Albanese to introduce a new AVGAS TAX
 

Just heard from question time in The House Of representatives, Albanese justifies a proposed .285c to .324c increase in Avgas excise to fund CASA.

Cites GA is growing?
PVT aircraft ownership is growing?
Helicopter operations are growing?

As an aside he said "GA represents a "huge" risk to aviation safety/ security.

Can we read that as GA is to future fund CASA and not the bums on seats of Kero burning RPT?

Has anybody asked what planet this "Minister" comes from?

It's just another nail in the coffin.

IDIOTS.:mad:

We used to pay a levy on Avgas - can't recall the actual figure.

We were informed at the time that it was used to fund Flight Service.

The removal of same fuel levy (tax) was a BIG point in spruiking the removal of F.S.

I feel Mr Albanese cannot have it both ways - the ASA en route charges (read 'indirect' taxes) already return a healthy profit to the Govt......

So why then does he feel the need to re-introduce that tax which was a pivotal point in the removal of services..??

One can only 'HOPE' that he is about to re-introduce some (any) services to GA..?? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Does this band of cretins know no bounds?

How much longer before we can not vote for Rudd?

bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbbbbbb

On matters aviation, Albanese can best be described as an inadequate mental midget.

Imagine if you will what I would have said had I honestly spoken my mind.

CC:eek:

I don’t disagree with the thrust of your concerns frank, but just so people are clear on the actual change i.e. an increase of less than 1c per litre.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Amongst other things:-
Are AsA are going to reduce fees in line with not funding OAR from 30 June?

The other interesting part of this is that premumably GA in controlled airspace have been funding CASA OAR, this change means all GA including Avgas burning RAAus will now pay for it? Fair or not?

I dare say the next election represents a huge risk to Albanese's future job security...:cool:

There's a new catchphrase going 'round, bzzbzzzzzzbzzz:

Kevin 07 - gone by 11.

:8:E:}:E:8

I can't think of anything that rhymes with Albanese, except "I'm a sleazy".

And most RAAus machines use Mogas where they can.........

Jarse...... Hope you are right :ok:

Why would the politicians believe that the Regulated would be willing to pay for more regulation?

The Regulated don't benefit from being regulated - it's the population at large, who should, by and large, pay!

User pays is meaningless in this context.

Albanese office is around the corner from my place, I have brick I can put through his window if everyone would care to sign it. :E

Thanks for the 'offer' Mac., But, just vote 'NO' at the next election.......

Calathumpians, Greens, anyone but these 'not-so-intelligent-persons'......:yuk::yuk:

Probably the General Aviation Resources Tax, so that all those wealthy GA capitalists and aircraft owners pay fairly for using good Australian air to fly around.


Nothing like the union thugs, communists and do gooders in the ALP once again setting into destroy general aviation in Australia!!!!

ouch, go easy, anybody can make a mistake....:ouch:


.... though, ...them ASIC's.......:hmm:




.

I voted for Labor in the last election, so I guess that makes me an effwit. So what's your point mate? What did you want to ask me?

Checklist

I've always thought that it was on all matters actually.

However, I don't believe that this is his idea (partly because he doesn't strike me as one who is troubled with ideas too often). No, I suspect that the passing of the ETS has opened up a great big hole which they're now desperately trying to fill.
And aircraft owner/operators are always easy targets aren't they ?
Joe public isn't going to shed too many tears if there are less of us around.

Yes Albanese..
 

Thanks for your life saving jump seat policy too...Your a life and community saver!!:yuk:

CASA already employs over 3000 people. There are less than 60,000 people employed in aviation in Australia (Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics). That is 1 to 20 ratio of overseers to employees. Bear in mind that many of those 60,000 CASA have absolutely no interest in as they are in roles outside their immediate oversight.

It is a gross waste of public resources.

Aviation needs a champion in the Government, more than one in fact.

my 2c

Kind of useless if GA business' start going out of business!

I might apply. Easiest job ever. Doing surveillance on nothing:ok:

Desperate people do desperate things. This Govt is sending the Australian economy into a spiral dive. They will grab at anything which offers sure funding.......avgas is only one.

Lets hope the election is called before all this happens.

Wonder what that's about ?



.

The biggest risk to Aviation in Australia, is the Minister - begone you **** !!
Kevin 07 - Gone by 11 - I'm there.

The people who benefit from regulation are a pack of (mainly canberra) &$&##*! parasites.

Don't think the libs will reverse it, they need to pluck some money from somewhere to pay for this damn mess labor put us in.

IMO Rudd should be thrown in jail for irresponsible spending. If it were members of the public sector who blew this dough there would be a royal commission.

Methinks it's Albanese trying to look good in front of his boss.

Aviation is an easy target. Always will be. I reckon the paid consortium McCormick brought up that is trying to get rid of GA is within CASA itself.

don't forget that the 0.7c per litre will also probably attract GST, making it 0.77c per litre.

the other thing that amazes me is that $90 million is going to be used to fund 97 extra CASA positions. Now correct me if I am wrong, but that is $927,835 PER EXTRA EMPLOYEE!!!!

how much are these clowns at CASA really worth?

AAAhh Mr Apache,

and the F.S. that was gotten rid of waaay baack was supposed to have cost $80Million p.a.........according to one Mr Mike Smith, the ASA spokesperson, when it was first mooted to get rid of F.S.

Subsequent 'challenges' reduced this figure somewhat, but the exaggeration remained.

Who would honestly know ??

So how can ANY of these 'estimates' be believed!!

More spin...more spin....like a washing machine.....just goes 'round n 'round.....:ugh::ugh:

Part of that 97mil is without doubt to ensure there are no ASIC holders airside having a drink after all the aircraft are safely hangared.
After all we're from the guvmint we're here to make sure you're safe from yourselves:=
When the fuel excise was lifted on avgas in the interests of user pays, avgas became cheaper than mogas, hurrah, until the fuel companies discovered they had to increase prices to make ends meet....... and the guvmint decided to introduce just a teensy 1c/ltr I think tax to fund something or other, which our friend Albanese has latched on to.
Meantime we all got slugged with the user pays terminal/sector fees which are still with us and steadily increasing.
It's no good bleating about it on this forum the only way is to have some concentrated response. Join AOPA or some other outfit whose members use avgas and let your membership dues support some argument that the pollies might listen to:ok:

Bearing in mind less and less places away from the capital cities are supplying Avgas, how do they propose to collect this tax? Is there a levy on Jet A1?

So, more taxes on us greedy overseas owned fat cat limited-resources-depleting GA companies. What a great idea. I seem to recall Beasley having a similar idea. A super dooper tax on the airport leaseholders would be nice though.

Can it be arranged for Rudd do a Harold Holt and just disappear?

CFI :ok:

Sounds like a great slogan to me...

I get the feeling Albanese is trying to make GA disappear. Class D and E works a hell of a lot better when there's no G and A.

FB

Maybe he realised we all had very accurate GPS systems and your scaring him with GPS buzz bombs has got him very nervous.:E

Where is AOPA and Dick S. on this?? They should be on the airwaves and newspapers.

The insidious creep of costs even a cent at a time can be ruinous.

We just gave $400m to Africa so Rudd can get elected to some UN deal. Charity begins at home.

Don't forget the largest groups [by numbers] of aircraft and pilots are NOT even over-sighted by CASA...RAAus/GFA/AWAL/PFA...

Remember Rudd is Whitlam's love child. The country may not fully recover from his economic and socialist vandalism....

Don't do it Frank!:ouch:

Nice to see the inflammatory language has gone from "Intolerable risk" to just "huge". Thank god for JMac's Class D taxi calls! We are so much safer now.

The wheels have fallen off
 

Frank,
I love this statement –

Quote:

---

As an aside he said "GA represents a "huge" risk to aviation safety security.

---

Interesting how the focus within CASA when it comes to safety oversight is larger passenger operations in the big playground. They don’t look at cargo operators (some very large aircraft shooting around Australia on a daily and nightly basis). They don’t look at cabin crew issues – only 2 Inspectors for all of Australia ( less than any other regulated country), minimal attention to dangerous goods( a mere 3 Inspectors for all of Australia which is less than any other regulated country), they don’t look at the larger GA type aircraft in use, they don’t look at the escalation in ground operations incidents and accidents and CASA don’t comply with FAA or ICAO findings until at least 2 years later when the hammer is about to fall on them ! This is managed by an inept board of buearacrats with plenty of public service experience but next to no experience in aviation. In fact board member Allan Hawke just copped a caning for performing 30 days work with a bill of 175k in another public service area. What does that tell the smart people out there in aviation land?? And this comes atop of an organization preaching risk based oversight and claiming GA is at the bottom of the risk pile! Certainly seems like the Minister and Fort Fumble are operating on different wave lengths. Now that is what I would define as being aviation risk.
Frank, as for your question Has anybody asked what planet this "Minister" comes from? It is quite obvious that Albanese is just another politician in charge of a portfolio that he has no understanding of. So I guess yes, he is guilty of that, but then again, aren’t they all?? But Planet Uranus is the likely answer to your question.

Hugh Jarse –

Quote:

---

I can't think of anything that rhymes with Albanese, except "I'm a sleazy

---

Try rhyming Albanese with Swiss cheese, because the holes have been lining up for some time now, it is only a matter of time.

The Chaser –

Quote:

---

This will result in the aviation fuel excise rate increasing from 2.854 cents per litre to 3.556 cents per litre, an increase of 0.702 cents per litre
Within this funding strategy, additional revenue of $89.9m is forecast to be generated by the increase in the aviation fuel excise rate over the budget and three forward estimate years, based upon projected volumes of collection. CASA will use this additional revenue to fund 97 permanent positions for safety specialists, safety analysts and airworthiness inspectors and other staff, allowing CASA to expand its surveillance activities and fulfill its increasingly complex regulatory responsibilities

---

Interesting statement. Safety Specialists you say?? My source tells me most have left CASA now, mass departure over the past 12 months for greener pastures, and another one leaves next week. As for analysts, my source tells me that it is pretty much kiddies and non industry people conducting these tasks and that the lights are on but nobody’s home. They spend their days running around asking knowledgeable people how to manage AOC`s and COA`s and are too scared to make decisions. As for more airworthiness inspectors this will be interesting – more 60+ retirees looking to make an easy buck for 3 years before retiring, wonderful addition to the inspectorate ranks that will be.

I doubt any of them can spell AOC or CAO.:(

Griffo; Surely you jest! Have you read the `Watermelon` party`s policies on Aviation?:ugh::mad:

Nah Pinks, sorry I haven't.....

Did I miss something..??

Do they really eat sushi in 'that place'..??:p:p

Griffo;If memory serves correctly, the Geens policy on aviation as a whole is that it must be `environmentally sustainable.` I leave you to draw your own conclusions as to a Greens party meaning of that statement.

There is a great Sushi place about 10 minutes walk from where I currently sit!:ok:

gobbledock

No, I didn't say, the quote was from the from the CASA site link I provided :hmm:

I agree 100% with your comments though :ok: