|
Federal Election 2010: Which party will support Aviation?
The Aviation industry is enduring a death by a thousand cuts, and is constantly left out of policy decisions and funding.
Successive governments (of both flavours) have ignored, prostituted, used and abused the Aviation sector - especially General Aviation - while funding roads and railways from consolidated revenue. In the interests of prompting debate: - Which Party do you think might HELP our industry to grow in 2011? I attach the Aviation policy for the major parties below. Nationals: Maintaining regional access to aviation services For the seven million Australians who live outside our capital cities, regional aviation is an especially important link to the rest of the nation, providing transport, goods and medical services to and from large centres. It is essential that regional aviation is supported, since many regional routes are of limited commercial value, with smaller carriers struggling with rising overheads and economic difficulties. The Nationals will retain the Remote Air Service Subsidy Scheme (RASS) so that isolated communities continue to receive a weekly passenger and freight service. The RASS subsidises flights to more than 235 communities which would otherwise not have a regular transport service. The En Route Charges Scheme fully refunds Air Services Australia’s air navigation charges for a number of regional airlines operating smaller aircraft and for aero-medical operators such as the Royal Flying Doctor Service. The EnRoute Charges Scheme helps regional airlines to maintain viable services to isolated areas. From 1 July 2008, Labor limited the scheme to existing routes and service frequencies and from 30 June 2012 the scheme will be abolished for commercial regional airline operators. The Nationals will reopen the En Route Charges Scheme to commercial air carriers using the scheme’s pre 1 July 2008 criteria and will keep it beyond 2012. The Nationals will continue and expand the Remote Aerodrome Safety Program to assist in the upgrade of airstrips in remote and isolated communities. The Nationals will also support general aviation – that part of the aviation sector not involved in regular public transport (or scheduled) services. It involves small aircraft undertaking roles vital to regional Australia, such as charter and business flights, aero-medical services, commercial and private pilot training, sports and recreational pursuits, and various kinds of aerial work such as agriculture and surveying. In 2005-06, the non-scheduled air and space transport sector comprised more than 1000 businesses, employing nearly 4000 people producing an industry turnover of nearly $1 billion. Australia’s general aviation fleet is ageing, with the average age of aircraft now 30 years. The Nationals will introduce incentives to enable business to replace aircraft used for commercial activities and to keep regional Australia flying. The Nationals will address the skill shortage in the aviation industry. We will build on existing regional pilot training schemes such as that operated by Regional Express including the establishment of a Regional Airline Pilots’ Scholarship Scheme. No published Aviation policy. I think it might be in here: Our Platform ...but I can't read through all the weasil-words and wank speak :rolleyes: Liberal Party of Australia No published Aviation policy. The Australian Greens Here: Policy G5: Sustainable Planning and Transport Australian Democrats Who? :confused: so...THERE IS ONLY ONE MAJOR PARTY IN AUSTRALIA WITH A CLEAR STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES FACING OUR INDUSTRY AND THEIR POLICY TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES. :ooh: |
Leafie....MATE!!!! why did you even bother with the Greens link :rolleyes: :ugh:
Well if you thought the last lot were tired and out of ideas..... the current lot rate worse! It will take another 10 years to sort out the mess they are creating.:ouch: |
Why did Australia's yobbo electorate turf out the Howard government?
1) Rising interest rates 2) Tough stand on illegal immigrants 3) Didn't embrace carbon trading scheme 4) Howard is an arogant little sh*t! Yaaaaaaaaah Krudie! We loves ya! We know nothing about ya but we saw your little smilie face on Sunrise so you must be good. Hang on a minute! Hmmmmmm! Why DID Australia's yobbo electorate turf out the Howard government? Dr :8 PS: Has Australia ever prospered under a Labour government? |
Interesting the Nationals are the only party with an aviation policy, considering their previous Leader was arguably Australia's worst Minister for Transport since Federation - until even he was out classed by the present Rudd Government incumbent!
|
:) Great post Forkie
Yep....full employment Record low interest rates Country balance sheet in surplus Makes ya wonder mate......what the f##k were people thinking ! time for a change?? well they certainly got that! Krudd will be thrown out next time around BUT who picks up the mess....who is to pay for the gross irresposibility.....us. PA39 Oh by the way......no party benefits from aviation, pilots or operators don't swing governments, so care factor for all parties concerned is -10. |
Seriously?
I didn't vote for Rudd, nor did I vote for Howard (If Howard had won, we still would have had the down turn, ops normal). Labour or Liberal? It doesn't matter! They are all the same self serving scum. They come from the same schools, the same universities and join whichever party is the most convenient at the time. They spend their entire political lives looking after themselves and their mates. Then, after they have sold all of our essential infrastructure to private enterprise (who squeeze the public for all we are worth) they retire into their cosy little private sector consultancy positions. Labour, Liberal, Nationals et al are all centre-right parties. It doesn't matter who you vote for, the outcome will be the same. Politicians stand for nothing but greed. The next election will be run and won, and nothing will change. Cynical? No, just realistic... |
Trojan
You have some underlying truths in your post, however history has shown time and time again that the left side of polotics with its idealistic dreams always spends up the kitty. Yes no matter which way it goes you get a bunch of pollies.....but the lesser of the two evils is more what this is about. After the Menzies years we had Whitlam and hawke/Keating and now Rudd. Fraser did not help that much but you have to admit that the Howard years were some of the best we have seen in 30 or so, and remember the first half of it was not on the back of a mining boom at all, it was bloody tough beginnings. Yes it is true the worlds GFC was going to have an impact on everyone even if Howards team were still in, but by now we would be in far better shape had they remained there, have a look at Torres post here Henry review and aviation - Page 2 - PPRuNe Forums Forkie rarely speaks out on political things....but that was GOLD! :D |
It is intersting that the Nats publish an aviation policy when they know there is no hope of it ever getting coalition support. The Nats will never govern in their own right so - any policy document is just spin.
Why did the Australian people vote Labor? 1. AWAs simply bad IR policy. If the reforms planned for 2009 had gone through we would have been no better off than before the 8 hour day ruling. That was the crux of the policy - no worker empowerment at all. 2. Howard and Costello were ruling Australia very firmly as a duocracy. It was irrelevant what or why the people wanted change, they knew better and refused to listen to public opinion. Whether it was better for Labor or Liberal to be in power during the GFC, well maybe Australia coming out of the GFC much earlier than anywhere else was fuelled by minerals and those companies that are raping Australia, but some of the credit goes to a party unfettered by 1960s thinking. Tin hat on, foxhole dug! |
Rudd didnt win the last election, Howard lost it.
Do you remember "Work Choices" and the "AWA" ?, all children of the Howard Government. I personally would have voted for a deaf mute retard with six fingers in a guerrilla suit before Howard. |
Who's next?
Along the lines of what trojan wrote - I recap - YOU VOTE FOR A POLITICIAN, YOU GET A POLITICIAN.
The problem would seem with the latest government having been in power for only a relatively short period and having done so much to unravel all the work - some good, some not so good work of the previous government is how can any party say with confidence that they can get anything back in shape? Bit like - how far do you unroll a ball of string before it isn't worth rolling up again?:} |
You understand of course that "Family First" is nothing about families but a group of rabid right wing religious zealots?:ugh::ugh:
I would prefer to vote shooters party, at least they don't hide behind devious names.:p |
I'm with Josh. I think the Libs forgot that a lot of their regular voters work for wages and found Work Choices very intimidating.
Not all Lib voters are Toorak bankers, and not all people with an interest in workplace rights are Labor voters. The Libs forgot that, and paid the price at the ballot box. The unions have also forgotten that, and have alienated a whole two generations (X and Y) in the process. Personally, I find that voting Labor is a bit like eating Kentucky Fried Chicken. It's one of those things you do occasionally because it seemed like a good idea at the time (or because there's no alternative option), but you usually live to regret it :ooh:. |
Robin Hood Rudd
Good to see that the Rudd government is continuing the Labor tradition of bleeding the so called "rich" to give to the so called "poor". This rubbish about us all sharing in the mining boom profits is pure Sherwood Forest stuff. If we all own all the resources why are we not all out there digging it up, putting our finances at risk to explore for the resources etc, which is what the mining companies and their shareholders do. Get real Mr Rudd. Better still, get voted out of office asap.
|
Rudd didnt win the last election, Howard lost it. |
Gooday Tonkers :ok: Didn't see you there last week...where were ya hiding! :suspect:
Agreed the IR legislation was really dumb....and I did not agree with the finer points however we would not have the debt from a spending spree and now a tax on all things productive now if the morons had not voted in KRuddie and Co. |
Jaba,
however we would not have the debt from a spending spree Geez, people like to whinge and groan about nothing. I am not a fan of Rudd, but if Howard / Costello were voted back in, it definately would have been worse for the little people, the turd sandwich that would have been work choices mod 2 and no stimulus ( more unemployed and small businesses down for the count ). Old fella, why not tax profits on big mining companies ?, every other business has its profits directly taxed. After the mining companies removes all of our natural resources, then what ?. |
Josh....mate tell me you have not read Torres's post earlier.
Sure stimulate the economy a bit, but do not let it become a massive free for all that is nothing short of a gross waste of funds. I run a small high tech engineering company, let me give you one tip, its not all as glam as the media hype it up to be. We are doing better than most, and let me say we are not setting any records either. Aprt from some banks etc that are reaping it in. There is not a lot of sense in doing the throw money in the air and letting it blow around in the breeze. Serious public works like roads airports hospitals...... generate job, not plasma TV's and big nights on the p!$$ for the great unwashed. End of rant.:mad: |
Agreed Jaba.
I sure as hell did not support the government giving out money willy nilly to every man and his dog (dead dog in some cases). I would have, however, supported the government putting it towards infrastructure that we needed. Look back to the 1920's during the recession then, what did they do? Built the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Why did Krudd seem to think everyone buying a plasma TV, would be better than building highways, hospitals or other vital infrastructure which are badly needed? morno |
Do you remember "Work Choices" and the "AWA" ? I first became an employer in the Fraser era when sacking someone was as easy as - "Hey you! Pack up your stuff and f*ck off right now!" And I was an employer in the Hawk/Keating era when sacking some was as easy as - "Look, I have given you a hundred and forty thousand warnings - all carefully documented in this book. I have spent more than a hundred thousand dollars on counselling for you and had you retrained fifty times. Please, please, pleeeease tell me how much I need to pay you to pack your stuff and f*ck off? Anything, just name your price"! Yay Work Choices and AWAs! Dr :8 |
And so endeth the lesson on why AWAs were dropped from Lib policy.
For every reasonable and responsible employer there was one who did not give a brass razoo about workers or their families or how they spent the super guarantee money. And it came to pass that political parties realised that there were more workers who had the vote than employers. The ALP are not the same party as the they were in the 80s, they too are full of lawyers who pretend they are in touch with the people and who can call a tax a levy. Heaven help Australia if Abbott and Hockey get the reigns though. |
Because Morno throwing money is instant 'stimulus' whereas infrastructure takes a long time to put in place - especially in this modern era of infrastructure projects being endlessly delayed and the costs driven up by Environmental Impact Studies/Statements.
I think you will find that the SHB was NOT a depression era stimulus project - a piece of infrastructure like that would have been in the planning stages for a decade or more before the Great Depression. You will also find that the Australian Govt of the day did NOT take the Keynesian approach during the GD but actually the opposite (dramatically cut spending/public service wages etc) and as a result Australia was exiting from the GD after only a couple of years - a full decade + ahead of the Yanks - who went Keynesian. Its interesting to compare recessions/corrections that occurred before Govts got hold of a large chunk of the economy (through personal taxation - around 1913 in the US) to those after. Beforehand Govts could do nothing and they were short lived events that relieved the economy of its imbalances and away it went again - after they started to be able to interfere they of course did and the results have been, without exception, truly bad. The current GFC is a product of political interference in the previous several economic corrections making them smaller than they otherwise would have been - the Tech Stock crash is an example. Greenspan lowered interest rates to silly levels and left them there thus turning a correction that would have effected very few people into a housing bubble that effected everyone. I would have to agree that Howard's workplace reforms cost him Govt - Labor's FWA is no better + we have all the other baggage the economy is currently being saddled with. Personally I believe Australia would have been in a MUCH better place right now had Howard/Costello won. What is economically more sustainable - a short blip of higher unemployment (debatable if it would even have happened) in a structurally sound economy or the massive stimulus debt/wastage and Australia being made a laughing stock with the proposed new super profits tax? |
Chimbu
What do you call the BER than? That has taken more than 12 months to get going and that has been a dissaster with plenty money being rorted by very few with in the community and the insulation issue don't get me started. The Dog |
Chimbu
Not that you need my agreement - but I do agree with your post. The only reason I voted Labor was becuase of the poisonous erosion of worker's rights that was Work Choices. If I could have maintained Costello and Howard without that policy - who knows. Truly the ALP are a disappointment and have done nothing to deserve the support of the majority of Labor voters, let alone other groups within the community. |
Don't Aussies always end up with the government they deserve? ;)
Nahhh! If that were true we'd have Sarah Palin as PM! :eek: Much as I hate KRudd (who's a sainted genius compared to that dip stick Senator Conrod), all those who think Howard & Co carefully crafted "the best years of our lives" are missing the point that the guy had the Reagan like luck to be around at the right time ... plus ... Who sold off the airports? :suspect: __________ Its easy to live it up as "Economic Heroes" if you just sell everything in sight... |
Josh
Do you remember "Work Choices" and the "AWA" ?, all children of the Howard Government. Australia's industrial relations legislation is now beyond redemption. Work Choices was far from ideal, but with a little mature tweaking it may have been the de-regulated industrial scenario needed by both employers and employees. |
I'll be voting Family First I'll admit Ive been a life long Labor voter but won't be this time due to the Internet censorship proposal. I couldn't give a rats about aviation policy as there is none. Def won't be voting Abbott. Whats one to do when one major party wants to censor us and the other is run by a religious nut job who opposes everything? A secular PM by 2020 |
Australian pilots have made it probably the most efficient industry in Australia What about airport privatisation? What about CASA & ASA Cost recovery? What about CASA regulations? What about the cost of compliance with those constantly changing regulations? What about the knock-on effects on the slowly shrinking GA industry: loss of "uneconomical" fuel facilities, loss of maintenance expertise, loss of maintenance support? Many of these issues we see in aviation are common problems across many industries - our particular problem is that our margins in Aviation (and GA in particular) are so small, yet the industry is so important so so many aspects of Australian life. I would suggest that the Nats are the only ones with a policy because they are the only party that isn't totally weighted towards the cities, and they can actually understand the importance of Aviation to their communities. |
I don't count the BER as nation building infrastructure like a snowy river scheme was. I would not be at all surprised if the BER was an example of political ideology meeting political opportunity.
The insulation 'stimulus' has actually put that industry to sleep until the imbalances (huge oversupply of insulation) caused by political interference are worked out of the system. On top of deaths/house fires/houses made into potential deathtraps the insulation 'stimulus' has actually CAUSED increased unemployment because not only have the vast numbers of new employees in that industry lost their jobs but several 1000 long term employees have too because their employers have a vast supply of insulation batts that have no demand. On the subject of Howard's Industrial Relations reforms I will just say this - Its all well and good having a high minimum wage and all sorts of employee empowerment IF that decision is made with full knowledge and acceptance of the costs. Politicians DO KNOW the costs but don't care. The public at large DO NOT KNOW the costs and (mostly) don't care. Employers DO KNOW the costs and DO CARE. A high minimum wage causes unemployment. A high dole promotes unemployment as a reasonable alternative to employment. The inability to sack an employee who is not performing not only removes the employers fundamental human right to run his business as he sees fit for his own betterment and, by natural extension, to the benefit of his other employees, but ALSO removes that job from the reach of a potential employee who might really want it/need it and enjoy/be good at it. I'll ask this question - Is society as a whole and an individual school leaver better served by our current system or would it/he or she be better served by a system that allowed an employer to pay them what they are really worth (which may be a lot or very little depending on qualifications) and getting them into the workforce where they can start building qualifications and work their way up the pay scale? To suggest the ratio of mongrel employers to decent ones is 50/50, as one poster above did, is simply unrealistic. Business' just don't survive long term if they are managed/owned by mean spirited incompetent bastards. |
Labor's great aviation achievements over the decades,
1. Charlie Jones in the Whitlam government, 2. Hawke and the 1989 Pilots dispute 3. Hawke governments setting up the Federal Airports Corporation, 4. Hawke government flogging of airports to local councils, 5. Hawke governments curfew on Sydney airport 6. Hawke government numerous name changes for DCA 7. KRudd about to root the FIFO operaters with his nationalisation of the mining industry, 8 Albenese being in charge of aviation Greens aviation policy rack up as many frequent flyer points at the taxpayer expense, while saving the world from global warming. |
Horatio
When did these things below [your list] start going really badly it's about so much more than IR, although that is one of the hot topics for any employee. What about airport privatisation? What about CASA & ASA Cost recovery? What about CASA regulations? What about the cost of compliance with those constantly changing regulations? What about the knock-on effects on the slowly shrinking GA industry: loss of "uneconomical" fuel facilities, loss of maintenance expertise, loss of maintenance support? Many of these issues we see in aviation are common problems across many industries - our particular problem is that our margins in Aviation (and GA in particular) are so small, yet the industry is so important so so many aspects of Australian life. I would suggest that the Nats are the only ones with a policy because they are the only party that isn't totally weighted towards the cities, and they can actually understand the importance of Aviation to their communities. The Transport Ministerial Goon Squad Quartet [former Federal Government Transport Ministers] NATIONALS ;) - Sharp, Anderson, Vaile, & Truss Is Truss the current shadow?? What has he said or done? Sorry mate, get real :hmm: That is not to say the current dunce is any better for Aviation :yuk: Chuck Business' just don't survive long term if they are managed/owned by mean spirited incompetent bastards. |
Non-partisan
G'day Chaser
I was ranting to one of my students today about the state of the industry. He asked "Who should I vote for?" and so I looked up the policies. I have only reported what I found on the net, which is what all of us already know: Aviation does not matter to mainstream Australia so long as they think they're getting cheap fares on the J curve. I am more than aware of the Nat's track record on this; John Anderson was my local member for a good many years. He was addressing the Chamber of Commerce in 1998 and I stood up and asked him about the state of the aviation industry. Many of my points made above were relevant then too. His response was that "We recognise that it's very important, but I think you will find it was the Hawke Labor government that created all those problems". I wasn't quick enough to respond "If it's important then why aren't you doing anything about it?" I worked for Col Pay at the time, his opinion (like Torres') was that Anderson was the worst Minister for Aviation this country has ever seen :yuk: |
Jaba,
Sure stimulate the economy a bit, but do not let it become a massive free for all that is nothing short of a gross waste of funds. Yes, plasma screen etc etc, how else would you suggest it be directly injected into the economy ?. To put it into perspective, we have a rental house in Perth, rented by bogans, they were two weeks behind in rent when the stimulus package was paid, did they pay their rent up to date ?, no !!!, the dumbasses purchased a massive plasma, well after taking them to court and doing the whole " ceasure and sale court order " on them, they lost there plasma ( who said the court system does not get it right some of the times :} ) |
:ok: Horatio, mate I know the frustration. None of them are worth a pincha goat sh1t.
I know from experience that people like Truss will pretend to be all caring and sabre rattling in oppo. In government, they will run you down without even looking back to see who they ran over. Cold hard reality. KRUDD [or Jules :}] will more than likely replace Albosleezy after the next poll [if they get re-elected]. As for MRABBBIT .... mate he is loopey enough to put Bronwyn Bishop :eek: ... or maybe Ironbar Turkey :} ... or maybe Littl' Cris Whyne [I doubt Bananaby would get a run at Transport though ... but then again :bored:] at our helm. Hava think about that :E .... hat .... coat, I'll see me self out :} |
Well living under the CD is another thing entirely. The only reason they prosper in europe is becuase the alternatives are too frightening and too mired in past transgressions.
|
Forget which party claims they will support aviation, what you need is bums in seats.
So whichever party will allow business to prosper which in turn will provide employment. It's business that supports aviation, not government! I know that's not what you socialists want to hear but tuff toenails! |
ozineurope if you want to look at a political experiment gone horribly wrong just look around you. The EU/euro experiment is about to be put to the ultimate test politically, financially and socially. They CANNOT bail out PIIGS because there just simply isn't enough money to fill those holes unless they put the printing presses into overdrive. The Germans will not do that - the ECB is functionally a German institution - because their memories of the results of hyperinflation are too raw.
The fringe EU countries should NEVER have been invited into the eurozone because they were NEVER financially sound in the first place but, NO, the idiot EU pollies in the usual political quest of more power brushed those inconvenient facts aside. The EU experiment was, allegedly, all about never having another 'WW2' - German shame about their national excesses of the 1930s/40s have until recently had them determinately 'European' in their national psyche rather than 'German'. That is changing and now you're going to have the Germans (the financial engine of Europe) asking their politicians "Ahhh, bail out the PIIGS - Bist du verucht!!!!!?" Voter backlash will be extreme. The euro becoming worthless, with all that entails, because the Greeks wouldn't work in an iron lung? I'd be very worried about a resurgent nationalist movement - not good - but pendulums always swing past the middle and out to the other extreme. The Brits/Swiss staying out of the euro will come to be seen as very lucky (for the Brits) and very savvy (for the Swiss). They, at least the Swiss, would have known full well that ALL previous efforts at a common currency/multi country union have failed sooner rather than later. |
Chimbu - spot on.
There are rumblings here already about a return to the DM. Not sure how strong the sentiment as it seems to be the fringe right who are most vocal. The greens and CD have pretty much gouged this country of much of its innovativeness. A lot more group think than I would like thanks. There is a veneer of efficiency that this country puts out to the rest of the world, live here and you find that is just global spin. The country is mired in one dimensional thinking and a lack of desire to get things moving. Most community service projects (road works etc) remind me of the 80s in Australia, very slow, very labour intensive and never to be completed lest people be out of a job. Many German people find the EU irrelevant, those that have any gumption to read about or learn about it that is, and many of the 30 to 40 year old age group do not wish to recognise the lessons of the 40s and find it offensive that the rest of the world still remembers. |
Oh and to answer the thread starter - none - you just have to vote for the party MOST LIKELY to get the hell out of the way (relatively speaking) and let capitalism do its thing - the rest follows.
I'll give you a hint - Expecting to take a 40% dividend from a company you are not a shareholder of, and have no capital at risk in yourself, is not getting the hell out of the way and letting capitalism do its thing. If this tax goes through - and I don't believe it will - WA/QLD FIFO ops will be decimated as well as the employment prospects of many 1000s of Australians not connected to aviation and the super nest eggs of millions of Australians. Think they will be going on holidays via airlines after? Personally I am wondering how long before Rudd trots out a junior minister to break the news that he's changed his underware - I mean mind. Why don't I think it will happen - well if you were the CEO of a multi billion $ multinational mining company with competing (for the investment $) interests all over the world what would you do if this tax stands? I would be investing where I get the best return for shareholders as is my fundamental responsibility as CEO - I don't do that I get sacked. Even if I was stupid enough to WANT to invest billions in mining ops in Australia would international banks lend me the money with this uninvited new shareholder possibly deciding at some point 40% isn't enough after all? How can Rudd climb down from this lunacy and not look even more politically impetuous than he has over ETS, Insulation, BER, Illegal Immigration, Population growth, food watch, fuel watch and on and on? This is big - he may actually have taken a step too far. |
@Chimbu
Spot on about Europe So far we have all posted statements suggesting that pollies can't be trusted! |
Josh
They lost their plasma.....you purchased the most expensive TV you are likely to own:eek: Yep that is the moronic mentaility of a large number of their supporters.....no wonder Kevvie was popular:rolleyes: Give a man a fish you feed him for a day, teach him to fish for himself and he will feed the whole family/village. J:ok: |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:05. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.