste is the order of the day and we should get some basic housekeeping done first.
It would be a pity if Murphies Motion were to become a casualty of the current byzantine politics being played out.
When a motion is adopted as a resolution, I think that's how it goes, is when you really find out who is playing which card to whom.
I would encourage your "mate" to keep going but him getting all "legal" will not help your mates or our AOPAs i.e., cause.
I suspect that there may be an EGM fairly shortly after the AGM which might be a more approriate Forum.
Anyway I look forward to sinking a jar or three with you at the Bridge.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cogwheel; some people who don't want their "handle" on pprune elect to pm others.
antechinus; Your's is one I would like to see.
gaunty; My profile is not in question. I am a member of AOPA and a voter.
It is possible for someone to "whiteant' a project by stonewalling, negative posting and rumour mongering, threats of legal intimidation, loosing documents, (ask CASA about how to do that), ridicule, using and alleging defamation.
Also, you can fail to assist (especially if you support the project?), in matters that require clear and unambiguous detail as to how to submit same. this is especially true if you profess to have the qualifications to give positive help. This smacks of a lack of duty of care.
Also I believe that ammended information I now have is that the signatures have to be to the board within 21 days of the AGM, but the members have to be notified 14 days prior. In which case the May magazine will be out in plenty of time (if it is distributed without interruption early in the month), thus saving the alleged 4K in postage, (which at the new rate of .50c per stamp = 8000 members, not 4000. Perhaps the printing and envelopes are expensive?
I have been advised that if Murphie pulls the pin on this some others will take the matter up.
Whether Murphie gets elected or not will not stop the project, but you will probably have a fairly cranky board member if he is.
How does this fit in whith the new and rejuvenated AOPA?
Perhaps it's about time some others spoke up, or will we just see the 100 signatures on the day and a heap of disgruntled and disfunctional Board members and Members?
antechinus; Your's is one I would like to see.
gaunty; My profile is not in question. I am a member of AOPA and a voter.
It is possible for someone to "whiteant' a project by stonewalling, negative posting and rumour mongering, threats of legal intimidation, loosing documents, (ask CASA about how to do that), ridicule, using and alleging defamation.
Also, you can fail to assist (especially if you support the project?), in matters that require clear and unambiguous detail as to how to submit same. this is especially true if you profess to have the qualifications to give positive help. This smacks of a lack of duty of care.
Also I believe that ammended information I now have is that the signatures have to be to the board within 21 days of the AGM, but the members have to be notified 14 days prior. In which case the May magazine will be out in plenty of time (if it is distributed without interruption early in the month), thus saving the alleged 4K in postage, (which at the new rate of .50c per stamp = 8000 members, not 4000. Perhaps the printing and envelopes are expensive?
I have been advised that if Murphie pulls the pin on this some others will take the matter up.
Whether Murphie gets elected or not will not stop the project, but you will probably have a fairly cranky board member if he is.
How does this fit in whith the new and rejuvenated AOPA?
Perhaps it's about time some others spoke up, or will we just see the 100 signatures on the day and a heap of disgruntled and disfunctional Board members and Members?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reduction in Board
Axiom.
I did move the motion that the Board be reduced in size, a motion to be put to the members at an AGM because 12 is too big. Then the incoming Board could decide how to impliment the change. This is a change that impacts on the incoming Board and not one for the outgoing.
Then the Hamilton/McKeown set pushed it via the BOARD (NOT the members) beforehand, thus attempting (I believe) to reduce their chances of being outed.
I have spoken to ASIC and will be challenging this. It is my view that the action is corrupt, immoral and self serving.
In his defence Mr McKeown has told me the NEXT Board can increase itself in size. This does not remove my concern as it is this Board that appears to me to be 'fiddling the numbers while AOPA burns'
It is my interpretation that the Board, at the next election, will be 12, and that they may then chose the Board size, only the MEMBERS can ammend the articles Mr McKeown!!!!!
So, the way I see it now is DO NOT vote for
Hamilton
McKeown
Murphie (sorry Bob, your apparent association with Hamilton is too much for me to stomach)
Rudd
If you want to see change. It seems to me that this tream is again up to the old sh!t that has wrecked AOPA in the past.
I have (loudly) told Mckeown of my dissapointment with him. Sorry Russell, I should have trusted you!!!
AK
I did move the motion that the Board be reduced in size, a motion to be put to the members at an AGM because 12 is too big. Then the incoming Board could decide how to impliment the change. This is a change that impacts on the incoming Board and not one for the outgoing.
Then the Hamilton/McKeown set pushed it via the BOARD (NOT the members) beforehand, thus attempting (I believe) to reduce their chances of being outed.
I have spoken to ASIC and will be challenging this. It is my view that the action is corrupt, immoral and self serving.
In his defence Mr McKeown has told me the NEXT Board can increase itself in size. This does not remove my concern as it is this Board that appears to me to be 'fiddling the numbers while AOPA burns'
It is my interpretation that the Board, at the next election, will be 12, and that they may then chose the Board size, only the MEMBERS can ammend the articles Mr McKeown!!!!!
So, the way I see it now is DO NOT vote for
Hamilton
McKeown
Murphie (sorry Bob, your apparent association with Hamilton is too much for me to stomach)
Rudd
If you want to see change. It seems to me that this tream is again up to the old sh!t that has wrecked AOPA in the past.
I have (loudly) told Mckeown of my dissapointment with him. Sorry Russell, I should have trusted you!!!
AK
Last edited by snarek; 7th Apr 2003 at 15:09.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who to vote for ?
Am inclined to agree with Snarek.
Voting for Hamilton, McKeown and Rudd will just mean a continuation of the same old ideological nonesense. This triumvirate have blood on their hands and ought be excluded from the board if AOPA is to have any chance of survival.
As for Bob Murphie, I'm not so quick to judge. In fairness I know little about Bob, his credentials or motives. If Bob is simply there to prop up Hamilton's failing regime then I too would not give him my support. Maybe Bob is his own man and capable of addressing issues on their merits and not following what he is told to do by Bill Hamilton. Maybe Bob is a one-trick pony, who knows. I'd like to hear what he has to say about some of the urgent issues facing the board (bet CASA management are enjoying the AOPA turmoil).
What's your position on funding liabilities, Bob?
Gaunty is correct about the EGM. There are enough angry rank and file out there to get the numbers and this certainly beats the Melbourne member push for a class action against the directors.
The current quagmire needs some dedicated expertise to sort out: The financial situation and the dodgy balance sheet, the lack of Directors' Liability Insurance, the two legal actions against AOPA, the breaching of the Directors' Code of Conduct, the leaking of confidential board communications just to name a few.
Then there is the scandal surrounding the current election and the reduction of board postions AFTER nominations had been received. And now with Marjorie Pagani's resignation yet another sucker to take on the treasury has to be found and front the AGM.
Of course until these issues are addressed, AOPA is essentially moribund. While those left on the board are busy trying to put fires out, member representation has come to a halt.
Russell
Voting for Hamilton, McKeown and Rudd will just mean a continuation of the same old ideological nonesense. This triumvirate have blood on their hands and ought be excluded from the board if AOPA is to have any chance of survival.
As for Bob Murphie, I'm not so quick to judge. In fairness I know little about Bob, his credentials or motives. If Bob is simply there to prop up Hamilton's failing regime then I too would not give him my support. Maybe Bob is his own man and capable of addressing issues on their merits and not following what he is told to do by Bill Hamilton. Maybe Bob is a one-trick pony, who knows. I'd like to hear what he has to say about some of the urgent issues facing the board (bet CASA management are enjoying the AOPA turmoil).
What's your position on funding liabilities, Bob?
Gaunty is correct about the EGM. There are enough angry rank and file out there to get the numbers and this certainly beats the Melbourne member push for a class action against the directors.
The current quagmire needs some dedicated expertise to sort out: The financial situation and the dodgy balance sheet, the lack of Directors' Liability Insurance, the two legal actions against AOPA, the breaching of the Directors' Code of Conduct, the leaking of confidential board communications just to name a few.
Then there is the scandal surrounding the current election and the reduction of board postions AFTER nominations had been received. And now with Marjorie Pagani's resignation yet another sucker to take on the treasury has to be found and front the AGM.
Of course until these issues are addressed, AOPA is essentially moribund. While those left on the board are busy trying to put fires out, member representation has come to a halt.
Russell
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Townsville Qld.
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone explain what is going on here.
Can a Committe change the size of the next Committee to suit itself???
Aren't there rules against that???
Axiom, like Russell, I prefer to give Bob Murphie the benefit of the doubt. But, you push his barrow and Hamilton's as well, which seems to indicate Murphie is firmly in the Hamilton camp.
I can't vote for anyone who supports Hamilton. I will only support someone who supports Marjorie Pagani.
Could you ask Murphie to let us know where he stands on that issue.
JJ
Can a Committe change the size of the next Committee to suit itself???
Aren't there rules against that???
Axiom, like Russell, I prefer to give Bob Murphie the benefit of the doubt. But, you push his barrow and Hamilton's as well, which seems to indicate Murphie is firmly in the Hamilton camp.
I can't vote for anyone who supports Hamilton. I will only support someone who supports Marjorie Pagani.
Could you ask Murphie to let us know where he stands on that issue.
JJ
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Russel;
I would leave Bob alone for a while, last I saw he was fairly despondent. I think he is his own man however and simply wants to get on with the job.
Even with some inside information, I DO AGREE, that there should be a closing of the ranks with the Board on policy matters and a "cone of silence" as Max Smart would say.
Lets see what the election brings. Leaks are not on and I have been as guilty as any in propagating rumours.
I guess a rumour on an anon forum has a negative effect especially in a matter as serious an election as is the forthcoming.
I would image a funding liability would be a matter for the executive to sort out without involving the members. I'll pass this on, but expect that as far as man management practices go, which includes matters arithmatec, there is a simple and ideoligical mantra that we all should recite.
Whatever column we put things "THE MEMBERS COME FIRST".
On matters "Hamilton", and axiom's "forced alegience to his camp", I ask a simple MAN MANAGEMENT question,
How come this person has been allowed to run riot for the last two years when not in presidency?
Who has been in charge of this debacle?
Beer still on chaps?
I would leave Bob alone for a while, last I saw he was fairly despondent. I think he is his own man however and simply wants to get on with the job.
Even with some inside information, I DO AGREE, that there should be a closing of the ranks with the Board on policy matters and a "cone of silence" as Max Smart would say.
Lets see what the election brings. Leaks are not on and I have been as guilty as any in propagating rumours.
I guess a rumour on an anon forum has a negative effect especially in a matter as serious an election as is the forthcoming.
I would image a funding liability would be a matter for the executive to sort out without involving the members. I'll pass this on, but expect that as far as man management practices go, which includes matters arithmatec, there is a simple and ideoligical mantra that we all should recite.
Whatever column we put things "THE MEMBERS COME FIRST".
On matters "Hamilton", and axiom's "forced alegience to his camp", I ask a simple MAN MANAGEMENT question,
How come this person has been allowed to run riot for the last two years when not in presidency?
Who has been in charge of this debacle?
Beer still on chaps?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Axiom
I can't have a beer with you if you aren't talking to me.
Bob Murphie, in my view an OK guy with a cheeky side (I remember the comments at Narromine). But I'd have to agree with the post above and question you or Russell, is he aligned to Hamilton.
I will send him my phone number, perhaps he can enlighten me. If he is as dedicated as you claim then AOPA needs him. If he is a Hamilton Strop, then I can't support him.
How did the guy get away with it for two years.
1. Loyalty. Pike has a lot of that.
2. Give the guy a go. Marjorie never prejudges.
When did it come to a head. When he made a pact with Lyon and Rudd. It all turned to custard then.
reminds me of a movie "One flew over the cuckoos nest"
AK
I can't have a beer with you if you aren't talking to me.
Bob Murphie, in my view an OK guy with a cheeky side (I remember the comments at Narromine). But I'd have to agree with the post above and question you or Russell, is he aligned to Hamilton.
I will send him my phone number, perhaps he can enlighten me. If he is as dedicated as you claim then AOPA needs him. If he is a Hamilton Strop, then I can't support him.
How did the guy get away with it for two years.
1. Loyalty. Pike has a lot of that.
2. Give the guy a go. Marjorie never prejudges.
When did it come to a head. When he made a pact with Lyon and Rudd. It all turned to custard then.
reminds me of a movie "One flew over the cuckoos nest"
AK
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pes-bang; after bob's introduction to the harsh realities of politics, I doubt you will get him to support the Pagani camp.
Trouble is, you like a lot of others appear to want to push him into "if you're not with us, you're agin us".
The main impetus of his proposal was to provide a "senate" of sorts to mediate and control these very decisive influences that would have AOPA where it is now. One would hope this would be apolitical and his courage to attempt such a thing should be at least admired.
Surely a geographically diverse and powerful committee should be tried. If it doesn't succeed, it doesn't get promulgated in 12 months time.
I'm sure you don't hold Bob responsible for axioms actions?
And woomera, my spell checker is on the fritz, did you do it ?
Bloody heck snarek, I was thinking of you today. Good thoughts only and I missed you. I THINK I am only NOT talking to you every other week and I may have to go of the p!ss to coincide with 24/25 May.
Public disobedience is what we want !
Bring your bail money.
Trouble is, you like a lot of others appear to want to push him into "if you're not with us, you're agin us".
The main impetus of his proposal was to provide a "senate" of sorts to mediate and control these very decisive influences that would have AOPA where it is now. One would hope this would be apolitical and his courage to attempt such a thing should be at least admired.
Surely a geographically diverse and powerful committee should be tried. If it doesn't succeed, it doesn't get promulgated in 12 months time.
I'm sure you don't hold Bob responsible for axioms actions?
And woomera, my spell checker is on the fritz, did you do it ?
Bloody heck snarek, I was thinking of you today. Good thoughts only and I missed you. I THINK I am only NOT talking to you every other week and I may have to go of the p!ss to coincide with 24/25 May.
Public disobedience is what we want !
Bring your bail money.