New Minister
 

Folks,
Looks like "Gippsland's Answer to George Clooney" has "gone finish".
Barnaby is taking over Infrastructure etc, which means aviation.
Our departing Minister hasn't just been demoted, he is out of the Ministry altogether.
I wonder what that says about both the Prime Minister's and Deputy Prime Minister's views on Chester's effectiveness as a Minister, probably what most of us think --- despite the ritual public praise he automatically is accorded.
Tootle pip!!

Oh joy., another minister who will not improve aviation in any way, shape or form.

I cannot recall if the recently-departed incumbent actually did anything.
(I was going to write 'did anything useful' but that never happens with most politicians)

It will potentially be good to have a political heavyweight as minister, so long as aviation can get his attention, not just inland rail.
It will be important to give the new minister a chance to prove himself before we judge.
He presumably has the political and ministerial maturity to potentially avoid his department coming to refer to him as “a delight to work with”.
Someone needs to have a word with him early on so he is made aware of the endemic abysmal performance/bastardry of CASA (not all at CASA are of this mould).
CASA as an organisation are adept at out manoeuvering politicians.

He just gave $11 Million to the Qantas museum in Longreach. That’s a start.

https://qfom.com.au/2017/12/18/media...-roof-project/

he will do nothing to CASA, like his predecessors. better men than barnaby have tried and failed

Should have words with Horatio on this forum, it's his electorate.

11 Million of taxpayer dollars to a museum glorifying a company? I must ask him for a roof over my operation.

Deckchairs......:hmm:

RMS Titanic.....:ooh:

The band playing "Nearer my Gough*:E to thee...":eek:

*Or his current equivalent.


Cynical....who...., me???:}

The poison chalice changes hands once again. The King is dead, long live the king.

In the good old days they were indeed poisoned or their heads cut off. Alas, these days they just continue as bloated leeches on the body politic, in some other busywork.

DeHavillandPilot, you cynical old bastard

As an inmate of the New England AsylumI assure you that a great many electrons have been wasted in Barnaby's direction for a standard response from Warren Truss or Dazza.

I firmly believe that Barnaby is a fundamentally good person who wants to make a difference, and I have spent enough time one-on-one with him to speak with a little confidence.

I won't write him off just yet.

It will all depend on who his advisors are and whether they are prepared to expose Mr Joyce to the risk of responsibility for any change in aviation regulation. The bureacracy has a very high success rate in scaring them off such unnecessary exposure.

All about safety and the public interest, don’t you know.

Well there's Qantas then and there's Qantas now. The history of Qantas is much more than just the history of one company, even if the current CEO seems to think that it's one's company.

It's not about Qantas but rather boosting tourism in LOngreach and the surrounds. It has the Stockman's Hall of Fame as the supporting act also subject to major grants. The $11m is to fund a hangar to get the big aircraft under cover...

During the "deregulation" process I spent a fair amount of time in the Ministers office. The standard process was that the minder would go through what you intended to discuss with the Minister prior to the meeting. If they didn't like what you had to say, then they would announce that the Minister didn't want to discuss that subject. Many a time and only days later I then heard the Minister in Parliament saying that he knew nothing about that subject.

If you broke the rule then you never got back into Parliament House.

The only way to break this cycle is to have a Minister that knows about Transport prior to getting the job. That will never happen as long as the Libs give it to a National whose main interest is exporting cows and Labor gives it to someone who has a noise impacted seat. Think back. Can anyone remember a Minister in the last say 30 years, that didn't fit these 2 criteria?

When ministers in general are chosen not for competency but by where they live or if they are from the "left right out" faction,then the system is "stuffed".No wonder we regard pollies at the same status as used vacuum cleaner salesmen.

With the latest aviation incumbent ,if he follows his recent process, CASA will have to move from Canberra to Armidale so maybe his position is not all bad?

Wunwing

I'm sure plenty of other exhibits can be located under the wings as well..:)


Perhaps the new minister for Aviation, and other things, can have a look-see at the CASA incompetence re the Cobden wind towers. I see he has a bit of common sense in his thinking...
"...we must not lose sight of where the main game is, and baseload coal-fired power it is and will remain..."

How can CASA make a determination about the impacts of wind power turbines when they have no actual research to base their findings on..:hmm:

The new minister needs to ask questions of the so-called C A Safety Authority about how they allow a dangerous wind turbine development near an airfield...

Wunwing,
Yes, John Sharp and Mark Vaile, and all the serious business was done and policy decisions made without minder's advanced vetting, usually without minders at all.

And they both got things done, despite huge resistance from "the usual suspects" in CASA, Airservices and the Department.

What they did have initially, which helped, was a Secretary, Allan Hawke and a CASA DAS/CEO Leroy Keith (ex-FAA) who were reform minded. Sadly, all too soon, the "iron ring" organised the forced resignation of said DAS/CEO.

Sadly, most of the important reforms Sharp/Vaile put in place have been blunted or reversed by the "iron ring", particularly during the reign of Albo or Gippsland's Answer to George Clooney.

What has been done to the Airspace Act was the most blatant gutting of legislation I have seen, flying in the face of Government policy on any level, a great example of what a cunning public "service??" can pull of with a dud Minister.

What was done to ALOP airports runs a close second, the blatant non-enforcement of lease terms for Commonwealth secondary airports equal second, in both cases real estate development being given "nudge nudge, wink wink" absolute priority over aviation, despite lease terms that said the opposite..

Tootle pip!!

What Wunwing said is correct. The public servants and minders do the advising and no Minister except an idiot will do things without advice to do the thing. I have sat as the public servant preparing for an industry - govt meeting and wunwing is correct. I asked industry what they were going to tell the Minister, discussed the pros and cons with them and pretty much told them what they could get. That way I could frame my advice to the Minister after the meeting in a way that provided mutual support for the industrycase, but of course I was on the side of industry anyway.

If you have an uncooperative public servant there is no point complaining. They close ranks and you will get nowhere, you then have to go for the "nuclear option" - the only way to galvanise a Minister is fear and that can only come from a threat to his seat and/or a Government majority. That fear trumps anything the public service can muster. You can complain till you are blue in the face about rules and regulations and it makes no difference (in fact it makes it worse).

The only way to do that is an aviation campaign group running negative (ie spoiling, smear and mud) advertising campaigns in marginal seats. The masters of this are the Israel lobby and the NRA in the US Congress. The message is simple "support us or you wont be elected" and they can and do make that stick. As I have said before, a negative campaign targeting individual marginal seats is what is needed, even to the extent of supporting a Greens candidate (ugh!) if that is what is needed to keep a government candidate out of office. Do that once, maybe twice and show you can do it at every election in future and all of a sudden, for no reason;) doors willl open and a cooperative public servant will appear.

Don't disagree with any of the above but as a once public servant myself the task is even harder than that. If a govt department really doesn't want to implement some legislation they go into stall mode until the next government is elected / new minister etc then work on him. Public servants at the top end really don't care if a politician or party loses office. Life just goes on for them.The only thing that worries them is their little empire.The people you have to convince is the Dept heads such as DAS,etc. If they propose something rarely if ever does a minister block it. Even if he does then the stall starts.

All those Transport Ministers over the last three decades...what a parade of fun fair ducks. !!
At least Sharp and Vaile had a go..
I remember with great sadness (after earlier optimism) the FAA related COOP/Classification of Ops Policy adopted with fanfair by Minister Sharp and the Board in mid April 1997.
I could have continued to get on with what I was doing instead of being turned into a criminal .
CAsA 'Iron Ring & Co..must have thought the COOP statement was made on April the 1st...such was the treatment of it, to trash it and see it off the premises for good.
Alas.... opportunities lost for so many for the benefit of so much for the Industry.

Darren, thanks for calling by. But before you slam the door on the way out could you publish the findings of the "review" that you reckoned on having...was supposed to be all done and dusted by THIS Xmas !

As you said Aviation is a bit of a mystery you. As you now see, the world works in mysterious ways.
C ya !!